From "ES-like" cells to induced pluripotent stem cells: a historical perspective in domestic animals
Koh S., Piedrahita JA.
Narrative Review, published in Theriogenology (2014) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Theriogenology (2014)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 24274415
- PMCID
- PMC3883495
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2013.09.009
- Citations
- 53
Abstract (original English)
Pluripotent stem cells such as embryonic stem cells (ESCs) and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) provide great potential as cell sources for gene editing to generate genetically modified animals, as well as in the field of regenerative medicine. Stable, long-term ESCs have been established in laboratory mouse and rat; however, isolation of true pluripotent ESCs in domesticated animals such as pigs and dogs have been less successful. Initially, domesticated animal pluripotent cell lines were referred to as "embryonic stem-like" cells owing to their similar morphologic characteristics to mouse ESCs, but accompanied by a limited ability to proliferate in vitro in an undifferentiated state. That is, they shared some but not all the characteristics of true ESCs. More recently, advances in reprogramming using exogenous transcription factors, combined with the utilization of small chemical inhibitors of key biochemical pathways, have led to the isolation of iPSCs. In this review, we provide a historical perspective of the isolation of various types of pluripotent stem cells in domesticated animals. In addition, we summarize the latest progress and limitations in the derivation and application of iPSCs.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.