ArticleRegenerative therapy2026
Sex as a biological variable in human dental pulp stem cells: An exploratory epigenomic and transcriptomic comparison.
Article in Regenerative therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To determine whether baseline epigenomic and transcriptional profiles of human dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) differ by sex, and to assess sex dependence of key markers related to growth and stemness. Methods: Primary DPSCs from nine young adult donors were isolated and cultured under standard growth conditions. Genome-wide DNA methylation was screened by Illumina Infinium Methylation EPIC v2.0. Bulk RNA sequencing was performed with poly A selected libraries on an Illumina NovaSeq X Plus sequencer. Additionally, a targeted RT-qPCR array covering canonical proliferation, stemness (multi- and pluri-potency, neural crest markers), MSC identity, and WNT and NOTCH signaling markers was tested. Results: Global differences between male- and female-derived samples were predominantly confined to the sex chromosomes. DNA methylation profiling revealed sex-dependent patterns, with mild autosomal hypermethylation in males and marked hypermethylation of the X chromosome in females. This pattern was accompanied by female-specific expression of XIST, supporting X-chromosome inactivation as a major contributor to the observed sex-chromosome signal. Autosomal methylation differences were generally modest (|Δβ| < 0.2). At the transcriptomic level, only a small fraction of genes (52 of 17,204) was differentially expressed, with most mapping to the sex chromosomes. Consistently, the RT-qPCR array indicated minimal differences between male and female DPSCs, with no consistent sex dependence across targets except for CCNE1. Conclusions: Under basal culture conditions, DNA methylation and transcriptional profiles in DPSCs are largely similar between sexes. The limited differential signal is associated predominantly with sex chromosomes, while autosomal effects are few and modest. These findings provide an initial molecular baseline and motivate larger and context specific studies.
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.