ArticlePeerJ2020
Advances and complications of regenerative medicine in diabetes therapy.
Article in PeerJ, 2020. 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.
- The Potential of Mesenchymal Stem Cell-Derived Exosomes to Treat Diabetes Mellitus.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Revolutionizing medicine: recent developments and future prospects in stem-cell therapy.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2024Review
- Recent Advances in the Use of Stem Cells in Tissue Engineering and Adjunct Therapies for Tendon Reconstruction and Future Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Advanced therapy to cure diabetes: mission impossible is now possible?Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024Review
- Stem Cell Applications and Tenogenic Differentiation Strategies for Tendon Repair.Stem cells international · 2023Review
- Review
- Pancreatic β-Cell Development and Regeneration.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2022Review
- Extracellular Vesicle Therapy for Type 1 Diabetes.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid development of technologies in regenerative medicine indicates clearly that their common application is not a matter of if, but of when. However, the regeneration of beta-cells for diabetes patients remains a complex challenge due to the plurality of related problems. Indeed, the generation of beta-cells masses expressing marker genes is only a first step, with maintaining permanent insulin secretion, their protection from the immune system and avoiding pathological modifications in the genome being the necessary next developments. The prospects of regenerative medicine in diabetes therapy were promoted by the emergence of promising results with embryonic stem cells (ESCs). Their pluripotency and proliferation in an undifferentiated state during culture have ensured the success of ESCs in regenerative medicine. The discovery of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) derived from the patients' own mesenchymal cells has provided further hope for diabetes treatment. Nonetheless, the use of stem cells has significant limitations related to the pluripotent stage, such as the risk of development of teratomas. Thus, the direct conversion of mature cells into beta-cells could address this issue. Recent studies have shown the possibility of such transdifferentiation and have set trends for regeneration medicine, directed at minimizing genome modifications and invasive procedures. In this review, we will discuss the published results of beta-cell regeneration and the advantages and disadvantages illustrated by these experiments.
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.