ArticlePLoS computational biology2016
Modeling Electrophysiological Coupling and Fusion between Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Cardiomyocytes.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantifying Early Electromechanical Integration of Cardiomyocytes Using a Minimalist PCL Nanofiber Platform.Polymers · 2025Article
- Computational design of custom therapeutic cells to correct failing human cardiomyocytes.Frontiers in systems biology · 2023Article
- Emerging Trends in Mesenchymal Stem Cells Applications for Cardiac Regenerative Therapy: Current Status and Advances.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2022Review
- Article
- Arrhythmogenic risks of stem cell replacement therapy for cardiovascular diseases.Journal of cellular physiology · 2020Review
- Glial cells influence cardiac permittivity as evidenced through in vitro and in silico models.Biofabrication · 2019Article
- Cardiac ischemia-insights from computational models.Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2018Review
- Physiologic, Pathologic, and Therapeutic Paracrine Modulation of Cardiac Excitation-Contraction Coupling.Circulation research · 2018Review
- CaFrontiers in physiology · 2018Article
- An Introduction to Computational Modeling of Cardiac Electrophysiology and Arrhythmogenicity.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2018Article
- Experimental and Computational Insight Into Human Mesenchymal Stem Cell Paracrine Signaling and Heterocellular Coupling Effects on Cardiac Contractility and Arrhythmogenicity.Circulation research · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Human mesenchymal stem cell (hMSC) delivery has demonstrated promise in preclinical and clinical trials for myocardial infarction therapy; however, broad acceptance is hindered by limited understanding of hMSC-human cardiomyocyte (hCM) interactions. To better understand the electrophysiological consequences of direct heterocellular connections between hMSCs and hCMs, three original mathematical models were developed, representing an experimentally verified triad of hMSC families with distinct functional ion channel currents. The arrhythmogenic risk of such direct electrical interactions in the setting of healthy adult myocardium was predicted by coupling and fusing these hMSC models to the published ten Tusscher midcardial hCM model. Substantial variations in action potential waveform-such as decreased action potential duration (APD) and plateau height-were found when hCMs were coupled to the two hMSC models expressing functional delayed rectifier-like human ether à-go-go K+ channel 1 (hEAG1); the effects were exacerbated for fused hMSC-hCM hybrid cells. The third family of hMSCs (Type C), absent of hEAG1 activity, led to smaller single-cell action potential alterations during coupling and fusion, translating to longer tissue-level mean action potential wavelength. In a simulated 2-D monolayer of cardiac tissue, re-entry vulnerability with low (5%) hMSC insertion was approximately eight-fold lower with Type C hMSCs compared to hEAG1-functional hMSCs. A 20% decrease in APD dispersion by Type C hMSCs compared to hEAG1-active hMSCs supports the claim of reduced arrhythmogenic potential of this cell type with low hMSC insertion. However, at moderate (15%) and high (25%) hMSC insertion, the vulnerable window increased independent of hMSC type. In summary, this study provides novel electrophysiological models of hMSCs, predicts possible arrhythmogenic effects of hMSCs when directly coupled to healthy hCMs, and proposes that isolating a subset of hMSCs absent of hEAG1 activity may offer increased safety as a cell delivery cardiotherapy at low levels of hMSC-hCM coupling.
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.