Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31847447›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2019

Kidney Cells Regeneration: Dedifferentiation of Tubular Epithelium, Resident Stem Cells and Possible Niches for Renal Progenitors.

Nadezda V Andrianova, Marina I Buyan, Ljubava D Zorova, Irina B Pevzner, Vasily A Popkov, Valentina A Babenko, Denis N Silachev, Egor Y Plotnikov, Dmitry B Zorov

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Dynamic Kidney Organoid Microphysiological Analysis Platform.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nadezda V AndrianovaFaculty of Bioengineering and Bioinformatics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119992 Moscow, Russia.
Marina I BuyanFaculty of Bioengineering and Bioinformatics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119992 Moscow, Russia.
Ljubava D ZorovaA.N. Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119992 Moscow, Russia.
Irina B PevznerA.N. Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119992 Moscow, Russia.
Vasily A PopkovA.N. Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119992 Moscow, Russia.
Valentina A BabenkoA.N. Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119992 Moscow, Russia.
Denis N SilachevA.N. Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119992 Moscow, Russia.
Egor Y PlotnikovA.N. Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119992 Moscow, Russia.ORCID 0000-0003-2838-3704
Dmitry B ZorovA.N. Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119992 Moscow, Russia.
Lomonosov Moscow State University · RUSechenov University · RU

Funding

Russian Science Foundation 18-15-00058Российский Фонд Фундаментальных Исследований (РФФИ) 19-29-04090
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A kidney is an organ with relatively low basal cellular regenerative potential. However, renal cells have a pronounced ability to proliferate after injury, which undermines that the kidney cells are able to regenerate under induced conditions. The majority of studies explain yielded regeneration either by the dedifferentiation of the mature tubular epithelium or by the presence of a resident pool of progenitor cells in the kidney tissue. Whether cells responsible for the regeneration of the kidney initially have progenitor properties or if they obtain a "progenitor phenotype" during dedifferentiation after an injury, still stays the open question. The major stumbling block in resolving the issue is the lack of specific methods for distinguishing between dedifferentiated cells and resident progenitor cells. Transgenic animals, single-cell transcriptomics, and other recent approaches could be powerful tools to solve this problem. This review examines the main mechanisms of kidney regeneration: dedifferentiation of epithelial cells and activation of progenitor cells with special attention to potential niches of kidney progenitor cells. We attempted to give a detailed description of the most controversial topics in this field and ways to resolve these issues.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell DedifferentiationEpithelial CellsEpitheliumHumansKidney TubulesRegenerationStem Cellsdifferentiationnichespapillarenal stem cellsscattered tubular cells

Identifiers

PMID31847447
PMCPMC6941132
OpenAlexW2995364895

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.