ReviewStem cells translational medicine2026
Heterogeneity and optimal study design between cell lines in induced pluripotent stem cell-based cardiac disease modeling.
Review in Stem cells translational medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endometriosis-derived iPSCs reveal conserved stromal maturation and endocrine responsiveness.Science advances · 2026Article
- Review
- Efficient Generation of Functional TCRαβbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human-induced pluripotent stem cell (hiPSC) technologies have provided access to in vitro models of inaccessible human cardiomyocytes (CMs), providing new insights into human disease mechanisms, therapy strategies, and cardiac toxicology. However, the robustness of reproducible outcomes and integration of data among research groups are hampered due to the variation between cell lines, clones, and batches-to-batch differences. These variable outcomes in hiPSC models are caused by differences in human donors, genetic stability, and experimental variability, which affect morphology, cellular heterogeneity, transcript and protein abundance, and differentiation potency. This review summarizes the usage of hiPSC-CMs obtained from multiple lines and evaluates the corresponding experimental variation between studies to perform in-depth in vitro power calculations. Our meta-analyses show that although 4 or more hiPSC lines are used in 21 published case-control studies, these reports still contain high heterogeneity between functional parameters. In specific CM readouts, the SD is >40%, meaning that the variation between different cell lines is larger than the effect of the studied mutation, drug response, or toxicity. Results indicate a need for careful selection of hiPSC lines, controls, and readout stability and these insights will further guide the power of hiPSC lines in biomedical applications.
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.