Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30922868›Full record

ReviewBiochimica et biophysica acta. Molecular cell research2020

What's in a cardiomyocyte - And how do we make one through reprogramming?

Benjamin Keepers, Jiandong Liu, Li Qian

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biochimica et biophysica acta. Molecular cell research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
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

3 authors.

Benjamin KeepersMcAllister Heart Institute, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Jiandong LiuMcAllister Heart Institute, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Li QianMcAllister Heart Institute, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA. Electronic address: li_qian@med.unc.edu.

Funding

Pre-doctoral Training Program in Integrative Vascular BiologyT32HL069768 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Christopher P. Mack · 2002 to 2026
$9.7M
Cardiac interaction networks as determinants of transcriptional specificityR01HD089275 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI CONLON, FRANK LEO, CRISTEA, ILEANA M. · 2017 to 2021
$2.9M
The role of RNA-binding protein Lin28a in hypertrophic cardiomyopathyR01HL139976 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI LIU, JIANDONG · 2019 to 2022
$2.1M
Molecular mechanisms of direct cardiac reprogrammingR01HL128331 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI QIAN, LI · 2016 to 2020
$2.1M
Molecular regulation of ventricular chamber maturationR01HL139880 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI LIU, JIANDONG · 2018 to 2022
$2.0M
Understanding Human Cardiomyocyte Fate AcquisitionR01HL144551 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI QIAN, LI · 2019 to 2020
$923k
American Heart Association-American Stroke Association 18TPA34180058NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL128331NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL139880NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL139976NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL144551NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL069768NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD089275
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Substantial progress is being made in the field cardiac reprogramming, and those in the field are hopeful that the technology will be formulated for therapeutic use. Beyond the excitement around generating a revolutionary new approach for treating ischemic heart diseases, cardiac reprogramming has delivered provocative findings that challenge common notions of cell fate and cell identity. Have we really made de novo cardiomyocytes? To answer this question, the essential characteristics of this unique and important cell type must first be defined. In this review, we walk through the history of scientific inquiry into cardiomyocytes, and then we examine the core features of cardiomyocytes as detailed in modern definitions. Informed by this, we turn to cardiac reprogramming to analyze the various screening approaches and ultimate factor combinations used in each study. We follow this with a dissection of the evidence used to support the authors' claims of successfully creating cardiomyocytes, and we end by discussing what is known about the molecular mechanisms of cardiac reprogramming. Through this analysis, we find interesting differences between the study designs and their results, but it becomes clear that the field at large is generating cells that closely match the textbook definition cardiomyocyte. However, the differences noted between the results of each study are largely unexplained, reflecting the need for further research in both cardiac reprogramming and in native cardiomyocyte biology. Knowledge gained from future research will help move the field towards better reprogramming techniques and technologies.

Indexed as

Cell DifferentiationCellular ReprogrammingFibroblastsHeartHumansMyocytes, CardiacCardiac reprogrammingCardiomyocytesCardiovascular biologyCell biologyCell fateCell identityHeart regenerationReprogrammingScience historyTransdifferentiation

Identifiers

PMID30922868
PMCPMC6911029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.