Variability of human pluripotent stem cell lines
Open accessAbstract
Human pluripotent stem cells derived from embryos (human Embryonic Stem Cells or hESCs) or generated by direct reprogramming of somatic cells (human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells or hiPSCs) can proliferate almost indefinitely in vitro while maintaining the capacity to differentiate into a broad diversity of cell types. These two properties (self-renewal and pluripotency) confers human pluripotent stem cells a unique interest for clinical applications since they could allow the production of infinite quantities of cells for disease modelling, drug screening and cell based therapy. However, recent studies have clearly established that human pluripotent stem cell lines can display variable capacity to differentiate into specific lineages. Consequently, the development of universal protocols of differentiation which could work efficiently with any human pluripotent cell line is complicated substantially. As a consequence, each protocol needs to be adapted to every cell line thereby limiting large scale applications and precluding personalised therapies. Here, we summarise our knowledge concerning the origin of this variability and describe potential solutions currently available to bypass this major challenge.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Individual stem cell lines vary significantly in their ability to differentiate into different lineages.
“individual stem cell lines vary significantly in their ability to differentiate into different lineages71”
From How to design preclinical studies in nanomedicine and cell therapy to maximize the prospects of clinical translation (2018) · cites this paper as [71]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 67 · Cited by 117
- Authors
- Ortmann, D., & Vallier, L.
- Affiliations
- Wellcome/MRC Cambridge Stem Cell Institute (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Vallier, Ludovic
- ORCID
- Vallier, Ludovic
- Venue
- Current Opinion in Genetics & Development
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-10
- Volume
- 46
- Pages
- 179-185
- ISSN
- 0959-437X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2745820973
- Cited by
- 117
- References
- 67
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 1.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Current Opinion in Genetics & Development (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
- Apollo
- Funders
- Medical Research Council (MC_PC_12009)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Pluripotent Stem Cells Research
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Mesenchymal stem cell research
- Keywords
- human pluripotent stem cells, human embryonic stem cells, induced pluripotent stem cells, lineage specification, differentiation protocols, self-renewal, pluripotency, disease modeling, cell therapy, personalized medicine
- MeSH terms
- Cell Differentiation, Cell Line, Humans, Embryonic Stem Cells, Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells, Cellular Reprogramming
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review