Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27905670›Full record

SynthesisCell proliferation2017

Induced pluripotent stem cells as a new getaway for bone tissue engineering: A systematic review.

Farshid Bastami, Pantea Nazeman, Hamidreza Moslemi, Maryam Rezai Rad, Kazem Sharifi, Arash Khojasteh

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cell proliferation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Bone organoids and mitochondrial reprogramming.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Bone Tissue Engineering: From Biomaterials to Clinical Trials.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Cell Sources for Human In vitro Bone Models.Current osteoporosis reports · 2021
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Emerging local delivery strategies to enhance bone regeneration.Biomedical materials (Bristol, England) · 2020
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Farshid BastamiMedical Nano-Technology & Tissue Engineering Research Center, School of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Pantea NazemanMedical Nano-Technology & Tissue Engineering Research Center, School of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Hamidreza MoslemiSchool of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Maryam Rezai RadMedical Nano-Technology & Tissue Engineering Research Center, School of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Kazem SharifiDepartment of Biotechnology, School of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Arash KhojastehDepartment of Tissue Engineering, School of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IRUniversity of Antwerp · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are frequently used for bone regeneration, however, they are limited in quantity. Moreover, their proliferation and differentiation capabilities reduce during cell culture expansion. Potential application of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) has been reported as a promising alternative source for bone regeneration. This study aimed to systematically review the available literature on osteogenic potential of iPSCs and to discuss methods applied to enhance their osteogenic potential. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A thorough search of MEDLINE database was performed from January 2006 to September 2016, limited to English-language articles. All in vitro and in vivo studies on application of iPSCs in bone regeneration were included.

resultsThe current review is organized according to the PRISMA statement. Studies were categorized according to three different approaches used for osteo-induction of iPSCs. Data are summarized and reported according to the following variables: types of study, cell sources used for iPSC generation, applied reprogramming methods, applied osteo-induction methods and treatment groups.

conclusionAccording to the articles reviewed, osteo-induced iPSCs revealed osteogenic capability equal to or superior than MSCs; cell sources do not significantly affect osteogenic potential of iPSCs; addition of resveratrol to the osteogenic medium (OM) and irradiatiation after osteogenic induction reduce teratoma formation in animal models; transfection with lentiviral bone morphogenetic protein 2 results in higher mineralization compared to osteo-induction in OM; addition of TGF-β, IGF-1 and FGF-β to OM increases osteogenic capability of iPSCs.

Indexed as

Tissue EngineeringAnimalsBone and BonesCell DifferentiationHumansInduced Pluripotent Stem CellsMesenchymal Stem CellsOsteogenesis

Identifiers

PMID27905670
PMCPMC6529104
OpenAlexW2557532829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.