Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30218497›Full record

ReviewStem cells translational medicine2018

Concise Review: Molecular Cytogenetics and Quality Control: Clinical Guardians for Pluripotent Stem Cells.

Leili Rohani, Adiv A Johnson, Pooyan Naghsh, Derrick E Rancourt, Henning Ulrich, Heidrun Holland

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cells translational medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Guidelines for Manufacturing and Application of Organoids: Skin.International journal of stem cells · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Generation and manipulation of human iPSC-derived platelets.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2021
    Review
  20. Article
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 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Leili RohaniSaxonian Incubator for Clinical Translation (SIKT), University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Adiv A JohnsonDepartment of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4740-2635
Pooyan NaghshDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Derrick E RancourtDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Henning UlrichDepartment of Biochemistry, Institute of Chemistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Heidrun HollandSaxonian Incubator for Clinical Translation (SIKT), University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
University of Calgary · CALeipzig University · DEMayo Clinic in Arizona · USSaxon Institute for Applied Biotechnology · DEUniversidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Now that induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-based transplants have been performed in humans and organizations have begun producing clinical-grade iPSCs, it is imperative that strict quality control standards are agreed upon. This is essential as both ESCs and iPSCs have been shown to accumulate genomic aberrations during long-term culturing. These aberrations can include copy number variations, trisomy, amplifications of chromosomal regions, deletions of chromosomal regions, loss of heterozygosity, and epigenetic abnormalities. Moreover, although the differences between iPSCs and ESCs appear largely negligible when a high enough n number is used for comparison, the reprogramming process can generate further aberrations in iPSCs, including copy number variations and deletions in tumor-suppressor genes. If mutations or epigenetic signatures are present in parental cells, these can also be carried over into iPSCs. To maximize patient safety, we recommend a set of standards to be utilized when preparing iPSCs for clinical use. Reprogramming methods that do not involve genomic integration should be used. Cultured cells should be grown using feeder-free and serum-free systems to avoid animal contamination. Karyotyping, whole-genome sequencing, gene expression analyses, and standard sterility tests should all become routine quality control tests. Analysis of mitochondrial DNA integrity, whole-epigenome analyses, as well as single-cell genome sequencing of large cell populations may also prove beneficial. Furthermore, clinical-grade stem cells need to be produced under accepted regulatory good manufacturing process standards. The creation of haplobanks that provide major histocompatibility complex matching is also recommended to improve allogeneic stem cell engraftment. Stem Cells Translational Medicine 2018;7:867-875.

Indexed as

Cellular ReprogrammingCytogeneticsDNA Copy Number VariationsHumansInduced Pluripotent Stem CellsPluripotent Stem CellsQuality ControlCellular reprogrammingESCsiPSCsMolecular cytogeneticsQuality controlTumorigenicity

Identifiers

PMID30218497
PMCPMC6265634
OpenAlexW2890238453

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.