Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27631110›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Molecular Survey of Cell Source Usage during Subtotal Hepatectomy-Induced Liver Regeneration in Rats.

Andrey Elchaninov, Timur Fatkhudinov, Natalia Usman, Evgeniya Kananykhina, Irina Arutyunyan, Andrey Makarov, Galina Bolshakova, Dmitry Goldshtein, Gennady Sukhikh

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. An Eye on Kupffer Cells: Development, Phenotype and the Macrophage Niche.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Andrey ElchaninovResearch Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology of Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation, 4 Oparina Street, Moscow 117997, Russia.
Timur FatkhudinovResearch Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology of Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation, 4 Oparina Street, Moscow 117997, Russia.
Natalia UsmanResearch Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology of Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation, 4 Oparina Street, Moscow 117997, Russia.
Evgeniya KananykhinaResearch Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology of Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation, 4 Oparina Street, Moscow 117997, Russia.
Irina ArutyunyanResearch Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology of Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation, 4 Oparina Street, Moscow 117997, Russia.
Andrey MakarovResearch Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology of Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation, 4 Oparina Street, Moscow 117997, Russia.
Galina BolshakovaScientific Research Institute of Human Morphology, 3 Tsurupa Street, Moscow 117418, Russia.
Dmitry GoldshteinResearch Centre of Medical Genetics, 1 Moskvorechie Street, Moscow 115478, Russia.
Gennady SukhikhResearch Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology of Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation, 4 Oparina Street, Moscow 117997, Russia.
National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology named after Academician V.I.Kulakov of the Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation · RUResearch Institute of Human Morphology · RUPirogov Russian National Research Medical University · RUResearch Centre for Medical Genetics · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proliferation of hepatocytes is known to be the main process in the hepatectomy-induced liver regrowth; however, in cases of extensive loss it may be insufficient for complete recovery unless supported by some additional sources e.g. mobilization of undifferentiated progenitors. The study was conducted on rat model of 80% subtotal hepatectomy; the objective was to evaluate contributions of hepatocytes and resident progenitor cells to the hepatic tissue recovery via monitoring specific mRNA and/or protein expression levels for a panel of genes implicated in growth, cell differentiation, angiogenesis, and inflammation. Some of the genes showed distinctive temporal expression patterns, which were loosely associated with two waves of hepatocyte proliferation observed at 2 and 7 days after the surgery. Focusing on genes implicated in regulation of the progenitor cell activity, we came across slight increases in expression levels for Sox9 and two genes encoding tumor necrosis factor-like cytokine TWEAK (Tnfsf12) and its receptor Fn14 (Tnfrsf12a). At the same time, no increase in numbers of cytokeratin 19-positive (CK19+) cells was observed in periportal areas, and no CK19+ cells were found in hepatic plates. Since CK19 is thought to be a specific marker of both cholangiocytes and the hepatic progenitor cells, the data indicate a lack of activation of the resident progenitor cells during recovery of hepatic tissue after 80% subtotal hepatectomy. Thus, proliferation of hepatocytes invariably makes the major contribution to the hepatic tissue recovery, although in the cases of subtotal loss this contribution is distinctively modulated. In particular, induction of Sox9 and TWEAK/Fn14 regulatory pathways, conventionally attributed to progenitor cell activation, may incidentally stimulate mitotic activity of hepatocytes.

Indexed as

Liver RegenerationAnimalsGene ExpressionHepatectomyRats

Identifiers

PMID27631110
PMCPMC5025203
OpenAlexW2519502115

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.