Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31143308›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2019

Glioblastoma Stem Cells and Comparison of Isolation Methods.

Tolga Turan Dundar, Mustafa Aziz Hatiboglu, Zehragul Ergul, Mehmet Hakan Seyithanoglu, Elif Sozen, Saffet Tuzgen, Mehmet Yasar Kaynar, Erdal Karaoz

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Naringenin Nanoformulations for Neurodegenerative Diseases.Current pharmaceutical biotechnology · 2024
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Tolga Turan DundarDepartment of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Mustafa Aziz HatibogluDepartment of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Zehragul ErgulCenter for Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research and Manufacturing, Liv Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Mehmet Hakan SeyithanogluDepartment of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Elif SozenCenter for Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research and Manufacturing, Liv Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Saffet TuzgenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Cerrahpasa Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Mehmet Yasar KaynarDepartment of Neurosurgery, Cerrahpasa Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Erdal KaraozCenter for Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research and Manufacturing, Liv Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Bezmiâlem Vakıf Üniversitesi · TRIstanbul University · TRLiv Hospital · TRIstinye University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlioblastoma (GBM) is the most aggressive and the most common primary brain tumor. Over the last few years, studies have identified many genetical and phenotypical molecular situations for developing new treatment modalities in patients with GBM. Nevertheless, main problem for the GBM is radio-chemotherapy resistance and relapse after the surgery. The identification of glioma stem cells and microenvironmental influences has created a paradigm shift in targets of therapy. Current studies have shown that glioma stem cell is responsible for aggressiveness, recurrence and resistance to therapy of GBM. GBM stem cell isolated from human GBM multiforme fresh tissue samples is important both for curative therapeutic options and personalized targeted therapy. The purpose of this study was to determine the most suitable isolation method of GBM stem cells (GSCs).

methodsTumor tissue sample was obtained during the surgical resection of lesion in patients with the diagnosis of GBM. Tumor stem cell isolation from tissue was performed in three different ways: 1) GBM cell isolation with trypsin; 2) GBM cell isolation with brain tumor dissociation Kit (BTD Kit); and 3) GBM cell isolation with tumor dissociation enzyme (TDE).

resultsWe showed that GSCs were isolated from tumor specimen using flow cytometry and immunofluorescence staining. Our study showed that isolation with BTD Kit is the most suitable method to isolate GBM tissue-derived glial tumor stem cells.

conclusionsThe development of alternative personalized therapies targeting brain tumor stem cell is urgently needed. It is important to understand the fundamental mechanisms of driving stem cells. If their life cycle mechanisms can be identified, we can control the growth of GBM.

Indexed as

Cancer stem cellGlioblastomaTargeted therapy

Identifiers

PMID31143308
PMCPMC6522234
OpenAlexW2944327096

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.