ArticlePloS one2020
Automated image analysis of stained cytospins to quantify Schwann cell purity and proliferation.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Analysis of lipid uptake, storage, and fatty acid oxidation by group 2 innate lymphoid cells.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Article
- Label-free identification of microplastics in human cells: dark-field microscopy and deep learning study.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2022Article
- Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Treatment Accelerates the Regeneration of Dorsal Root Ganglion NeuronsFrontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2022Article
- MUW researcher of the month.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In response to injury, adult Schwann cells (SCs) re-enter the cell cycle, change their expression profile, and exert repair functions important for wound healing and the re-growth of axons. While this phenotypical instability of SCs is essential for nerve regeneration, it has also been implicated in cancer progression and de-myelinating neuropathies. Thus, SCs became an important research tool to study the molecular mechanisms involved in repair and disease and to identify targets for therapeutic intervention. A high purity of isolated SC cultures used for experimentation must be demonstrated to exclude that novel findings are derived from a contaminating fibroblasts population. In addition, information about the SC proliferation status is an important parameter to be determined in response to different treatments. The evaluation of SC purity and proliferation, however, usually depends on the time consuming, manual assessment of immunofluorescence stainings or comes with the sacrifice of a large amount of SCs for flow cytometry analysis. We here show that rat SC culture derived cytospins stained for SC marker SOX10, proliferation marker EdU, intermediate filament vimentin and DAPI allowed the determination of SC identity and proliferation by requiring only a small number of cells. Furthermore, the CellProfiler software was used to develop an automated image analysis pipeline that quantified SCs and proliferating SCs from the obtained immunofluorescence images. By comparing the results of total cell count, SC purity and SC proliferation rate between manual counting and the CellProfiler output, we demonstrated applicability and reliability of the established pipeline. In conclusion, we here combined the cytospin technique, a multi-colour immunofluorescence staining panel, and an automated image analysis pipeline to enable the quantification of SC purity and SC proliferation from small cell aliquots. This procedure represents a solid read-out to simplify and standardize the quantification of primary SC culture purity and proliferation.
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.