Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37730545›Full record

ArticleBiological procedures online2023

Comparison of two protocols for the generation of iPSC-derived human astrocytes.

Patrycja Mulica, Carmen Venegas, Zied Landoulsi, Katja Badanjak, Sylvie Delcambre, Maria Tziortziou, Soraya Hezzaz, Jenny Ghelfi, Semra Smajic, Jens Schwamborn and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biological procedures online, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

16 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Patrycja MulicaLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Carmen VenegasLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Zied LandoulsiLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Katja BadanjakLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Sylvie DelcambreLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Maria TziortziouLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Soraya HezzazLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Jenny GhelfiLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Semra SmajicLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Jens SchwambornLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Rejko KrügerLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Paul AntonyLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Patrick MayLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Enrico GlaabLuxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Anne Grünewald *Luxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg. anne.gruenewald@uni.lu.
Sandro L Pereira *Luxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
University of Luxembourg · LU

Funding

European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program ERAPERMED 2020-314Luxembourg National Research Fund (FNR) C19/BM/13688526Luxembourg National Research Fund (FNR) C20/BM/14548100Luxembourg National Research Fund (FNR) FNR10907093Luxembourg National Research Fund (FNR) INTER/DFG/19/14429377Luxembourg National Research Fund (FNR) NCER-PDLuxembourg National Research Fund (FNR) PRIDE17/12244779/PARK-QCLuxembourg National Research Fund (FNR), NextImmune2 PRIDE21/16749720
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAstrocytes have recently gained attention as key contributors to the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative disorders including Parkinson's disease. To investigate human astrocytes in vitro, numerous differentiation protocols have been developed. However, the properties of the resulting glia are inconsistent, which complicates the selection of an appropriate method for a given research question. Thus, we compared two approaches for the generation of iPSC-derived astrocytes. We phenotyped glia that were obtained employing a widely used long, serum-free ("LSF") method against an in-house established short, serum-containing ("SSC") protocol which allows for the generation of astrocytes and midbrain neurons from the same precursor cells.

resultsWe employed high-content confocal imaging and RNA sequencing to characterize the cultures. The astrocytes generated with the LSF or SSC protocols differed considerably in their properties: while the former cells were more labor-intense in their generation (5 vs 2 months), they were also more mature. This notion was strengthened by data resulting from cell type deconvolution analysis that was applied to bulk transcriptomes from the cultures to assess their similarity with human postmortem astrocytes.

conclusionsOverall, our analyses highlight the need to consider the advantages and disadvantages of a given differentiation protocol, when designing functional or drug discovery studies involving iPSC-derived astrocytes.

Indexed as

AstrocytesDisease modelingiPSC

Identifiers

PMID37730545
PMCPMC10512486
OpenAlexW4386883336

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.