ArticleCell proliferation2021
Therapeutic effects of CXCR4
Article in Cell proliferation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamic Proteomic and Metabolomic Analysis Reveals Metabolic Reprogramming During Early Neuronal Transdifferentiation of Human Fibroblasts Driven by Forskolin.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
- CD317 stabilizes TNFR1 and confers the anti-inflammatory functions of MSCs via NF-κB/TSG6 pathway.Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Article
- Unveiling heterogeneity in MSCs: exploring marker-based strategies for defining MSC subpopulations.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Review
- Post-myocardial infarction fibrosis: Pathophysiology, examination, and intervention.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Review
- Therapeutic effects of CXCR4Cell proliferation · 2021Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesMyocardial infarction (MI) is the most predominant type of cardiovascular diseases with high mortality and morbidity. Stem cell therapy, especially cardiac progenitor cell therapy, has been proposed as a promising approach for cardiac regeneration and MI treatment. Previously, we have successfully generated cardiac progenitor-like cells, induced cardiosphere (iCS), via somatic reprogramming. However, the genome integration characteristic of virus-based reprogramming approach hampered their therapeutic applications due to the risk of tumour formation. In the current study, we aim to establish a safer iCS generation strategy with transgene-free approaches. MATERIALS AND
methodsFour transgene-free approaches for somatic reprogramming, including episome, minicircle, self-replicative RNA, and sendai virus, were compared, from the perspective of cardiac progenitor marker expression, iCS formation, and cardiac differentiation. The therapeutic effects were assessed in the mouse model of MI, from the perspective of survival rate, cardiac function, and structural alterations.
resultsThe self-replicative RNA approach produced more iCS, which had cardiomyocyte differentiation ability and therapeutic effects on the mouse model of MI with comparable levels with endogenous cardiospheres and iCS generated with retrovirus. In addition, the CXCR4 (C-X-C chemokine receptor 4) positive subpopulation of iCS derived cells (iCSDC) delivered by intravenous injection was found to have similar therapeutic effects with intramyocardial injection on the mouse model of MI, representing a safer delivery approach.
conclusionThus, the optimized strategy for iCS generation is safer and has more therapeutic potentials.
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.