ArticleStem cells translational medicine2025
Modeling rare genetic disease with patient-derived induced pluripotent stem cells: reassessment of the minimum numbers of lines needed.
Article in Stem cells translational medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Changes in Purine Metabolism During Differentiation of Dopamine Neurons from Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells.Cellular and molecular neurobiology · 2026Article
- Modeling rare genetic disease with gene-edited induced pluripotent stem cells: relevance of the starting stock line.Stem cells translational medicine · 2025Article
- The role of stem cells in precision medicine: next-generation cancer treatment.Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) are widely used to model human genetic diseases. The most common strategy involves collecting cells from relevant individuals and then reprogramming them into iPSCs. This strategy is very powerful, but finding enough individuals with a specific genetic disease can be challenging, especially since most are rare. In addition, making numerous iPSC lines is time-consuming and expensive. As a result, most studies have included relatively small numbers of iPSC lines, sometimes from the same individual. Considering the experimental variability obtained using different iPSC lines, there has been great interest in delineating the most efficient number of lines needed to achieve a robust and reproducible result. Several recommendations have been published, although most conclusions have been based on methods where experimental variance from individual cases is difficult to separate from technical issues related to the preparation of iPSCs. The current study used gene expression profiles determined by RNA sequencing (RNAseq) to empirically evaluate the impact of the number of unique individuals and the number of replicate iPSC lines from each individual for modeling Lesch-Nyhan disease (LND). This disease is caused by mutations in the HPRT1 gene, which encodes the enzyme hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase. Results for detecting disease-relevant changes in gene expression depended on the analytical method employed, and whether or not statistical procedures were used to address multiple iPSC lines from the same individual. In keeping with prior studies, the best results were obtained with iPSC lines from 3-4 unique individuals per group. In contrast to prior studies, results were improved with 2 lines per individual, without statistical corrections for duplicate lines from the same individual. In the current study where all lines were produced in parallel using the same methods, most variance in gene expression came from technical factors unrelated to the individual from whom the iPSC lines were prepared.
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.