Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35567354›Full record

ArticleAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)2022

Soft, Dynamic Hydrogel Confinement Improves Kidney Organoid Lumen Morphology and Reduces Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition in Culture.

Floor A A Ruiter, Francis L C Morgan, Nadia Roumans, Anika Schumacher, Gisela G Slaats, Lorenzo Moroni, Vanessa L S LaPointe, Matthew B Baker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing 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

45 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Biomaterials in organoid research: current state and future directions.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Study Models forMicroorganisms · 2025
    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

8 authors.

Floor A A RuiterMERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Department of Complex Tissue Engineering, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht, 6229 ER, the Netherlands.
Francis L C MorganMERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Department of Complex Tissue Engineering, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht, 6229 ER, the Netherlands.
Nadia RoumansMERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Department of Cell Biology-Inspired Tissue Engineering, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht, 6229 ER, the Netherlands.
Anika SchumacherMERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Department of Cell Biology-Inspired Tissue Engineering, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht, 6229 ER, the Netherlands.
Gisela G SlaatsDepartment II of Internal Medicine and Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, 50937, Germany.
Lorenzo MoroniMERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Department of Complex Tissue Engineering, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht, 6229 ER, the Netherlands.
Vanessa L S LaPointeMERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Department of Cell Biology-Inspired Tissue Engineering, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht, 6229 ER, the Netherlands.
Matthew B BakerMERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Department of Complex Tissue Engineering, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht, 6229 ER, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1731-3858

Funding

Dutch Ministry of Economic AffairsDutch Province of LimburgNWO 731.016.202Regenerative Medicine Crossing Borders
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pluripotent stem cell-derived kidney organoids offer a promising solution to renal failure, yet current organoid protocols often lead to off-target cells and phenotypic alterations, preventing maturity. Here, various dynamic hydrogel architectures are created, conferring a controlled and biomimetic environment for organoid encapsulation. How hydrogel stiffness and stress relaxation affect renal phenotype and undesired fibrotic markers are investigated. The authors observe that stiff hydrogel encapsulation leads to an absence of certain renal cell types and signs of an epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), whereas encapsulation in soft, stress-relaxing hydrogels leads to all major renal segments, fewer fibrosis or EMT associated proteins, apical proximal tubule polarization, and primary cilia formation, representing a significant improvement over current approaches to culture kidney organoids. The findings show that engineering hydrogel mechanics and dynamics have a decided benefit for organoid culture. These structure-property-function relationships can enable the rational design of materials, bringing us closer to functional engraftments and disease-modeling applications.

Indexed as

OrganoidsPluripotent Stem CellsEpithelial-Mesenchymal TransitionHydrogelsKidneyHydrogelsdynamic hydrogelsepithelial-mesenchymal transitionkidney organoidsprimary ciliaviscoelastic

Identifiers

PMID35567354
PMCPMC9284132

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.