ArticleNeurogenesis (Austin, Tex.)2016
Can manipulation of differentiation conditions eliminate proliferative cells from a population of ES cell-derived forebrain cells?
Article in Neurogenesis (Austin, Tex.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cell therapy in Huntington's disease: Taking stock of past studies to move the field forward.Stem cells (Dayton, Ohio) · 2021Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
There is preliminary evidence that implantation of primary fetal striatal cells provides functional benefit in patients with Huntington's disease, a neurodegenerative condition resulting in loss of medium-sized spiny neurons (MSN) of the striatum. Scarcity of primary fetal tissue means it is important to identify a renewable source of cells from which to derive donor MSNs. Embryonic stem (ES) cells, which predominantly default to telencephalic-like precursors in chemically defined medium (CDM), offer a potentially inexhaustible supply of cells capable of generating the desired neurons. Using an ES cell line, with the forebrain marker FoxG1 tagged to the LacZ reporter, we assessed effects of known developmental factors on the yield of forebrain-like precursor cells in CDM suspension culture. Addition of FGF2, but not DKK1, increased the proportion of FoxG1-expressing cells at day 8 of neural induction. Oct4 was expressed at day 8, but was undetectable by day 16. Differentiation of day 16 precursors generated GABA-expressing neurons, with few DARPP32 positive MSNs. Transplantation of day 8 precursor cells into quinolinic acid-lesioned striata resulted in generation of teratomas. However, transplantation of day 16 precursors yielded grafts expressing neuronal markers including NeuN, calbindin and parvalbumin, but no DARPP32 6 weeks post-transplantation. Manipulation of fate of ES cells requires optimization of both concentration and timing of addition of factors to culture systems to generate the desired phenotypes. Furthermore, we highlight the value of increasing the precursor phase of ES cell suspension culture when directing differentiation toward forebrain fate, so as to dramatically reduce the risk of teratoma formation.
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.