ReviewCurrent opinion in genetics & development2017
Reprogramming human cells to naïve pluripotency: how close are we?
Review in Current opinion in genetics & development, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Cell reprogramming design by transfer learning of functional transcriptional networks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Article
- KLF17 promotes human naive pluripotency through repressing MAPK3 and ZIC2.Science China. Life sciences · 2022Article
- Epigenetic aberrations in human pluripotent stem cells.The EMBO journal · 2019Review
- The Long Noncoding RNA Lncenc1 Maintains Naive States of Mouse ESCs by Promoting the Glycolysis Pathway.Stem cell reports · 2018Article
- Systematic perturbation of retroviral LTRs reveals widespread long-range effects on human gene regulation.eLife · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Pluripotent stem cells (PSCs) have the potential to revolutionise biomedical science; however, while it is simple to reproducibly obtain comparable, stable cell lines in mouse, those produced from human material typically show significant variability both within and between cell lines. This is likely due to differences in the cell identity of conventional mouse and human PSCs. It is hoped that recently identified conditions to reprogram human cells to a naïve-like state will produce better PSCs resulting in reproducible experimental outcomes and more consistent differentiation protocols. In this review we discuss the latest literature on the discovery of human naïve-like stem cells and examine how similar they are to both mouse naïve cells and the preimplantation human epiblast.
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.