Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27095443›Full record

ReviewStem cell research & therapy2016

Functional imaging for regenerative medicine.

Martin Leahy, Kerry Thompson, Haroon Zafar, Sergey Alexandrov, Mark Foley, Cathal O'Flatharta, Peter Dockery

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Impedance-based cellular assays for regenerative medicine.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2018
    Review
  12. New imaging probes to track cell fate: reporter genes in stem cell research.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2017
    Review
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Martin LeahyTissue Optics & Microcirculation Imaging Group, School of Physics, National University of Ireland (NUI), Galway, Ireland. martin.leahy@nuigalway.ie.
Kerry ThompsonCentre for Microscopy and Imaging, Anatomy, School of Medicine, National University of Ireland (NUI), Galway, Ireland.
Haroon ZafarTissue Optics & Microcirculation Imaging Group, School of Physics, National University of Ireland (NUI), Galway, Ireland.
Sergey AlexandrovTissue Optics & Microcirculation Imaging Group, School of Physics, National University of Ireland (NUI), Galway, Ireland.
Mark FoleyMedical Physics Research Cluster, School of Physics, National University of Ireland (NUI), Galway, Ireland.
Cathal O'FlathartaRegenerative Medicine Institute (REMEDI), National University of Ireland (NUI), Galway, Ireland.
Peter DockeryCentre for Microscopy and Imaging, Anatomy, School of Medicine, National University of Ireland (NUI), Galway, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Regenerative MedicineStem Cell TransplantationCell- and Tissue-Based TherapyDiagnostic ImagingElasticity Imaging TechniquesHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMicroscopy, FluorescencePhotoacoustic TechniquesTomography, Optical CoherenceFunctionalImagingLabel-freeMicroscopyOptical coherence tomographyPhotoacoustic imagingStem cells

Identifiers

PMID27095443
PMCPMC4837501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.