Talk:Induced stem cells

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Dear monsieur Jytdog!

Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte, Ph.D., the senior author of this paper is holder of Salk's Roger Guillemin Chair. I am not suggesting that these cells indeed surely can be used for tissue engineering. But if we do not inform readers of Wikipedia means to reduce Wikipedias value as a source of information. If you need a review [1]. As for the Japanese Obakama, I was the first to correctly interpret, and then delete this material (earlier than "Nature" done it). Dmitry Dzhagarov (talk) 17:03, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

see WP:NOTNEWS and WP:RECENTISM and WP:NODEADLINE. we are not here to report cutting edge stuff. blowing off that principle is what led to Wikipedia describing the "stem cells from shaking" thing and then having to delete it. wrong-headed. and if you are claiming some pride over WP:OR then you are doubly wrong-headed. we should not be yanking readers around like that - we should rely on secondary sources - reviews - for matters biological (as for everything here, per NPOV, OR, VERIFY, RS, and MEDRS. every one of those call us to rely primarily on secondary sources, and there are good, deep reasons for it. Jytdog (talk) 17:08, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I personally feel that it's okay to include at least a sentence or two about these studies, even if they are not secondary review articles. But I won't argue strongly against removing it either. -A1candidate 17:38, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Information of special importance for the clinical application of iPSC

Please edit and put it back into the paper

Safeguard System

As demonstrated above the tumorigenic risks of iPSCs could be reduced by several strategies, such as sorting out undifferentiated cells with antibodies targeting surface-displayed biomarkers, killing undifferentiated cells with cytotoxic antibodies, or elimination of remaining undifferentiated pluripotent cells with chemical inhibitors. However, these strategies may not suffice to lower risk to acceptable levels, because the tumorigenic risk of iPSC-based cell therapy arises not just from contamination with undifferentiated iPSCs but also from other unexpected events associated with long-term culture for reprogramming and redifferentiation. There is always a chance of unexpected issues associated with first-in-human clinical studies. An efficient and reliable approach to provide safety for future regenerative therapy and first-in-human cell therapy can be a suicide gene engineered from human caspase-9, that is not immunogenic, and can kill transduced cells in a cell-cycle-independent manner[2][3][4][5].

Miki Ando et al.[6] demonstrated the efficacy of suicide gene therapy by introducing inducible caspase-9 (iC9) into iPSCs. Activation of iC9 system in vivo with a specific chemical inducer of dimerization (CID) initiates a caspase cascade that eliminates iPSCs and tumors originated from iPSCs. They introduced this iC9/CID safeguard system into a previously reported iPSC-derived, rejuvenated cytotoxic T lymphocyte (rejCTL) therapy model and confirmed that rejCTLs from iPSCs are expressing high levels of iC9 without disturbing antigen-specific killing activity. iC9-expressing rejCTLs exert antitumor effects in vivo. Upon induction, the iC9 system efficiently leads to apoptosis in rejuvenated CTLs. This safeguard system can eliminate contaminating iPSCs, debulk tumors originated from iPSCs, stop cytokine release syndrome associated with iPSC-derived CTL therapy, and control “on-target, off-tumor toxicities”. It should be applicable to other cell therapies using iPSC-derived cells.

References

  1. ^ http://www.genengnews.com/gen-news-highlights/new-stem-cell-discovery-opens-door-to-range-of-novel-therapies/81251241/
  2. ^ Di Stasi, A., Tey, S. K., Dotti, G., Fujita, Y., Kennedy-Nasser, A., Martinez, C., ... & Brenner, M. K. (2011). Inducible apoptosis as a safety switch for adoptive cell therapy. New England Journal of Medicine, 365(18), 1673-1683. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1106152
  3. ^ Yagyu, S., Hoyos, V., Del Bufalo, F., & Brenner, M. K. (2015). An Inducible Caspase-9 Suicide Gene to Improve the Safety of Therapy Using Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells. Molecular Therapy. doi:10.1038/mt.2015.100
  4. ^ Wu, C., Hong, S. G., Winkler, T., Spencer, D. M., Jares, A., Ichwan, B., ... & Dunbar, C. E. (2014). Development of an inducible caspase-9 safety switch for pluripotent stem cell–based therapies. Molecular Therapy—Methods & Clinical Development 1, Article number: 14053 doi:10.1038/mtm.2014.53
  5. ^ Ivics, Z. (2015). Self-Destruct Genetic Switch to Safeguard iPS Cells. Molecular Therapy, 23(9), 1417-1420. doi:10.1038/mt.2015.139
  6. ^ Miki Ando, Toshinobu Nishimura, Satoshi Yamazaki,et al., & Hiromitsu Nakauchi (2015). A Safeguard System for Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Rejuvenated T Cell Therapy. Stem Cell Reports. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stemcr.2015.07.011

Dmitry Dzhagarov (talk) 15:56, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a scientific journal; this article is not a "paper" it is an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia articles summarize accepted knowledge; a finding in a research paper is not 'accepted knowledge" - it is one piece in a long chain of communication among scientists, working toward accepted knowledge. We find accepted knowledge in reviews - in secondary sources. Jytdog (talk) 15:01, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Algorithms for cellular reprogramming

Important achievements of science on the topic of the article that were deleted. I bring them to the community court. To restore or not? − Determining the unique set of cellular factors that is needed to be manipulated for each cell conversion is a long and costly process that involved much trial and error. As a result, this first step of identifying the key set of cellular factors for cell conversion is the major obstacle researchers face in the field of cell reprogramming. An international team of researchers have developed an algorithm, called Mogrify, that can predict the optimal set of cellular factors required to convert one human cell type to another.

− When tested, Mogrify was able to accurately predict the set of cellular factors required for previously published cell conversions correctly. To further validate Mogrify's predictive ability, the team conducted two novel cell conversions in the laboratory using human cells and these were successful in both attempts solely using the predictions of Mogrify.[1][2] Mogrify has been made available online for other researchers and scientists.[3][4]

− − Another algorithm also has been developed that "predicts known reprogramming factors, top candidates for new settings, and ideal timing for application of transcription factors" based on the dynamics of topologically associating domains (TADs) expression levels.[5] The University of Michigan has filed for a patent on the algorithm using the Hi-C technique[6]

References

  1. ^ Waldron, D. (2016). Technology: Prediction of reprogramming factors. Nature Reviews Genetics, 17(3), 128-128. doi:10.1038/nrg.2016.6
  2. ^ Cahan, P. (2016). Enabling direct fate conversion with network biology. Nature genetics, 48(3), 226. PMID 26906680 doi:10.1038/ng.3516
  3. ^ Owen, Rackham; Gough, Julian (2016). "A predictive computational framework for direct reprogramming between human cell types". Nature Genetics. 48: 331–335. doi:10.1038/ng.3487. PMID 26780608.
  4. ^ New Algorithm May Someday Enable Scientists to Regrow Limbs and Replace Damaged Organs
  5. ^ Scott Ronquist et al., & Indika Rajapakse (2017). Algorithm for cellular reprogramming. PNAS. doi:10.1073/pnas.1712350114
  6. ^ No magic wand required: Scientists propose way to turn any cell into any other cell type

-- Dmitry Dzhagarov (talk) 05:55, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Primary source + comments + press release. WP is WP:NOTNEWS and very not news for biology. Did you learn nothing from this? Nothing? Jytdog (talk) 05:55, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is Nature Reviews Genetics Primary source? I am waiting for appropriate discussion with other Wikipedians Dmitry Dzhagarov (talk) 06:01, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Induced stem cells. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:36, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Induced stem cells. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:29, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Induced_stem_cells"