Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36835305›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of molecular sciences2023

Teratoma Assay for Testing Pluripotency and Malignancy of Stem Cells: Insufficient Reporting and Uptake of Animal-Free Methods-A Systematic Review.

Joaquin Montilla-Rojo, Monika Bialecka, Kimberley E Wever, Christine L Mummery, Leendert H J Looijenga, Bernard A J Roelen, Daniela C F Salvatori

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of molecular sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. 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

7 authors.

Joaquin Montilla-RojoAnatomy and Physiology, Department Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584 CL Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3168-0796
Monika BialeckaAnatomy and Physiology, Department Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584 CL Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9430-4854
Kimberley E WeverDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3635-3660
Christine L MummeryDepartment of Anatomy and Embryology, Leiden University Medical Centre, 2333 ZC Leiden, The Netherlands.
Leendert H J LooijengaPrincess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8146-1911
Bernard A J RoelenAnatomy and Physiology, Department Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584 CL Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9512-4708
Daniela C F SalvatoriAnatomy and Physiology, Department Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584 CL Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

ZonMw 114024122 (40-42600-98-423)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pluripotency describes the ability of stem cells to differentiate into derivatives of the three germ layers. In reporting new human pluripotent stem cell lines, their clonal derivatives or the safety of differentiated derivatives for transplantation, assessment of pluripotency is essential. Historically, the ability to form teratomas in vivo containing different somatic cell types following injection into immunodeficient mice has been regarded as functional evidence of pluripotency. In addition, the teratomas formed can be analyzed for the presence of malignant cells. However, use of this assay has been subject to scrutiny for ethical reasons on animal use and due to the lack of standardization in how it is used, therefore questioning its accuracy. In vitro alternatives for assessing pluripotency have been developed such as ScoreCard and PluriTest. However, it is unknown whether this has resulted in reduced use of the teratoma assay. Here, we systematically reviewed how the teratoma assay was reported in publications between 1998 (when the first human embryonic stem cell line was described) and 2021. Our analysis of >400 publications showed that in contrast to expectations, reporting of the teratoma assay has not improved: methods are not yet standardized, and malignancy was examined in only a relatively small percentage of assays. In addition, its use has not decreased since the implementation of the ARRIVE guidelines on reduction of animal use (2010) or the introduction of ScoreCard (2015) and PluriTest (2011). The teratoma assay is still the preferred method to assess the presence of undifferentiated cells in a differentiated cell product for transplantation since the in vitro assays alone are not generally accepted by the regulatory authorities for safety assessment. This highlights the remaining need for an in vitro assay to test malignancy of stem cells.

Indexed as

Pluripotent Stem CellsTeratomaAnimalsCell DifferentiationCell LineEmbryonic Stem CellsHumansInjectionsMicehPSCsmalignancypluripotencyteratoma assay

Identifiers

PMID36835305
PMCPMC9967860

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.