Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30622181›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2019

Clonal-level lineage commitment pathways of hematopoietic stem cells in vivo.

Rong Lu, Agnieszka Czechowicz, Jun Seita, Du Jiang, Irving L Weissman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

57 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Mapping Hematopoietic Fate after Transplantation.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Hematopoietic stem cells and betaherpesvirus latency.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023
    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

5 authors.

Rong LuInstitute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305; ronglu@usc.edu irv@stanford.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5151-9246
Agnieszka CzechowiczInstitute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305.
Jun SeitaInstitute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305.
Du JiangDepartment of Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Eli and Edythe Broad Center for Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033.
Irving L WeissmanInstitute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305; ronglu@usc.edu irv@stanford.edu.

Funding

USC/NORRIS COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER (CORE) SUPPORTP30CA014089 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI William Dean Wallace · 1985 to 2026
$181.4M
Interrogation of individual cells to identify progenitors and their nichesU01HL099999 · NHLBI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI WEISSMAN, IRVING L. · 2009 to 2015
$7.8M
HSC Diversity: Regulation by Clonal Selection vs Epigenetic InductionR01CA086065 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI WEISSMAN, IRVING L. · 2000 to 2017
$6.9M
Tracing the developmental origin of hematopoietic stem cell heterogeneityR01HL138225 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI LU, RONG · 2017 to 2019
$1.6M
Investigating the heterogeneous aging of individual hematopoietic stem cell clonesR01HL135292 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI LU, RONG · 2017 to 2019
$1.5M
Lineage bias and clonal expansion of hematopoietic stem cell differentiationR00HL113104 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI LU, RONG · 2014 to 2016
$747k
Lineage bias and clonal expansion of hematopoietic stem cell differentiationK99HL113104 · NHLBI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI LU, RONG · 2012 to 2013
$266k
Howard Hughes Medical InstituteNCI NIH HHS P30 CA014089NCI NIH HHS R01 CA086065NHLBI NIH HHS K99 HL113104NHLBI NIH HHS R00 HL113104NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL135292NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL138225NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL099999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While the aggregate differentiation of the hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) population has been extensively studied, little is known about the lineage commitment process of individual HSC clones. Here, we provide lineage commitment maps of HSC clones under homeostasis and after perturbations of the endogenous hematopoietic system. Under homeostasis, all donor-derived HSC clones regenerate blood homogeneously throughout all measured stages and lineages of hematopoiesis. In contrast, after the hematopoietic system has been perturbed by irradiation or by an antagonistic anti-ckit antibody, only a small fraction of donor-derived HSC clones differentiate. Some of these clones dominantly expand and exhibit lineage bias. We identified the cellular origins of clonal dominance and lineage bias and uncovered the lineage commitment pathways that lead HSC clones to different levels of self-renewal and blood production under various transplantation conditions. This study reveals surprising alterations in HSC fate decisions directed by conditioning and identifies the key hematopoiesis stages that may be manipulated to control blood production and balance.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell DifferentiationCell LineageClone CellsHematopoiesisHematopoietic Stem CellsHomeostasisMiceMice, Inbred C57BLclonal trackinghematopoietic stem celllineage commitmentradiationtransplantation preconditioning

Identifiers

PMID30622181
PMCPMC6347684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.