Article in Biology open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.
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
13 authors.
Rita SuchaLaboratory of Applied Proteome Analyses and Research Center PIGMOD, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics of The Czech Academy of Sciences, Rumburska 89, Libechov CZ-27721, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-2808-4870
Martina KubickovaLaboratory of Applied Proteome Analyses and Research Center PIGMOD, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics of The Czech Academy of Sciences, Rumburska 89, Libechov CZ-27721, Czech Republic.
Jakub CervenkaLaboratory of Applied Proteome Analyses and Research Center PIGMOD, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics of The Czech Academy of Sciences, Rumburska 89, Libechov CZ-27721, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-9947-2045
Marian Hruska-PlochanDepartment of Quantitative Biomedicine, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, Zürich CH-8057, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-9253-4362
Dasa BohaciakovaDepartment of Histology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Kamenice 753/5, Brno CZ-62500, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-9538-6668
Katerina Vodickova KepkovaLaboratory of Applied Proteome Analyses and Research Center PIGMOD, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics of The Czech Academy of Sciences, Rumburska 89, Libechov CZ-27721, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-6848-7826
Tereza NovakovaLaboratory of Applied Proteome Analyses and Research Center PIGMOD, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics of The Czech Academy of Sciences, Rumburska 89, Libechov CZ-27721, Czech Republic.
Katerina BudkovaLaboratory of Applied Proteome Analyses and Research Center PIGMOD, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics of The Czech Academy of Sciences, Rumburska 89, Libechov CZ-27721, Czech Republic.
Andrej SusorLaboratory of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology of Germ Cells, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics of The Czech Academy of Sciences, Rumburska 89, Libechov CZ-27721, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0003-2926-4096
Martin MarsalaNeuroregeneration Laboratory, Sanford Consortium for Regenerative Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, University of California, San Diego, 2880 Torrey Pines Scenic Dr., La Jolla, CA 92037, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5048-6422
Jan MotlikLaboratory of Cell Regeneration and Plasticity and Research Center PIGMOD, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics of The Czech Academy of Sciences, Rumburska 89, Libechov CZ-27721, Czech Republic.
Hana KovarovaLaboratory of Applied Proteome Analyses and Research Center PIGMOD, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics of The Czech Academy of Sciences, Rumburska 89, Libechov CZ-27721, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-1705-4035
Petr VodickaLaboratory of Applied Proteome Analyses and Research Center PIGMOD, Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics of The Czech Academy of Sciences, Rumburska 89, Libechov CZ-27721, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-6605-9158
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
6 · The paper itself
Abstract
Human multipotent neural stem cells could effectively be used for the treatment of a variety of neurological disorders. However, a defining signature of neural stem cell lines that would be expandable, non-tumorigenic, and differentiate into desirable neuronal/glial phenotype after in vivo grafting is not yet defined. Employing a mass spectrometry approach, based on selected reaction monitoring, we tested a panel of well-described culture conditions, and measured levels of protein markers routinely used to probe neural differentiation, i.e. POU5F1 (OCT4), SOX2, NES, DCX, TUBB3, MAP2, S100B, GFAP, GALC, and OLIG1. Our multiplexed assay enabled us to simultaneously identify the presence of pluripotent, multipotent, and lineage-committed neural cells, thus representing a powerful tool to optimize novel and highly specific propagation and differentiation protocols. The multiplexing capacity of this method permits the addition of other newly identified cell type-specific markers to further increase the specificity and quantitative accuracy in detecting targeted cell populations. Such an expandable assay may gain the advantage over traditional antibody-based assays, and represents a method of choice for quality control of neural stem cell lines intended for clinical use.
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.
Targeted mass spectrometry for monitoring of neural differentiation. · full record | OpenQuestion