ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2023
A Case Study from the Past: "The RGC-5 vs. the 661W Cell Line: Similarities, Differences and Contradictions-Are They Really the Same?"
Article 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Protocol for the purification and culture of primary retinal ganglion cells and development of common pathological models.Journal of molecular histology · 2025Article
- A review of the 661W cell line as a tool to facilitate treatment development for retinal diseases.Cell & bioscience · 2025Review
- Retinal Protection of New Nutraceutical Formulation.Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
- Stress Granule Induction in Rat Retinas Damaged by Constant LED Light.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the pursuit of identifying the underlying pathways of ocular diseases, the use of cell lines such as (retinal ganglion cell-5) RGC-5 and 661W became a valuable tool, including pathologies like retinal degeneration and glaucoma. In 2001, the establishment of the RGC-5 cell line marked a significant breakthrough in glaucoma research. Over time, however, concerns arose about the true nature of RGC-5 cells, with conflicting findings in the literature regarding their identity as retinal ganglion cells or photoreceptor-like cells. This study aimed to address the controversy surrounding the RGC-5 cell line's origin and properties by comparing it with the 661W cell line, a known cone photoreceptor model. Both cell lines were differentiated according to two prior published redifferentiation protocols under the same conditions using 500 nM of trichostatin A (TSA) and investigated for their morphological and neuronal marker properties. The results demonstrated that both cell lines are murine, and they exhibited distinct morphological and neuronal marker properties. Notably, the RGC-5 cells showed higher expression of the neuronal marker β-III tubulin and increased Thy-1-mRNA compared with the 661W cells, providing evidence of their different properties. The findings emphasize the importance of verifying the authenticity of cell lines used in ocular research and highlight the risks of contamination and altered cell properties.
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.