ReviewCells2019
(Epi)genetic Modifications in Myogenic Stem Cells: From Novel Insights to Therapeutic Perspectives.
Review in Cells, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- State of the Art Procedures for the Isolation and Characterization of Mesoangioblasts.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Identification of circulating miRNAs differentially expressed in patients with Limb-girdle, Duchenne or facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophies.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2022Article
- An Emerging Role for Epigenetics in Cerebral Palsy.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Valproic acid stimulates myogenesis in pluripotent stem cell-derived mesodermal progenitors in a NOTCH-dependent manner.Cell death & disease · 2021Article
- Mechanisms of exercise as a preventative measure to muscle wasting.American journal of physiology. Cell physiology · 2021Review
- Epigenetics of Skeletal Muscle-Associated Genes in theEpigenomes · 2020Article
- Article
- Epigenetic Clock: DNA Methylation in Aging.Stem cells international · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The skeletal muscle is considered to be an ideal target for stem cell therapy as it has an inherent regenerative capacity. Upon injury, the satellite cells, muscle stem cells that reside under the basal lamina of the myofibres, start to differentiate in order to reconstitute the myofibres while maintaining the initial stem cell pool. In recent years, it has become more and more evident that epigenetic mechanisms such as histon modifications, DNA methylations and microRNA modulations play a pivatol role in this differentiation process. By understanding the mechanisms behind myogenesis, researchers are able to use this knowledge to enhance the differentiation and engraftment potential of different muscle stem cells. Besides manipulation on an epigenetic level, recent advances in the field of genome-engineering allow site-specific modifications in the genome of these stem cells. Combining epigenetic control of the stem cell fate with the ability to site-specifically correct mutations or add genes for further cell control, can increase the use of stem cells as treatment of muscular dystrophies drastically. In this review, we will discuss the advances that have been made in genome-engineering and the epigenetic regulation of muscle stem cells and how this knowledge can help to get stem cell therapy to its full potential.
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.