ArticleStem cells international2025
Human iPSC Reprogramming Success: The Impact of Approaches and Source Materials.
Article in Stem cells international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Kit-based remote collection and isolation of human reprogrammable somatic cells for generation of induced pluripotent stem cells and cerebral organoids.Nature protocols · 2026Review
- Induced pluripotent stem cell reprogramming: methodological evolution and challenges in clinical translation.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Replicable generation and stable maintenance of rhesus macaque iPSCs forFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Article
- New iPSC resource with long-read whole genome sequencing characterizations for enhanced in vitro modeling.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells in Cardiomyopathy: Advancing Disease Modeling, Therapeutic Development, and Regenerative Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Review
- Deciphering reprogramming efficiency in human induced pluripotent stem cells: insights from the generation of 150 cell lines.Frontiers in immunology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Since their discovery, human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) have been instrumental in biomedical research, particularly in the fields of disease modelling, drug screening and regenerative therapies. Their use has significantly increased over recent years driven by the ability of hiPSCs to provide differentiated cell models without requiring embryonic stem cells. Furthermore, the transition from integrating to non-integrating reprogramming methodologies has contributed to the increase in utilisation. This shift minimises the risk of genomic alterations, enhancing the safety and reliability of hiPSCs. However, the factors that contribute to reprogramming success are still not well understood. In this study, we conducted a comparative analysis of the most prevalent non-integrating reprogramming methods across a range of starting source materials to assess their impact on reprogramming success rates. We found that while source material does not significantly impact success rates, the Sendai virus reprogramming method yields significantly higher success rates relative to the episomal reprogramming method. Our findings offer important insights from a biobanking perspective, for which long-term reliability, integrity and reproducibility of hiPSCs are crucial.
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.