Cited by 895Hematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationMesenchymal stem cell researchBlood disorders and treatments

Hematopoiesis: a human perspective

Open access
Doulatov, Sergei, Notta, Faiyaz, Laurenti, Elisa, Dick, John E.·2012·Cell stem cell

Abstract

Despite its complexity, blood is probably the best understood developmental system, largely due to seminal experimentation in the mouse. Clinically, hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplantation represents the most widely deployed regenerative therapy, but human HSCs have only been characterized relatively recently. The discovery that immune-deficient mice could be engrafted with human cells provided a powerful approach for studying HSCs. We highlight 2 decades of studies focusing on isolation and molecular regulation of human HSCs, therapeutic applications, and early lineage commitment steps, and compare mouse and humanized models to identify both conserved and species-specific mechanisms that will aid future preclinical research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.stem.2012.01.006

Cites

174 of 174 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Early studies of hematopoiesis relied on genetically ablating the function of key master transcription factors or epigenetic regulators in mice to assess their physiological roles.

    “These studies often relied on genetically ablating the function of key master TFs or epigenetic regulators, such as GATA1, SPI1 (PU.1), CEBPA, GFI1, BMI1, IKZF1 (Ikaros), and ETV6 in mice to assess their physiological roles in hematopoiesis (Doulatov et al., 2012; Fujiwara et al., 1996; Hock et al., 2004a, 2004b; Lessard and Sauvageau, 2003; Nichogiannopoulou et al., 1999; Park et al., 2003; Scott”

    From Unraveling Hematopoiesis through the Lens of Genomics (2020) · cites this paper as Doulatov et al., 2012

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Doulatov, S., Notta, F., Laurenti, E., & Dick, J. E.
Affiliations
University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Dick, John E.
Venue
Cell stem cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-02
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
120-136
ISSN
  • 1875-9777 (ISSN-L)
  • 1934-5909
OpenAlex
W1982202983
Cited by
895
References
174
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 84 · 2020: 80 · 2019: 66 · 2018: 64 · 2017: 68 · 2016: 65 · 2015: 64 · 2014: 63 · 2013: 58 · 2012: 31
FWCI
10.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cell stem cell (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Mesenchymal stem cell research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Blood disorders and treatments
Keywords
hematopoiesis, hematopoietic stem cells, humanized mice, immunodeficient mice, HSC isolation, HSC transplantation, regenerative therapy, lineage commitment, human-mouse comparison
MeSH terms
Animals, Hematopoiesis, Hematopoietic Stem Cells, Humans, Mice, SCID, Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation, Cell Lineage, Models, Animal, Regenerative Medicine, Mice

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