↓ Skip to main content

Silencing of hepatic fate-conversion factors induce tumorigenesis in reprogrammed hepatic progenitor-like cells

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Silencing of hepatic fate-conversion factors induce tumorigenesis in reprogrammed hepatic progenitor-like cells
Published in
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13287-016-0349-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Felipe Serrano, Maria García-Bravo, Marina Blazquez, Josema Torres, Jose V. Castell, Jose C. Segovia, Roque Bort

Abstract

Several studies have reported the direct conversion of mouse fibroblasts to hepatocyte-like cells with different degrees of maturation by expression of hepatic fate-conversion factors. We have used a combination of lentiviral vectors expressing hepatic fate-conversion factors with Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and Myc to convert mouse embryonic fibroblasts into hepatic cells. We have generated hepatic cells with progenitor-like features (iHepL cells). iHepL cells displayed basic hepatocyte functions but failed to perform functions characteristic of mature hepatocytes such as significant Cyp450 or urea cycle activities. iHepL cells expressed multiple hepatic-specific transcription factors and functional genes characteristic of immature hepatocytes and cholangiocytes, as well as high levels of Foxl1, Cd24a, and Lgr5, specific markers of hepatic progenitor cells. When transplanted into partial hepatectomized and hepatic irradiated mice, they differentiated into hepatocytes and cholangiocytes. However, iHepL cells formed malignant non-teratoma cell aggregations in one out of five engrafted livers and five out of five xenografts assays. All the cells in these tumors had silenced key hepatic fate-conversion factors, and lost hepatic features. This study highlights the dangers of using pluripotency factors in reprogramming strategies when fate-conversion factors are silenced in vivo, and urges us to perform extensive tumorigenic tests in reprogrammed cells.

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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 4%
Unknown 23 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Researcher 4 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 13%
Student > Master 2 8%
Lecturer 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 7 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 25%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Engineering 2 8%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 7 29%
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 28 July 2016.
All research outputs
#15,380,359
of 22,881,154 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#1,344
of 2,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,455
of 365,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#28
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,154 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,425 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 365,593 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.