Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35546493›Full record

ReviewWIREs mechanisms of disease2022

Understanding astrocyte differentiation: Clinical relevance, technical challenges, and new opportunities in the omics era.

Michael Lattke, Francois Guillemot

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in WIREs mechanisms of disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Astrocyte Enrichment of 3D Cortical Constructs Enhances Brain Repair.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Label-Free Molecular Characterization of Protein Aggregates in Differentiated Astrocytes.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Michael LattkeNeural Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, The Francis Crick Institute, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5533-8592
Francois GuillemotNeural Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, The Francis Crick Institute, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0432-5067

Funding

Cancer Research UK FC0010089Medical Research CouncilMedical Research Council FC0010089Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust FC0010089
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Astrocytes are a major type of glial cells that have essential functions in development and homeostasis of the central nervous system (CNS). Immature astrocytes in the developing CNS support neuronal maturation and possess neural-stem-cell-like properties. Mature astrocytes partially lose these functions but gain new functions essential for adult CNS homeostasis. In pathological conditions, astrocytes become "reactive", which disrupts their mature homeostatic functions and reactivates some immature astrocyte-like properties, suggesting a partial reversal of astrocyte maturation. The loss of homeostatic astrocyte functions contributes to the pathogenesis of various neurological conditions, and therefore activating maturation-promoting mechanisms may be a promising therapeutic strategy to restore homeostasis. Manipulating the mechanisms underlying astrocyte maturation might also allow to facilitate CNS regeneration by enhancing developmental functions of adult astrocytes. However, such therapeutic strategies are still some distance away because of our limited understanding of astrocyte differentiation and maturation, due to biological and technical challenges, including the high degree of similarity of astrocytes with neural stem cells and the shortcomings of astrocyte markers. Current advances in systems biology have a huge potential to overcome these challenges. Recent transcriptomic analyses have already revealed new astrocyte markers and new regulators of astrocyte differentiation. However, the epigenomic changes that presumably occur during astrocyte differentiation remain an important, largely unexplored area for future research. Emerging technologies such as CRISPR/Cas9-based functional screens will further improve our understanding of the mechanisms underlying astrocyte differentiation. This may open up new clinical approaches to restore homeostasis in neurological disorders and/or promote CNS regeneration. This article is categorized under: Neurological Diseases > Genetics/Genomics/Epigenetics Neurological Diseases > Stem Cells and Development Neurological Diseases > Molecular and Cellular Physiology.

Indexed as

AstrocytesNeural Stem CellsCentral Nervous SystemNeurogenesisastrocytescell differentiationepigenomicsneural developmentneural repair/regenerationneurological disorderstranscriptomics

Identifiers

PMID35546493
PMCPMC9539907

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.