ArticlePloS one2017
Tissue engineering potential of human dermis-isolated adult stem cells from multiple anatomical locations.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Non-destructive, continuous monitoring of biochemical, mechanical, and structural maturation in engineered tissue.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Regenerative Engineering: Current Applications and Future Perspectives.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Review
- Surgical and tissue engineering strategies for articular cartilage and meniscus repair.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2019Review
- Non-destructive detection of matrix stabilization correlates with enhanced mechanical properties of self-assembled articular cartilage.Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2019Article
- The Human Skin-Derived Precursors for Regenerative Medicine: Current State, Challenges, and Perspectives.Stem cells international · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Abundance and accessibility render skin-derived stem cells an attractive cell source for tissue engineering applications. Toward assessing their utility, the variability of constructs engineered from human dermis-isolated adult stem (hDIAS) cells was examined with respect to different anatomical locations (foreskin, breast, and abdominal skin), both in vitro and in a subcutaneous, athymic mouse model. All anatomical locations yielded hDIAS cells with multi-lineage differentiation potentials, though adipogenesis was not seen for foreskin-derived hDIAS cells. Using engineered cartilage as a model, tissue engineered constructs from hDIAS cells were compared. Construct morphology differed by location. The mechanical properties of human foreskin- and abdominal skin-derived constructs were similar at implantation, remaining comparable after 4 additional weeks of culture in vivo. Breast skin-derived constructs were not mechanically testable. For all groups, no signs of abnormality were observed in the host. Addition of aggregate redifferentiation culture prior to construct formation improved chondrogenic differentiation of foreskin-derived hDIAS cells, as evident by increases in glycosaminoglycan and collagen contents. More robust Alcian blue staining and homogeneous cell populations were also observed compared to controls. Human DIAS cells elicited no adverse host responses, reacted positively to chondrogenic regimens, and possessed multi-lineage differentiation potential with the caveat that efficacy may differ by anatomical origin of the skin. Taken together, these results suggest that hDIAS cells hold promise as a potential cell source for a number of tissue engineering applications.
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.