ArticleBiotechnology letters2024
Redifferentiation of genetically modified dedifferentiated chondrocytes in a microcavitary hydrogel.
Article in Biotechnology letters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Microcavitary Alginate Hydrogel Reverses Chondrocyte Dedifferentiation via Temporal Modulation of the p53 Pathway.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWe genetically modified dedifferentiated chondrocytes (DCs) using lentiviral vectors and adenoviral vectors encoding TGF-β3 (referred to as transgenic groups below) and encapsulated these DCs in the microcavitary hydrogel and investigated the combinational effect on redifferentiation of the genetically manipulated DCs.
resultsThe Cell Counting Kit-8 data indicated that both transgenic groups exhibited significantly higher cell viability in the first week but inferior cell viability in the subsequent timepoints compared with those of the control group. Real-time polymerase chain reaction and western blot analysis results demonstrated that both transgenic groups had a better effect on redifferentiation to some extent, as evidenced by higher expression levels of chondrogenic genes, suggesting the validity of combination with transgenic DCs and the microcavitary hydrogel on redifferentiation. Although transgenic DCs with adenoviral vectors presented a superior extent of redifferentiation, they also expressed greater levels of the hypertrophic gene type X collagen. It is still worth further exploring how to deliver TGF-β3 more efficiently and optimizing the appropriate parameters, including concentration and duration.
conclusionsThe results demonstrated the better redifferentiation effect of DCs with the combinational use of transgenic TGF-β3 and a microcavitary alginate hydrogel and implied that DCs would be alternative seed cells for cartilage tissue engineering due to their easily achieved sufficient cell amounts through multiple passages and great potential to redifferentiate to produce cartilaginous extracellular matrix.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38523201What 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.