ArticlePharmaceutics2022
Experimental Comparison of Primary and hiPS-Based In Vitro Blood-Brain Barrier Models for Pharmacological Research.
Article in Pharmaceutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Human Brain In Vitro Model for Pathogen Infection-Related Neurodegeneration Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Evaluation of the Transport and Binding of Dopamine-Loaded PLGA Nanoparticles for the Treatment of Parkinson's Disease Using In Vitro Model Systems.Pharmaceutics · 2024Article
- The ENDOMIX project: an interdisciplinary approach to understanding how real-life chemical mixtures target the immune system to trigger disease.Open research Europe · 2024Article
- Electrospun Scaffolds as Cell Culture Substrates for the Cultivation of an In Vitro Blood-Brain Barrier Model Using Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells.Pharmaceutics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In vitro model systems of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) play an essential role in pharmacological research, specifically during the development and preclinical evaluation of new drug candidates. Within the past decade, the trend in research and further development has moved away from models based on primary cells of animal origin towards differentiated models derived from human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSs). However, this logical progression towards human model systems from renewable cell sources opens up questions about the transferability of results generated in the primary cell models. In this study, we have evaluated both models with identical experimental parameters and achieved a directly comparable characterisation showing no significant differences in protein expression or permeability even though the achieved transendothelial electrical resistance (TEER) values showed significant differences. In the course of this investigation, we also determined a significant deviation of both model systems from the in vivo BBB circumstances, specifically concerning the presence or absence of serum proteins in the culture media. Thus, we have further evaluated both systems when confronted with an in vivo-like distribution of serum and found a notable improvement in the differential permeability of hydrophilic and lipophilic compounds in the hiPS-derived BBB model. We then transferred this model into a microfluidic setup while maintaining the differential serum distribution and evaluated the permeability coefficients, which showed good comparability with values in the literature. Therefore, we have developed a microfluidic hiPS-based BBB model with characteristics comparable to the established primary cell-based model.
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.