ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2025
Cell Reprogramming, Transdifferentiation, and Dedifferentiation Approaches for Heart Repair.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Harnessing Endogenous Plasticity Rather than Reprogramming of Mature Cells Will Advance Regenerative Medicine, Cancer Treatment and Rejuvenation.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2026Review
- Revisiting Pluripotency Acquisition: A Unified Framework for Reprogramming Strategies.Development, growth & differentiation · 2026Review
- Paligenosis: dual potential of mature cell plasticity in regeneration and tumorigenesis.MedScience · 2026Review
- Correction: Almeida et al. Cell Reprogramming, Transdifferentiation, and Dedifferentiation Approaches for Heart Repair.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Tissue nanotransfection and cellular reprogramming in regenerative medicine and antimicrobial dynamics.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death globally, with myocardial infarction (MI) being a major contributor. The current therapeutic approaches are limited in effectively regenerating damaged cardiac tissue. Up-to-date strategies for heart regeneration/reconstitution aim at cardiac remodeling through repairing the damaged tissue with an external cell source or by stimulating the existing cells to proliferate and repopulate the compromised area. Cell reprogramming is addressed to this challenge as a promising solution, converting fibroblasts and other cell types into functional cardiomyocytes, either by reverting cells to a pluripotent state or by directly switching cell lineage. Several strategies such as gene editing and the application of miRNA and small molecules have been explored for their potential to enhance cardiac regeneration. Those strategies take advantage of cell plasticity by introducing reprogramming factors that regress cell maturity in vitro, allowing for their later differentiation and thus endorsing cell transplantation, or promote in situ cell proliferation, leveraged by scaffolds embedded with pro-regenerative factors promoting efficient heart restoration. Despite notable advancements, important challenges persist, including low reprogramming efficiency, cell maturation limitations, and safety concerns in clinical applications. Nonetheless, integrating these innovative approaches offers a promising alternative for restoring cardiac function and reducing the dependency on full heart transplants.
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.