ArticleInternational journal of stem cells2016
Comparative Evaluation for Potential Differentiation of Endothelial Progenitor Cells and Mesenchymal Stem Cells into Endothelial-Like Cells.
Article in International journal of stem cells, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells combined with gonadotropin therapy restore postnatal oogenesis of chemo-ablated ovaries in rats via enhancing very small embryonic-like stem cells.Stem cell research & therapy · 2021Article
- Adipose mesenchymal stem cells combined with platelet-rich plasma accelerate diabetic wound healing by modulating the Notch pathway.Stem cell research & therapy · 2021Article
- Adipose Tissue-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cell Modulates the Immune Response of Allergic Rhinitis in a Rat Model.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Article
- Simultaneous isolation of mesenchymal stem cells and endothelial progenitor cells derived from murine bone marrow.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2018Article
- Production of endothelial progenitor cells from skin fibroblasts by direct reprogramming for clinical usages.In vitro cellular & developmental biology. Animal · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding the mechanisms of vascular remodeling could lead to more effective treatments for ischemic conditions. We aimed to compare between the abilities of both human Wharton jelly derived mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) and human cord blood endothelial progenitor cells (hEPCs) and CD34⁺ to induce angiogenesis in vitro. hMSCs, hEPCs, and CD34⁺ were isolated from human umbilical cord blood using microbead (MiniMacs). The cells characterization was assessed by flow cytometry following culture and real-time PCR for vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2) and von Willebrand factor (vWF) to prove stem cells differentiation. The study revealed successful isolation of hEPCs, CD34⁺, and hMSCs. The hMSCs were identified by gaining CD29⁺ and CD44⁺ using FACS analysis. The hEPCs were identified by having CD133⁺, CD34⁺, and KDR. The potential ability of hEPCs and CD34⁺ to differentiate into endothelial-like cells was more than hMSCs. This finding was assessed morphologically in culture and by higher significant VEGFR2 and vWF genes expression (p<0.05) in differentiated hEPCs and CD34⁺ compared to differentiated hMSCs. hEPCs and CD34⁺ differentiation into endothelial-like cells were much better than that of hMSCs.
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.