Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37626885›Full record

ReviewCells2023

Human and Pig Pluripotent Stem Cells: From Cellular Products to Organogenesis and Beyond.

Yiyi Xuan, Björn Petersen, Pentao Liu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cells, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. The making of cells and organs in xenogeneic animal bioreactor.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Yiyi XuanStem Cell & Regenerative Medicine Consortium, School of Biomedical Sciences, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Björn PetersenInstitute of Farm Animal Genetics, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Mariensee, 31535 Neustadt am Rübenberge, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1532-4863
Pentao LiuStem Cell & Regenerative Medicine Consortium, School of Biomedical Sciences, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Chinese University of Hong Kong · HKFriedrich-Loeffler-Institut · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pluripotent stem cells (PSCs) are important for studying development and hold great promise in regenerative medicine due to their ability to differentiate into various cell types. In this review, we comprehensively discuss the potential applications of both human and pig PSCs and provide an overview of the current progress and challenges in this field. In addition to exploring the therapeutic uses of PSC-derived cellular products, we also shed light on their significance in the study of interspecies chimeras, which has led to the creation of transplantable human or humanized pig organs. Moreover, we emphasize the importance of pig PSCs as an ideal cell source for genetic engineering, facilitating the development of genetically modified pigs for pig-to-human xenotransplantation. Despite the achievements that have been made, further investigations and refinement of PSC technologies are necessary to unlock their full potential in regenerative medicine and effectively address critical healthcare challenges.

Indexed as

OrganogenesisPluripotent Stem CellsAnimalsGenetic EngineeringHumansRegenerative MedicineSwineTechnologycellular productsinterspecies chimerapluripotent stem cellsregenerative medicinexenotransplantation

Identifiers

PMID37626885
PMCPMC10453631
OpenAlexW4385878563

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.