Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34876171›Full record

ArticleFluids and barriers of the CNS2021

Next-generation in vitro blood-brain barrier models: benchmarking and improving model accuracy.

Raleigh M Linville, Peter C Searson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Fluids and barriers of the CNS, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Permeability Benchmarking: Guidelines for ComparingJournal of chemical information and modeling · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Synergistic induction of blood-brain barrier properties.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Standardized PreclinicalMolecular pharmaceutics · 2023
    Article
  19. Nonviral nanoparticle gene delivery into the CNS for neurological disorders and brain cancer applications.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology · 2023
    Review
  20. 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

2 authors.

Raleigh M LinvilleInstitute for Nanobiotechnology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Peter C SearsonInstitute for Nanobiotechnology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. searson@jhu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5417-0828

Funding

Mechanisms of cerebrovascular barrier dysfunction caused by APP and PSEN1 mutations and amyloid beta exposureR01NS106008 · NINDS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SEARSON, PETER C · 2019 to 2023
$1.9M
Reverse engineering zonation-specific and age-specific iPSC-derived cerebrovascular models based on transcriptomic profiling of the human brainR61HL154252 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI HEIMAN, MYRIAM, SEARSON, PETER C · 2021 to 2022
$1.6M
Reverse engineering zonation-specific and age-specific iPSC-derived cerebrovascular models based on transcriptomic profiling of the human brainR33HL154252 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI HEIMAN, MYRIAM, SEARSON, PETER C · 2023 to 2025
$1.3M
NHLBI NIH HHS NHLBI R61HL154252NHLBI NIH HHS R33 HL154252NHLBI NIH HHS R61 HL154252NINDS NIH HHS NINDS R01NS106008NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS106008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the limitations associated with post-mortem tissue and animal models, In vitro BBB models enable precise control of independent variables and microenvironmental cues, and hence play an important role in studying the BBB. Advances in stem cell technology and tissue engineering provide the tools to create next-generation in vitro BBB models with spatial organization of different cell types in 3D microenvironments that more closely match the human brain. These models will be capable of assessing the physiological and pathological responses to different perturbations relevant to health and disease. Here, we review the factors that determine the accuracy of in vitro BBB models, and describe how these factors will guide the development of next-generation models. Improving the accuracy of cell sources and microenvironmental cues will enable in vitro BBB models with improved accuracy and specificity to study processes and phenomena associated with zonation, brain region, age, sex, ethnicity, and disease state.

Indexed as

Blood-Brain BarrierCellular MicroenvironmentEndothelial CellsModels, BiologicalPluripotent Stem CellsAnimalsBenchmarkingHumansBlood–brain barrierBrain microvascular endothelial cellsDifferentiationGene expressionInduced pluripotent stem cellsMicroenvironmentMicroenvironmental cuesModel accuracy

Identifiers

PMID34876171
PMCPMC8650371

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.