ReviewMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2024
Fate-Mapping Macrophages: From Ontogeny to Functions.
Review in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Harnessing macrophage signaling pathways and scalable engineering for next-generation immunotherapies.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- Insights Into Stria Vascular Function, Stria Immunity, and Age-Related Hearing Loss.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2025Review
- Immunomodulation of salivary gland function due to cancer therapy.Oral diseases · 2025Review
- Exosomes and MicroRNAs: key modulators of macrophage polarization in sepsis pathophysiology.European journal of medical research · 2025Review
- Masterful macrophages: understanding and targeting activation dysfunction in diabetic wounds.Burns & trauma · 2025Review
- Tissue-Resident Macrophages in Cancer: Friend or Foe?Cancer medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Macrophages are vital to the physiological function of most tissues, but also contribute to disease through a multitude of pathological roles. They are thus highly plastic and heterogeneous. It is now well recognized that macrophages develop from several distinct progenitors from embryogenesis onwards and extending throughout life. Tissue-resident macrophages largely originate from embryonic sources and in many cases self-maintain independently without monocyte input. However, in certain tissues, monocyte-derived macrophages replace these over time or as a result of tissue injury and inflammation. This additional layer of heterogeneity has introduced many questions regarding the influence of origin on fate and function of macrophages in health and disease. To comprehensively address these questions, appropriate methods of tracing macrophage ontogeny are required. This chapter explores why ontogeny is of vital importance in macrophage biology and how to delineate macrophage populations by origin through genetic fate mapping. First, we summarize the current view of macrophage ontogeny and briefly discuss how origin may influence macrophage function in homeostasis and pathology. We go on to make the case for genetic fate mapping as the gold standard and briefly review different fate-mapping models. We then put forward our recommendations for fate-mapping strategies best suited to answer specific research questions and finally discuss the strengths and limitations of currently available models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37639113What 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.