ArticleCell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.)2022
Comparing the mitochondrial signatures in ESCs and iPSCs and their neural derivations.
Article in Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Potential of Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Treating Spinocerebellar Ataxia: Advances and Future Directions.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Plant-derived exosomes extracted fromBioengineering & translational medicine · 2024Article
- Neuronal Cell Differentiation of iPSCs for the Clinical Treatment of Neurological Diseases.Biomedicines · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Embryonic stem cells (ESCs) and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) have distinct origins: ESCs are derived from pre-implanted embryos while iPSCs are reprogrammed somatic cells. Both have their own characteristics and lineage specificity, and both are valuable tools for studying human neurological development and disease. Thus far, few studies have analyzed how differences between stem cell types influence mitochondrial function and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) homeostasis during differentiation into neural and glial lineages. In this study, we compared mitochondrial function and mtDNA replication in human ESCs and iPSCs at three different stages - pluripotent, neural progenitor and astrocyte. We found that while ESCs and iPSCs have a similar mitochondrial signature, neural and astrocyte derivations manifested differences. At the neural stem cell (NSC) stage, iPSC-NSCs displayed decreased ATP production and a reduction in mitochondrial respiratory chain (MRC) complex IV expression compared to ESC-NSCs. IPSC-astrocytes showed increased mitochondrial activity including elevated ATP production, MRC complex IV expression, mtDNA copy number and mitochondrial biogenesis relative to those derived from ESCs. These findings show that while ESCs and iPSCs are similar at the pluripotent stage, differences in mitochondrial function may develop during differentiation and must be taken into account when extrapolating results from different cell types.
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.