Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39022557›Full record

ReviewPulse (Basel, Switzerland)

In situ Reprogramming as a Pro-Angiogenic Inducer to Rescue Ischemic Tissues.

Seyong Chung, Hak-Joon Sung

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pulse (Basel, Switzerland). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Seyong ChungDepartment of Medical Engineering, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Hak-Joon SungDepartment of Medical Engineering, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Enhanced regenerative therapeutic strategies are required to treat intractable ischemic heart disease. Summary: Since the discovery of putative endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) in 1997, many studies have focused on their extraction, ex vivo processing, and autotransplantation under ischemic conditions. Nonetheless, numerous randomized clinical trials involving thousands of patients have yielded only marginal treatment effects, highlighting the need for advances regarding insufficient dosage and complex ex vivo processing. The prevailing paradigm of cellular differentiation highlights the potential of direct cellular reprogramming, which paves the way for in situ reprogramming. In situ reprogramming holds the promise of significantly enhancing current therapeutic strategies, yet its success hinges on the precise targeting of candidate cells for reprogramming. In this context, the spleen emerges as a pivotal "in situ reprogramming hub," owing to its dual function as both a principal site for nanoparticle distribution and a significant reservoir of putative EPCs. The in situ reprogramming of splenic EPCs offers a potential solution to overcome critical challenges, including the aforementioned insufficient dosage and complex ex vivo processing. Key Messages: This review explores the latest advancements in EPC therapy and in situ reprogramming, spotlighting a pioneering study that integrates those two strategies with a specific focus on the spleen. Such an innovative approach will potentially herald a new era of regenerative therapy for ischemic heart disease.

Indexed as

AngiogenesisIn situ reprogrammingIschemic tissues

Identifiers

PMID39022557
PMCPMC11249613

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.