↓ Skip to main content

Characterization of embryonic stem-like cells derived from HEK293T cells through miR302/367 expression and their potentiality to differentiate into germ-like cells

Overview of attention for article published in Methods in Cell Science, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Characterization of embryonic stem-like cells derived from HEK293T cells through miR302/367 expression and their potentiality to differentiate into germ-like cells
Published in
Methods in Cell Science, October 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10616-013-9639-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Long Wang, Haijing Zhu, Jiang Wu, Na Li, Jinlian Hua

Abstract

Human induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells have great value for regenerative medicine, but are facing problems of low efficiency. MicroRNAs are a recently discovered class of 19-25 nt small RNAs that negatively target mRNAs. miR302/367 cluster has been demonstrated to reprogram mouse and human somatic cells to iPS cells without exogenous transcription factors, however, the repetition and differentiation potentiality of miR302/367-induced pluripotent stem (mirPS) cells need to be improved. Here, we showed overexpression of miR302/367 cluster reprogrammed human embryonic kidney 293T cells into mirPS cells in serum-free N2B27-based medium. The mirPS cells had similar morphology with embryonic stem cells, and expressed pluripotent markers including Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and Nanog. In addition, through formation of embryoid bodies, various cells and tissues from three germ layers could be determined. Moreover, we examined the potential of mirPS cells differentiating into germ cells both in vitro and in vivo. Taken together, these data might provide a new source of cells and technique for the investigation of the mechanisms underlying reprogramming and pluripotency.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 7%
Unknown 14 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 33%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Researcher 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 33%
Psychology 1 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%
Chemistry 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Methods in Cell Science
#857
of 1,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,654
of 220,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in Cell Science
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,026 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 220,645 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.