ArticleLife science alliance2022
Comparative functional genomics identifies unique molecular features of EPSCs.
Article in Life science alliance, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- BMP4 and FGF2 promote heterogeneous priming including extraembryonic lineages in porcine expanded potential stem cells.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Article
- Transcriptomic insights and feeder-free culturing of porcine expanded potential stem cells from cloned embryos.Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Article
- Recapitulating primary immunodeficiencies with expanded potential stem cells: Proof of concept with STAT1 gain of function.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2024Article
- Comparative transcriptomic analysis of Illumina and MGI next-generation sequencing platforms using RUNX3- and ZBTB46-instructed embryonic stem cells.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Extended pluripotent or expanded potential stem cells (EPSCs) possess superior developmental potential to embryonic stem cells (ESCs). However, the molecular underpinning of EPSC maintenance in vitro is not well defined. We comparatively studied transcriptome, chromatin accessibility, active histone modification marks, and relative proteomes of ESCs and the two well-established EPSC lines to probe the molecular foundation underlying EPSC developmental potential. Despite some overlapping transcriptomic and chromatin accessibility features, we defined sets of molecular signatures that distinguish EPSCs from ESCs in transcriptional and translational regulation as well as metabolic control. Interestingly, EPSCs show similar reliance on pluripotency factors Oct4, Sox2, and Nanog for self-renewal as ESCs. Our study provides a rich resource for dissecting the regulatory network that governs the developmental potency of EPSCs and exploring alternative strategies to capture totipotent stem cells in culture.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.