ReviewCancer science2018
Unveiling epigenetic regulation in cancer, aging, and rejuvenation with in vivo reprogramming technology.
Review in Cancer science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- In Vivo Reprogramming Highlights Epigenetic Regulation That Shapes Cancer Hallmarks.Cancer science · 2025Review
- Targeting DNA methylation and demethylation in diabetic foot ulcers.Journal of advanced research · 2023Review
- Review
- MacroH2A impedes metastatic growth by enforcing a discrete dormancy program in disseminated cancer cells.Science advances · 2022Article
- The Role of Systemic Filtrating Organs in Aging and Their Potential in Rejuvenation Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- LncRNAInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Epidrugs: targeting epigenetic marks in cancer treatment.Epigenetics · 2019Review
- Nuclear Organization in Stress and Aging.Cells · 2019Review
- Unveiling epigenetic regulation in cancer, aging, and rejuvenation with in vivo reprogramming technology.Cancer science · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Reprogramming technology has enabled the fate conversion of terminally differentiated somatic cells into pluripotent stem cells or into another differentiated state. A dynamic reorganization of epigenetic regulation takes place during cellular reprogramming. Given that reprogramming does not require changes in the underlying genome, the technology can be used to actively modify epigenetic regulation. Although reprogramming has been investigated mostly at the cellular level in vitro, studies have reported that somatic cells are reprogrammable in multicellular organisms in vivo. In vivo reprogramming provides a potential strategy for regenerative medicine. Notably, recent studies using in vivo reprogramming technology to alter epigenetic regulation at organismal levels have revealed unappreciated epigenetic mechanisms in various biological phenomena, including cancer development, tissue regeneration, aging, and rejuvenation in mammals. Moreover, in vivo reprogramming technology can be applied to abrogate epigenetic aberrations associated with aging and cancer, which raises the possibility that the technology could provide a potential strategy to control the fate of detrimental cells such as senescent cells and cancer cells in vivo. Here, we review recent progress and future perspectives of in vivo reprogramming.
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.