Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30779868›Full record

ArticleStem cells (Dayton, Ohio)2019

Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Are Functionally and Genetically Different From Bone Marrow-Derived Mesenchymal Stromal Cells.

Maojia Xu, Georgina Shaw, Mary Murphy, Frank Barry

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Stem cells (Dayton, Ohio), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

72 citing papers in PubMed, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Regenerative strategies for intervertebral disc degeneration.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

12 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maojia XuThe Regenerative Medicine Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-5740-8408
Georgina ShawThe Regenerative Medicine Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Mary MurphyThe Regenerative Medicine Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-0971-7684
Frank BarryThe Regenerative Medicine Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-5535-002X
Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There has been considerable interest in the generation of functional mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC) preparations from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) and this is now regarded as a potential source of unlimited, standardized, high-quality cells for therapeutic applications in regenerative medicine. Although iMSCs meet minimal criteria for defining MSCs in terms of marker expression, there are substantial differences in terms of trilineage potential, specifically a marked reduction in chondrogenic and adipogenic propensity in iMSCs compared with bone marrow-derived (BM) MSCs. To reveal the cellular basis underlying these differences, we conducted phenotypic, functional, and genetic comparisons between iMSCs and BM-MSCs. We found that iMSCs express very high levels of both KDR and MSX2 compared with BM-MSCs. In addition, BM-MSCs had significantly higher levels of PDGFRα. These distinct gene expression profiles were maintained during culture expansion, suggesting that prepared iMSCs are more closely related to vascular progenitor cells (VPCs). Although VPCs can differentiate along the chondrogenic, osteogenic, and adipogenic pathways, they require different inductive conditions compared with BM-MSCs. These observations suggest to us that iMSCs, based on current widely used preparation protocols, do not represent a true alternative to primary MSCs isolated from BM. Furthermore, this study highlights the fact that high levels of expression of typical MSC markers such as CD73, CD90, and CD105 are insufficient to distinguish MSCs from other mesodermal progenitors in differentiated induced pluripotent stem cell cultures. Stem Cells 2019;37:754-765.

Indexed as

5'-NucleotidaseAdipocytesBiomarkersBone Marrow CellsCell DifferentiationChondrocytesEndoglinGene ExpressionGPI-Linked ProteinsHomeodomain ProteinsHumansInduced Pluripotent Stem CellsMesenchymal Stem CellsOrgan SpecificityOsteoblastsPrimary Cell Culture5'-NucleotidaseBiomarkersEndoglinENG protein, humanGPI-Linked ProteinsHomeodomain ProteinsKDR protein, humanMSX2 proteinNT5E protein, humanReceptor, Platelet-Derived Growth Factor alphaThy-1 AntigensVascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-2Induced pluripotent stem cellsiPSC-derived mesenchymal stromal cellsMesenchymal stromal cellsVascular progenitor cells

Identifiers

PMID30779868
PMCPMC6591688
OpenAlexW2917573167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.