Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29770269›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2018

Ten years of progress and promise of induced pluripotent stem cells: historical origins, characteristics, mechanisms, limitations, and potential applications.

Adekunle Ebenezer Omole, Adegbenro Omotuyi John Fakoya

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 101 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
101citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

101 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 194 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Machine Learning in Stem Cell Research: From Biological Data to Clinical Translation.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

41 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Adekunle Ebenezer OmoleDepartment of Basic Sciences, American University of Antigua College of Medicine, St. John's, Antigua.
Adegbenro Omotuyi John FakoyaDepartment of Anatomical Sciences, All Saints University, School of Medicine, Roseau, Dominica.ORCID 0000-0001-7064-9719
American University of Antigua · AGDominica State College · DM

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The discovery of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) by Shinya Yamanaka in 2006 was heralded as a major breakthrough of the decade in stem cell research. The ability to reprogram human somatic cells to a pluripotent embryonic stem cell-like state through the ectopic expression of a combination of embryonic transcription factors was greeted with great excitement by scientists and bioethicists. The reprogramming technology offers the opportunity to generate patient-specific stem cells for modeling human diseases, drug development and screening, and individualized regenerative cell therapy. However, fundamental questions have been raised regarding the molecular mechanism of iPSCs generation, a process still poorly understood by scientists. The efficiency of reprogramming of iPSCs remains low due to the effect of various barriers to reprogramming. There is also the risk of chromosomal instability and oncogenic transformation associated with the use of viral vectors, such as retrovirus and lentivirus, which deliver the reprogramming transcription factors by integration in the host cell genome. These challenges can hinder the therapeutic prospects and promise of iPSCs and their clinical applications. Consequently, extensive studies have been done to elucidate the molecular mechanism of reprogramming and novel strategies have been identified which help to improve the efficiency of reprogramming methods and overcome the safety concerns linked with iPSC generation. Distinct barriers and enhancers of reprogramming have been elucidated, and non-integrating reprogramming methods have been reported. Here, we summarize the progress and the recent advances that have been made over the last 10 years in the iPSC field, with emphasis on the molecular mechanism of reprogramming, strategies to improve the efficiency of reprogramming, characteristics and limitations of iPSCs, and the progress made in the applications of iPSCs in the field of disease modelling, drug discovery and regenerative medicine. Additionally, this study appraises the role of genomic editing technology in the generation of healthy iPSCs.

Indexed as

Cell therapyCRISPREmbryonic stem cellsGene editing technologyInduced pluripotent stem cellsReprogrammingReprogramming factors

Identifiers

PMID29770269
PMCPMC5951134
OpenAlexW2765385557

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.