Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27398291›Full record

ReviewCurrent stem cell reports

A Broad Overview and Review of CRISPR-Cas Technology and Stem Cells.

Simon N Waddington, Riccardo Privolizzi, Rajvinder Karda, Helen C O'Neill

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current stem cell reports. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The ethics of genome editing in non-human animals: a systematic review of reasons reported in the academic literature.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Organs to Cells and Cells to Organoids: The Evolution ofFrontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2019
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Recent Advances in the Genetics of Schizophrenia.Molecular neuropsychiatry · 2018
    Review
  14. 3D bioprinting using stem cells.Pediatric research · 2018
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Simon N WaddingtonGene Transfer Technology Group, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 86-96 Chenies Mews, London, UK ; Antiviral Gene Therapy Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witswatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Riccardo PrivolizziGene Transfer Technology Group, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 86-96 Chenies Mews, London, UK.
Rajvinder KardaFaculty of Medicine, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Helen C O'NeillPreimplantation Genetics and Embryology Group, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 86-96 Chenies Mews, London, WC1E 6HX UK.
University College London · GBImperial College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The pinnacle of four decades of research, induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), and genome editing with the advent of clustered, regularly interspaced, short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) now promise to take drug development and regenerative medicine to new levels and to enable the interrogation of disease mechanisms with a hitherto unimaginable level of model fidelity. Autumn 2014 witnessed the first patient receiving iPSCs differentiated into retinal pigmented epithelium to treat macular degeneration. Technologies such as 3D bioprinting may now exploit these advances to manufacture organs in a dish. As enticing as these prospects are, these technologies demand a deeper understanding, which will lead to improvements in their safety and efficacy. For example, precise and more efficient reprogramming for iPSC production is a requisite for wider clinical adoption. Improving awareness of the roles of long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) and microRNAs (miRNAs) and genomic epigenetic status will contribute to the achievement of these aims. Similarly, increased efficiency, avoidance of off-target effects, and expansion of available target sequences are critical to the uptake of genome editing technology. In this review, we survey the historical development of genetic manipulation and stem cells. We explore the potential of genetic manipulation of iPSCs for in vitro disease modeling, generation of new animal models, and clinical applicability. We highlight the aspects that define CRISPR-Cas as a breakthrough technology, look at gene correction, and consider some important ethical and societal implications of this approach.

Indexed as

CRISPR-CasGene therapyGenome engineeringHuman Genome EditingiPSCs

Identifiers

PMID27398291
PMCPMC4913977
OpenAlexW2274391952

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.