Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33679325›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cellular neuroscience2021

Anna Maria Tolomeo, Cecilia Laterza, Eleonora Grespan, Federica Michielin, Isaac Canals, Zaal Kokaia, Maurizio Muraca, Onelia Gagliano, Nicola Elvassore

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cellular neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Anna Maria TolomeoDepartment of Industrial Engineering, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Cecilia LaterzaDepartment of Industrial Engineering, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Eleonora GrespanInstitute of Neuroscience, National Research Council, Padua, Italy.
Federica MichielinDepartment of Industrial Engineering, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Isaac CanalsStem Cells, Aging and Neurodegeneration Group, Lund Stem Cell Center, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Zaal KokaiaLaboratory of Stem Cells and Restorative Neurology, Lund Stem Cell Center, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Maurizio MuracaL.i.f.e.L.a.b. Program, Consorzio per la Ricerca Sanitaria (CORIS), Padua, Italy.
Onelia GaglianoDepartment of Industrial Engineering, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Nicola ElvassoreDepartment of Industrial Engineering, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
University of Padua · ITConsorzio per la Ricerca Sanitaria · ITLund University · SENational Research Council · ITVeneto Institute of Molecular Medicine · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advancements in cell engineering have succeeded in manipulating cell identity with the targeted overexpression of specific cell fate determining transcription factors in a process named transcriptional programming. Neurogenin2 (NGN2) is sufficient to instruct pluripotent stem cells (PSCs) to acquire a neuronal identity when delivered with an integrating system, which arises some safety concerns for clinical applications. A non-integrating system based on modified messenger RNA (mmRNA) delivery method, represents a valuable alternative to lentiviral-based approaches. The ability of NGN2 mmRNA to instruct PSC fate change has not been thoroughly investigated yet. Here we aimed at understanding whether the use of an NGN2 mmRNA-based approach combined with a miniaturized system, which allows a higher transfection efficiency in a cost-effective system, is able to drive human induced PSCs (hiPSCs) toward the neuronal lineage. We show that NGN2 mRNA alone is able to induce cell fate conversion. Surprisingly, the outcome cell population accounts for multiple phenotypes along the neural development trajectory. We found that this mixed population is mainly constituted by neural stem cells (45% ± 18 PAX6 positive cells) and neurons (38% ± 8 βIIITUBULIN positive cells) only when NGN2 is delivered as mmRNA. On the other hand, when the delivery system is lentiviral-based, both providing a constant expression of NGN2 or only a transient pulse, the outcome differentiated population is formed by a clear majority of neurons (88% ± 1 βIIITUBULIN positive cells). Altogether, our data confirm the ability of NGN2 to induce neuralization in hiPSCs and opens a new point of view in respect to the delivery system method when it comes to transcriptional programming applications.

Indexed as

induced neuronsmicrofluidicsmmRNANGN2transcriptional programming

Identifiers

PMID33679325
PMCPMC7928329
OpenAlexW3132239329

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.