ReviewStem cell research & therapy2016
Functional imaging for regenerative medicine.
Review in Stem cell research & therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanosensitive optical coherence tomography for detecting structural changes in stem cells.Biomedical optics express · 2023Article
- Interactions between Dental MSCs and Biomimetic Composite Scaffold during Bone Remodeling Followed by In Vivo Real-Time Bioimaging.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Article
- Methods and applications of full-field optical coherence tomography: a review.Journal of biomedical optics · 2022Review
- Biodistribution studies for cell therapy products: Current status and issues.Regenerative therapy · 2021Review
- Targeting Brain Tumors with Mesenchymal Stem Cells in the Experimental Model of the Orthotopic Glioblastoma in Rats.Biomedicines · 2021Article
- Contrast agents for photoacoustic imaging: a review of stem cell tracking.Stem cell research & therapy · 2021Review
- A brief review of reporter gene imaging in oncolytic virotherapy and gene therapy.Molecular therapy oncolytics · 2021Review
- An advanced optical clearing protocol allows label-free detection of tissue necrosisTheranostics · 2021Article
- Optical fluorescence imaging with shortwave infrared light emitter nanomaterials for in vivo cell tracking in regenerative medicine.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2019Review
- Impedance-based cellular assays for regenerative medicine.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2018Review
- New imaging probes to track cell fate: reporter genes in stem cell research.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2017Review
- New Bioengineering Breakthroughs and Enabling Tools in Regenerative Medicine.Current stem cell reports · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In vivo imaging is a platform technology with the power to put function in its natural structural context. With the drive to translate stem cell therapies into pre-clinical and clinical trials, early selection of the right imaging techniques is paramount to success. There are many instances in regenerative medicine where the biological, biochemical, and biomechanical mechanisms behind the proposed function of stem cell therapies can be elucidated by appropriate imaging. Imaging techniques can be divided according to whether labels are used and as to whether the imaging can be done in vivo. In vivo human imaging places additional restrictions on the imaging tools that can be used. Microscopies and nanoscopies, especially those requiring fluorescent markers, have made an extraordinary impact on discovery at the molecular and cellular level, but due to their very limited ability to focus in the scattering tissues encountered for in vivo applications they are largely confined to superficial imaging applications in research laboratories. Nanoscopy, which has tremendous benefits in resolution, is limited to the near-field (e.g. near-field scanning optical microscope (NSNOM)) or to very high light intensity (e.g. stimulated emission depletion (STED)) or to slow stochastic events (photo-activated localization microscopy (PALM) and stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (STORM)). In all cases, nanoscopy is limited to very superficial applications. Imaging depth may be increased using multiphoton or coherence gating tricks. Scattering dominates the limitation on imaging depth in most tissues and this can be mitigated by the application of optical clearing techniques that can impose mild (e.g. topical application of glycerol) or severe (e.g. CLARITY) changes to the tissue to be imaged. Progression of therapies through to clinical trials requires some thought as to the imaging and sensing modalities that should be used. Smoother progression is facilitated by the use of comparable imaging modalities throughout the discovery and trial phases, giving label-free techniques an advantage wherever they can be used, although this is seldom considered in the early stages. In this paper, we will explore the techniques that have found success in aiding discovery in stem cell therapies and try to predict the likely technologies best suited to translation and future directions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.