Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27372054›Full record

ReviewJournal of Huntington's disease2016

Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells in Huntington's Disease Research: Progress and Opportunity.

Adelaide Tousley, Kimberly B Kegel-Gleason

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of Huntington's disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Stem Cell-Based Therapeutic Approaches in Genetic Diseases.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2019
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Translation of MicroRNA-Based Huntingtin-Lowering Therapies from Preclinical Studies to the Clinic.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2018
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Adelaide Tousley
Kimberly B Kegel-Gleason

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) derived from controls and patients can act as a starting point for in vitro differentiation into human brain cells for discovery of novel targets and treatments for human disease without the same ethical limitations posed by embryonic stem cells. Numerous groups have successfully produced and characterized Huntington's disease (HD) iPSCs with different CAG repeat lengths, including cells from patients with one or two HD alleles. HD iPSCs and the neural cell types derived from them recapitulate some disease phenotypes found in both human patients and animal models. Although these discoveries are encouraging, the use of iPSCs for cutting edge and reproducible research has been limited due to some of the inherent problems with cell lines and the technological differences in the way laboratories use them. The goal of this review is to summarize the current state of the HD iPSC field, and to highlight some of the issues that need to be addressed to maximize their potential as research tools.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchAnimalsHumansHuntingtin ProteinHuntington DiseaseInduced Pluripotent Stem CellsHuntingtin ProteinHTTHuntingtinHuntington’s diseaseinduced neuroninduced pluripotent stem cellneural stem cellneurodegenerative disorder

Identifiers

PMID27372054
PMCPMC4942721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.