The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 42 of the 59 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision
Open accessAbstract
Ageing is a degenerative process that leads to tissue dysfunction and death. A proposed cause of ageing is the accumulation of epigenetic noise that disrupts gene expression patterns, leading to decreases in tissue function and regenerative capacity 1-3. Changes to DNA methylation patterns over time form the basis of ageing clocks 4, but whether older individuals retain the information needed to restore these patterns-and, if so, whether this could improve tissue function-is not known. Over time, the central nervous system (CNS) loses function and regenerative capacity 5-7. Using the eye as a model CNS tissue, here we show that ectopic expression of Oct4 (also known as Pou5f1), Sox2 and Klf4 genes (OSK) in mouse retinal ganglion cells restores youthful DNA methylation patterns and transcriptomes, promotes axon regeneration after injury, and reverses vision loss in a mouse model of glaucoma and in aged mice. The beneficial effects of OSK-induced reprogramming in axon regeneration and vision require the DNA demethylases TET1 and TET2. These data indicate that mammalian tissues retain a record of youthful epigenetic information-encoded in part by DNA methylation-that can be accessed to improve tissue function and promote regeneration in vivo.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
73 Own result · 20 Own method · 16 Partly supported · 12 Own interpretation · 11 Supported · 3 Supported so far · 2 No full text of the sources · 2 No basis given · 1 Not checked yet · accuracy not yet measured
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Changes to DNA methylation patterns over time form the basis of ageing clocks4, but whether older individuals retain the information needed to restore these patterns—and, if so, whether this could improve tissue function—is not known.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [4] Horvath, S. DNA methylation age of human tissues and cell types. Genome Biol. 14, 3156 (2013). source
The Background describes age-related changes in DNA methylation and age predictors based on methylation levels. In “The changing ticking rate of the epigenetic clock,” the paper states that its clock combines 353 CpG methylation measurements that vary with age. This supports the cited clause; the later question about restoring patterns is not attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In mammals, one of the first systems to lose regenerative potential is the CNS5–7.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK stimulates axon regeneration
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] Kennard, M. A. Relation of age to motor impairment in man and in subhuman primates. Arch. Neurol. Psychiatry 44, 377–397 (1940). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Goldberg, J. L., Klassen, M. P., Hua, Y. & Barres, B. A. Amacrine-signaled loss of intrinsic axon growth ability by retinal ganglion cells. Science 296, 1860–1864 (2002). source
- Partly supportedcites [7] Yun, M. H. Changes in regenerative capacity through lifespan. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 16, 25392–25432 (2015). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 2.1 (page unavailable) says mammals can regenerate their spinal cords only partially and only during early development, supporting early loss of regenerative potential in part of the CNS. It does not establish that the CNS as a whole is one of the first systems to lose that potential; Section 2.2 also describes adult neurogenesis that declines with age. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Because Tet1 and Tet2, but not Tet3, were upregulated by OSK35,36 (Extended Data Fig. 6a), we tested the effect of knocking down Tet1 or Tet2 (sh-Tet1 or sh-Tet2) using AAV37 in the context of damaged, OSK-treated RGCs (Extended Data Fig. 6b–d).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Regeneration requires DNA demethylation
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [35] Koh, K. P. et al. Tet1 and Tet2 regulate 5-hydroxymethylcytosine production and cell lineage specification in mouse embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 8, 200–213 (2011). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section reports that Tet1 and Tet2 expression increased, while Tet3 expression decreased, when mouse fibroblasts were reprogrammed to iPS cells. However, the paper used Oct4, Sox2, Klf4 and c-Myc (OSKM), not OSK alone, so it does not establish the claimed response to OSK. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Partly supportedcites [36] Gao, Y. et al. Replacement of Oct4 by Tet1 during iPSC induction reveals an important role of DNA methylation and hydroxymethylation in reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell 12, 453–469 (2013). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “Tet1 Can Facilitate Traditional iPSC Induction in a Hydroxylase-Dependent Manner” (page unavailable), the paper reports that Tet1 progressively increased in both OSK and OSKM reprogramming and that Tet3 was repressed in iPSCs. It reports early Tet2 upregulation for OSKM, but does not establish Tet2 upregulation by OSK alone. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Among the Yamanaka factors, c-Myc is an oncogene that reduces mouse lifespan20 and is not required for the initiation of cellular reprogramming21.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Reset of ageing signatures, not identity
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [21] Rand, T. A. et al. MYC releases early reprogrammed human cells from proliferation pause via retinoblastoma protein inhibition. Cell Rep. 23, 361–375 (2018). source
The Discussion (page unavailable) states that OSK initiates reprogramming in human cells and that MYC does not affect this initial process. The Results (page unavailable) also report that suppressing endogenous MYC did not alter the emergence of early reprogramming markers. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Elevation of IOP was induced unilaterally by injection of polystyrene microbeads (FluoSpheres; Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA; 15-μm diameter) to the anterior chamber of the right eye of each animal under a surgical microscope, as previously reported40.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Microbead-induced elevated intraocular pressure (IOP)
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [40] Krishnan, A. et al. Overexpression of soluble Fas ligand following adeno-associated virus gene therapy prevents retinal ganglion cell death in chronic and acute murine models of glaucoma. J. Immunol. 197, 4626–4638 (2016). source
The Methods section (‘Induction of elevated IOP’) describes unilateral injection of 15-μm polystyrene microbeads into the anterior chamber to induce elevated IOP. The Results section (‘sFasL prevents loss of RGCs and axons in a microbead-induced model of glaucoma’) reports that this injection elevated IOP compared with saline controls. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“When applying an elastic net model to train a predictor of age, PCs beyond PC1 did not increase the robustness of the age prediction65.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > DNAm ageing signature
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [65] Levine, M. et al. A rat epigenetic clock recapitulates phenotypic aging and co-localizes with heterochromatin. eLife 9, e59201 (2020). source
The Results section (Age differences in DNAm) says that including PCs beyond PC1 did not improve age prediction. The Statistical analysis section reports that, in 10-fold cross-validation of the elastic-net model, PC1 alone produced the best age predictor. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“To our knowledge, this is the first example of vision loss reversal after glaucomatous injury has occurred, with previous attempts focusing on neuroprotection delivered at an early stage to prevent further disease progression41,42 (Supplementary discussion).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Recovery of vision in mice with glaucoma
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [41] Almasieh, M. & Levin, L. A. Neuroprotection in glaucoma: animal models and clinical trials. Ann. Rev. Vis. Sci. 3, 1–30 (2016). source
The citation is attached to the description of previous attempts, not to the citing authors’ claim that their result is the first reversal. Section 1.4 describes neuroprotection as preserving retinal ganglion cells and visual function, while section 7.1 describes glaucoma trials in terms of slowing progression. Those passages support the cited contrast between preventing further loss and reversing loss that has already occurred. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Partly supportedcites [42] Levin, L. A. et al. Neuroprotection for glaucoma: requirements for clinical translation. Exp. Eye Res. 157, 34–37 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 2 (page unavailable) defines glaucoma neuroprotection as slowing functional loss and disease progression rather than reversing it. Section 7 discusses intervening at an early level of retinal ganglion cell injury, but the paper does not establish that previous attempts were delivered at an early stage. The citing authors’ assertion that their result is the first reversal is their own claim, not the part this citation supports. (LLM, conf=0.82)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Day 4-injured RGCs experienced an acceleration of DNAm age, while OSK expression counteracted this effect (Fig. 2d).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK counters injury-induced DNAm ageing
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“OSK-mediated recovery of neurite area, as well as both the number and length of axons, were blocked by Tet2 knockdown, but not by mTOR-S6K inhibition (Extended Data Fig. 8j–s).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Axon regeneration in human neurons
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When delivered singly, Oct4 or Sox2 alone increased RGC survival slightly (Extended Data Fig. 3e), but none of the single factors alone had any effect on regenerative capacity (Fig. 1d).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK stimulates axon regeneration
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 31
- Probably not a substantial claim. 35
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“A proposed cause of ageing is the accumulation of epigenetic noise that disrupts gene expression patterns, leading to decreases in tissue function and regenerative capacity1–3.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] Sinclair, D. A., Mills, K. & Guarente, L. Accelerated aging and nucleolar fragmentation in yeast sgs1 mutants. Science 277, 1313–1316 (1997). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [2] Imai, S. & Kitano, H. Heterochromatin islands and their dynamic reorganization: a hypothesis for three distinctive features of cellular aging. Exp. Gerontol. 33, 555–570 (1998). source
- Partly supportedcites [3] Oberdoerffer, P. et al. SIRT1 redistribution on chromatin promotes genomic stability but alters gene expression during aging. Cell 135, 907–918 (2008). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction proposes that chromatin alterations and resulting gene-expression changes can drive aging, and the Discussion describes DNA-damage-induced chromatin reorganization as a possible contributor. Our copy does not establish the claimed decreases in tissue function or regenerative capacity; the Discussion says the physiological relevance of age-related expression changes remains debated. The cited passages have section labels but no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Over time, the central nervous system (CNS) loses function and regenerative capacity5–7.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] Kennard, M. A. Relation of age to motor impairment in man and in subhuman primates. Arch. Neurol. Psychiatry 44, 377–397 (1940). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Goldberg, J. L., Klassen, M. P., Hua, Y. & Barres, B. A. Amacrine-signaled loss of intrinsic axon growth ability by retinal ganglion cells. Science 296, 1860–1864 (2002). source
- Supportedcites [7] Yun, M. H. Changes in regenerative capacity through lifespan. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 16, 25392–25432 (2015). source
Section 2.2 identifies the central nervous system among tissues affected by age-related degeneration and dysfunction. It also reports that adult neurogenesis and neural stem cells decline with age, reducing regenerated neurons and causing functional impairment. Page numbers are not provided in the supplied copy. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“During ageing, for reasons that are unclear, these patterns change in ways that can be used to calculate DNA methylation (DNAm) age, a representation of biological age that can predict future health and lifespan4.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [4] Horvath, S. DNA methylation age of human tissues and cell types. Genome Biol. 14, 3156 (2013). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Background and Conclusions (pages not provided) describe age-related methylation changes and a DNAm-age biomarker derived from them. The paper demonstrates prediction of age, but the passages do not establish that DNAm age predicts future health or lifespan; the Conclusions say its role as a marker of aging needs further research. (LLM, conf=0.89)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Because Klf4 can repress rather than promote axonal growth24, we tested a dual-cistron of only Oct4 and Sox2 and observed no regenerative effect.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK stimulates axon regeneration
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [24] Moore, D. L. et al. KLF family members regulate intrinsic axon regeneration ability. Science 326, 298–301 (2009). source
The paper’s Abstract identifies KLF4 as a repressor of axon growth in retinal ganglion cells and other CNS neurons. It also reports that KLF4 overexpression reduced axon length in embryonic retinal ganglion cells, directly supporting the cited statement that KLF4 can repress axonal growth. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“If damaged, RGCs of embryos and neonates can regenerate axons, but this capacity is lost within days after birth, likely due to a molecular program intrinsic to the RGCs6,22.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK stimulates axon regeneration
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Goldberg, J. L., Klassen, M. P., Hua, Y. & Barres, B. A. Amacrine-signaled loss of intrinsic axon growth ability by retinal ganglion cells. Science 296, 1860–1864 (2002). source
- Partly supportedcites [22] Laha, B., Stafford, B. K. & Huberman, A. D. Regenerating optic pathways from the eye to the brain. Science 356, 1031–1034 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The “Intrinsic factors that limit RGC regeneration” section (page not supplied) says RGC axon growth speed falls sharply from embryonic to postnatal ages, likely because of molecular programs intrinsic to RGCs. It does not say that embryonic and neonatal RGCs regenerate after damage or that this capacity is lost within days after birth. (LLM, conf=0.85)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“In cell culture, the ectopic expression of the four Yamanaka transcription factors Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc (OSKM) can reprogram cultured somatic cells to become pluripotent stem cells14, a process that erases cellular identity and resets DNAm age4,15.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [14] Takahashi, K. & Yamanaka, S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell 126, 663–676 (2006). source
- Supportedcites [4] Horvath, S. DNA methylation age of human tissues and cell types. Genome Biol. 14, 3156 (2013). source
The section “DNAm age of induced pluripotent stem cells and stem cells” (page unavailable) describes iPS cells as pluripotent cells derived from non-pluripotent cells by inducing genes. It reports that their DNAm age is significantly younger than that of corresponding primary cells and indistinguishable from embryonic stem cells, supporting the attributed age reset. The specific OSKM factors are attached to a different citation in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Supportedcites [15] Petkovich, D. A. et al. Using DNA methylation profiling to evaluate biological age and longevity interventions. Cell Metab. 25, 954–960.e6 (2017). source
The STAR Methods describe reprogramming cultured mouse fibroblasts into iPSCs, consistent with a change from somatic-cell identity to pluripotency. The Results and Discussion report that these iPSCs had much younger estimated DNA-methylation ages than the fibroblasts, while cautioning that the estimates used a clock developed from mouse blood. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Many regenerative approaches that work well in young individuals often fail in older ones25,26.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK stimulates axon regeneration
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [25] Geoffroy, C. G., Hilton, B. J., Tetzlaff, W. & Zheng, B. Evidence for an age-dependent decline in axon regeneration in the adult mammalian central nervous system. Cell Rep. 15, 238–246 (2016). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract and Discussion (page not provided) report that Pten deletion promotes axon regeneration in young mice but has a greatly diminished effect in older mice. The paper tests one approach in mice; it does not establish that many approaches often fail in older individuals, and it describes diminished regeneration rather than complete failure. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Could not verifycites [26] Yao, K. et al. Restoration of vision after de novo genesis of rod photoreceptors in mammalian retinas. Nature 560, 484–488 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract describes successful rod-photoreceptor regeneration in mature mouse retinas, with treatment beginning at four weeks of age. Our copy does not compare outcomes in young and older individuals or say that regenerative approaches often fail with age (searched: young versus older regeneration, age-dependent failure). (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In a premature ageing mouse model of Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome (HGPS), cyclic transgene-mediated expression of these four genes alleviates symptoms and extends lifespan, raising the possibility that OSKM might counteract normal ageing, too16.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [16] Ocampo, A. et al. In vivo amelioration of age-associated hallmarks by partial reprogramming. Cell 167, 1719–1733.e12 (2016). source
The Methods describe cyclic doxycycline induction of the OSKM transgene, and the Results report improved appearance and a dramatic increase in median and maximal lifespan in LAKI 4F mice. The paper identifies LAKI as a mouse model of HGPS. The suggestion about normal ageing is the citing authors’ inference, not a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Among the Yamanaka factors, c-Myc is an oncogene that reduces mouse lifespan20 and is not required for the initiation of cellular reprogramming21.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Reset of ageing signatures, not identity
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [20] Hofmann, J. W. et al. Reduced expression of MYC increases longevity and enhances healthspan. Cell 160, 477–488 (2015). source
The Introduction identifies MYC as a cellular proto-oncogene. The Results (‘Myc+/− Mice Have Increased Longevity’; page unavailable) report that mice with reduced MYC expression lived longer than normal Myc+/+ mice, supporting the lifespan claim in that comparison. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Continuous expression of all four factors in normal mice, however, often induces teratomas17–19 or is fatal within days16, ostensibly due to tissue dysplasia18.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [17] Ohnishi, K. et al. Premature termination of reprogramming in vivo leads to cancer development through altered epigenetic regulation. Cell 156, 663–677 (2014). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report teratomas after four weeks of factor induction in a small proportion of chimeric mice, and dysplastic lesions in all mice examined after 3–9 days. They also report that induced mice became morbid within days, but do not establish that dysplasia caused death; the sentence cites a different source for the fatality claim. The paper therefore supports the occurrence of teratomas and rapid dysplasia, but not the implied frequency of teratomas or the proposed cause of fatality. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [18] Abad, M. et al. Reprogramming in vivo produces teratomas and iPS cells with totipotency features. Nature 502, 340–345 (2013). source
- Partly supportedcites [19] Senís, E. et al. AAV vector-mediated in vivo reprogramming into pluripotency. Nat. Commun. 9, 2651 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report teratomas in wild-type mice given all four OKSM factors, with high-dose mice developing palpable teratomas after 6–13 weeks. The Introduction mentions dysplasia in a separate study of mice with muscle damage, but this paper does not establish tissue dysplasia as the cause of fatality within days. The within-days fatality clause is cited to a different source (16). (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Supportedcites [16] Ocampo, A. et al. In vivo amelioration of age-associated hallmarks by partial reprogramming. Cell 167, 1719–1733.e12 (2016). source
The section “Cyclic In Vivo Induction of Reprogramming Factors Does Not Lead to Tumor Formation” reports high mortality after four days of continuous OSKM induction in 4F mice. The citing sentence attaches this source to the claim of death within days; its teratoma and dysplasia claims have other citations. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The DNAm age of RGCs was calculated based on a ribosomal DNA methylation clock33, which provided the best site coverage (67/72 CpG sites) and was highly correlated with chronological age (Extended Data Fig. 5g).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK counters injury-induced DNAm ageing
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [33] Wang, M. & Lemos, B. Ribosomal DNA harbors an evolutionarily conserved clock of biological aging. Genome Res. 29, 325–333 (2019). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section ('CpGs from the rDNA are sufficient to accurately predict age within species'; page unavailable) reports a 72-CpG rDNA clock and a strong correlation between predicted and chronological age in mouse test subsets (median Spearman’s ρ = 0.92). It does not report coverage of 67 of 72 sites, establish that this clock had the best site coverage in the citing study, or test the correlation in RGCs; those appear to be results of the citing study. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Evidence from yeast and mammals supports an Information Theory of Ageing10,11, in which the loss of epigenetic information disrupts youthful gene expression patterns1–3, leading to cellular dysfunction and senescence12,13.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [10] Sinclair, D. A. & LaPlante, M. D. Lifespan: Why We Age—and Why We Don’t Have To 13–23, 158–175 (Simon & Schuster, 2019).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [11] Shannon, C. E. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 27, 379–423 (1948). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] Sinclair, D. A., Mills, K. & Guarente, L. Accelerated aging and nucleolar fragmentation in yeast sgs1 mutants. Science 277, 1313–1316 (1997). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [2] Imai, S. & Kitano, H. Heterochromatin islands and their dynamic reorganization: a hypothesis for three distinctive features of cellular aging. Exp. Gerontol. 33, 555–570 (1998). source
- Supportedcites [3] Oberdoerffer, P. et al. SIRT1 redistribution on chromatin promotes genomic stability but alters gene expression during aging. Cell 135, 907–918 (2008). source
The Introduction describes chromatin changes causing aging phenotypes in yeast, and the Discussion says the paper presents evidence for a related response in mammals that may contribute to age-related gene-expression changes. This supports the yeast-and-mammal evidence attributed to this citation; the later claims about disrupted gene expression and senescence carry separate citations. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Partly supportedcites [12] López-Otín, C., Blasco, M. A., Partridge, L., Serrano, M. & Kroemer, G. The hallmarks of aging. Cell 153, 1194–1217 (2013). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Epigenetic Alterations overview (page not provided) says aging is accompanied by epigenetic changes, and the Transcriptional alterations section reports age-related changes in gene expression. The paper also discusses longevity-related evidence from yeast and mammals. It does not set out an Information Theory of Ageing or establish the claimed causal chain from loss of epigenetic information through disrupted youthful expression to cellular dysfunction and senescence. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [13] Yang, J.-H. et al. Erosion of the epigenetic landscape and loss of cellular identity as a cause of aging in mammals. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.1101/808642 (2019). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“IOPs were measured with a rebound TonoLab tonometer (Colonial Medical Supply, Espoo, Finland), as previously described40.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > IOP measurements
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [40] Krishnan, A. et al. Overexpression of soluble Fas ligand following adeno-associated virus gene therapy prevents retinal ganglion cell death in chronic and acute murine models of glaucoma. J. Immunol. 197, 4626–4638 (2016). source
The Materials and Methods section (‘IOP measurements’; page not provided) explicitly states that IOP was measured with a rebound TonoLab tonometer from Colonial Medical Supply and gives the same location. It also describes the measurement procedure. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Visual acuity of mice was measured using an optomotor reflex-based spatial frequency threshold test58.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Optomotor response
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [58] Sun, D., Moore, S. & Jakobs, T. C. Optic nerve astrocyte reactivity protects function in experimental glaucoma and other nerve injuries. J. Exp. Med. 214, 1411-1430 (2017). source
The Materials and methods section ('Optomotor response') states the claim directly and describes how the spatial frequency threshold was determined in mice. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The number of regenerating axons in the optic nerve was estimated by counting the number of CTB-labeled axons at different distances from the crush site as described previously29.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Quantification of axon regeneration for the optic nerve crush model
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [29] Park, K. K. et al. Promoting axon regeneration in the adult CNS by modulation of the PTEN/mTOR pathway. Science 322, 963–966 (2008). source
The paper’s main text (indexed under Abstract; page unavailable) says it assayed optic-nerve regeneration using CTB-labeled axons in sections across the lesion site. It also reports quantifying regeneration by distance from the lesion epicenter, supporting the described counting method. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“or 248/582 and 77,342/ 193,651 sites (ridge) of two entire lifespan multi-tissue clocks62.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > DNA methylation analysis of mouse RGC
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [62] Thompson, M. J. et al. A multi-tissue full lifespan epigenetic clock for mice. Aging (Albany NY) 10, 2832–2854 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Table 1 in Results (page not provided) lists 582 CpGs for the all-CpGs elastic-net clock and 193,651 for the ridge clock. The paper does not report that 248 or 77,342 of those sites were covered; searches for both coverage figures found no matching passage. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The mathematical algorithm and available software underlying the skin & blood clock for in vitro studies (based on 391 CpGs) was previously published57.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Human neuron DNA methylation analyses
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [57] Horvath, S. et al. Epigenetic clock for skin and blood cells applied to Hutchinson Gilford Progeria Syndrome and ex vivo studies. Aging (Albany NY) 10, 1758–1775 (2018). source
The Results section, “The DNAm age estimator for skin and blood,” says the clock was constructed from 391 CpGs selected by elastic net regression and describes how their weighted average forms the estimator. The Methods section says the R software code underlying the clock is in the Supplement. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“We chose to use differentiated human neurons that would maintain ageing signatures53.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Human neuron differentiation and regeneration assay
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [53] Mertens, J. et al. Directly reprogrammed human neurons retain aging-associated transcriptomic signatures and reveal age-related nucleocytoplasmic defects. Cell Stem Cell 17, 705–718 (2015). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Summary reports that directly converted human induced neurons retain aging-associated signatures. It also says that iPSC-derived neurons do not, and the Results section (‘iPSC-Derived iNs Remain Transcriptionally Rejuvenated’) confirms this distinction. The claim is supported only if ‘differentiated human neurons’ means directly converted neurons, not differentiated neurons generally. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Interestingly, the signature CpG sites were associated with genes involved in synaptic and neuronal processes and enriched for the binding of polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) and its histone methyltransferase product H3K27me3, both of which are known to recruit Tet enzymes47,48 (Extended Data Fig 10g–i).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Restoration of vision in old mice
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [47] Wu, X., Li, G. & Xie, R. Decoding the role of TET family dioxygenases in lineage specification. Epigenetics Chromatin 11, 58 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The section on maintenance of hypomethylated promoters says that PRC2 and TET proteins can recruit each other, and Fig. 1 explicitly depicts PRC2 recruiting TETs to bivalent promoters. It describes H3K27me3 as a histone mark at these regions, but does not say that H3K27me3 itself recruits TET enzymes. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites [48] Neri, F. et al. Genome-wide analysis identifies a functional association of Tet1 and Polycomb repressive complex 2 in mouse embryonic stem cells. Genome Biol. 14, R91 (2013). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Conclusions state that PRC2 recruits Tet1 to H3K27me3 regions in embryonic stem cells (page not specified). The paper does not establish that H3K27me3 itself recruits Tet enzymes, or that this recruitment applies to Tet enzymes generally or to other cell types. (LLM, conf=0.88)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“compared to 102/435 sites of the whole lifespan multi-tissue clock61”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > DNA methylation analysis of mouse RGC
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [61] Meer, M. V., Podolskiy, D. I., Tyshkovskiy, A. & Gladyshev, V. N. A whole lifespan mouse multi-tissue DNA methylation clock. eLife 7, e40675 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (Construction of a multi-tissue clock; page unavailable) state that the whole-lifespan multi-tissue clock contains 435 CpG sites. The Discussion (page unavailable) reports coverage in other datasets, but neither passage reports 102 covered sites; the cited paper therefore supports the denominator, not the claimed coverage count. (LLM, conf=0.89)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In agreement with previous studies57,63,64, DNAm age estimates of neurons tend to be lower than their chronological age but remain correlated.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > DNA methylation analysis of mouse RGC
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [57] Horvath, S. et al. Epigenetic clock for skin and blood cells applied to Hutchinson Gilford Progeria Syndrome and ex vivo studies. Aging (Albany NY) 10, 1758–1775 (2018). source
The Results section, “Skin & blood clock applied to brain, liver, bone, and other body parts,” directly reports both findings for sorted neurons: DNAm age correlated strongly with chronological age (r=0.83), while its mean estimate was 6 years in people with a mean chronological age of 31 years. (LLM, conf=0.95)
- Partly supportedcites [63] Horvath, S. et al. The cerebellum ages slowly according to the epigenetic clock. Aging (Albany NY) 7, 294–306 (2015). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and Methods state that DNAm age correlates with chronological age in sorted neurons. The Results report lower age acceleration for cerebellar brain samples, particularly in the oldest subjects, but do not establish that neurons generally have DNAm age estimates below chronological age. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites [64] Hoshino, A., Horvath, S., Sridhar, A., Chitsazan, A. & Reh, T. A. Synchrony and asynchrony between an epigenetic clock and developmental timing. Sci. Rep. 9, 3770 (2019). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Epigenetic clock analysis section (page unavailable) says DNAm age correlates with chronological age in sorted neurons. It does not say neuronal DNAm age estimates tend to be lower than chronological age; the paper’s own reported correlation concerns fetal retinal tissue, not isolated neurons. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“That said, we do not wish to imply that DNA methylation is the only epigenetic mark involved in this process. It likely involves other transcription factors and epigenetic modifications, such as the PRC2 complex and H3K27me3, both of which are involved in maintaining stem cell plasticity and are associated with DNAm clock sites4,49,50.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Discussion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [4] Horvath, S. DNA methylation age of human tissues and cell types. Genome Biol. 14, 3156 (2013). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The section comparing the multi-tissue predictor with other age predictors reports that age-increasing clock CpGs are enriched near Polycomb-group target genes; the Additional file 9 description also links them to SUZ12, EED and H3K27me3 occupancy. The paper does not establish that PRC2, H3K27me3 or other transcription factors participate in the process the citing sentence proposes, or that their role in maintaining stem-cell plasticity explains the clock-site association. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Partly supportedcites [49] Margueron, R. & Reinberg, D. The Polycomb complex PRC2 and its mark in life. Nature 469, 343–349 (2011). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The sections on genome-wide localization and PRC2 pluripotency and differentiation link PRC2 and H3K27me3 to stem-cell chromatin states and plasticity, though they qualify PRC2’s role in maintaining pluripotency. The paper discusses DNA methylation alongside these marks, but it does not address DNAm clock sites or establish their involvement in the citing paper’s specific process. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Partly supportedcites [50] Mozhui, K. & Pandey, A. K. Conserved effect of aging on DNA methylation and association with EZH2 polycomb protein in mice and humans. Mech. Ageing Dev. 162, 27–37 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and Discussion §4.4 identify PRC2 as a potential regulator of age-related DNA methylation, and Results §3.5 reports that PRC2 members associate with age-hypermethylated regions. The passages do not establish the attributed role of H3K27me3 or the claim that both PRC2 and H3K27me3 maintain stem-cell plasticity and are associated with DNA-methylation clock sites. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Another 196 genes that were up-regulated during ageing are involved in ion transport or neuronal projection development, including Efemp1 (Extended Data Fig. 10b–d), a Tet1- and Tet2-regulated gene associated with glaucoma45 and age-related macular degeneration (AMD)46.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Restoration of vision in old mice
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [45] Mackay, D. S., Bennett, T. M. & Shiels, A. Exome sequencing identifies a missense variant in EFEMP1 co-segregating in a family with autosomal dominant primary open-angle glaucoma. PLoS ONE 10, e0132529 (2015). source
The citation to this paper follows “glaucoma,” so the relevant attribution is EFEMP1’s association with glaucoma, not the citing authors’ Tet1/Tet2 finding or the separately cited AMD association. The Discussion reports an EFEMP1 variant co-segregating with primary open-angle glaucoma in an affected family. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [46] Marmorstein, L. Y. et al. Aberrant accumulation of EFEMP1 underlies drusen formation in Malattia Leventinese and age-related macular degeneration. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 13067–13072 (2002). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In 12-month-old mice, OSK treatment doubled RGC survival, similar to what was observed in 1- and 3-month-old mice (Extended Data Fig. 4a).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK stimulates axon regeneration
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even without c-Myc, expression of OSK for five days promoted youthful mRNA profile, with no apparent loss of cellular identity or the induction of Nanog, a transcription factor indicative of pluripotency and oncogenicity (Extended Data Fig. 1a–c).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Reset of ageing signatures, not identity
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After 10–18 months of continuous OSK induction, no increase in tumor incidence or negative effects on overall health were observed, indicating that cellular identity was maintained in OSK-expressing cells (Extended Data Fig.1 j–n).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Reset of ageing signatures, not identity
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The longer the duration of the OSK induction, the greater the distance the axons extended, with no sign of RGC proliferation (Fig. 2b, c, Extended Data Fig. 5f).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK counters injury-induced DNAm ageing
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The mRNA levels of Stat3, a pro-regeneration gene28, robustly increased in response to OSK and was maintained post-injury (Extended Data Fig. 5a, Supplementary Table 1).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK stimulates axon regeneration
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even after 15 months of continuous induction, OSK expression did not induce any tumors or structural changes in the retina (Extended Data Fig. 2c–i, Supplementary Videos).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK stimulates axon regeneration
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“67/72 sites with at least 10 reads per site were covered for the ribosomal DNAm clock”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > DNA methylation analysis of mouse RGC
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“OSK-mediated recovery of neurite area, as well as both the number and length of axons, were blocked by Tet2 knockdown, but not by mTOR-S6K inhibition (Extended Data Fig. 8j–s).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Axon regeneration in human neurons
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of the 703,583 CpGs that were considered, 1,226 were selected (723 that trended towards hypermethylation with age and 503 that trended towards hypomethylation with age, see Supplementary Table 3).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > DNAm ageing signature
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This resulted in a total of 703,583 sites, covered by uniquely mapped reads.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > DNA methylation analysis of mouse RGC
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The OSK-treated eyes also experienced a significant increase in visual acuity relative to the pre-treatment function baseline, restoring about half of visual acuity in the optomotor response (OMR) assay (Fig. 3c, d).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Recovery of vision in mice with glaucoma
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Interestingly, the signature CpG sites were associated with genes involved in synaptic and neuronal processes and enriched for the binding of polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) and its histone methyltransferase product H3K27me3, both of which are known to recruit Tet enzymes47,48 (Extended Data Fig 10g–i).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Restoration of vision in old mice
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“DNA demethylation is catalyzed by ten-eleven-translocation methylcytosine dioxygenases (TET1–3), either passively through DNA replication or actively, even in non-replicating cells, by reversion to cytosine via thymine DNA glycosylase (TDG)34.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Regeneration requires DNA demethylation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [34] Wu, X. & Zhang, Y. TET-mediated active DNA demethylation: mechanism, function and beyond. Nat. Rev. Genet. 18, 517–534 (2017). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, the ability of OSK to increase survival appears to be mediated within the RGC and is largely cell-autonomous.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK stimulates axon regeneration
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Attempts to reverse optic nerve damage have been only moderately successful, with no treatments able to restore eyesight either in late-stage glaucoma or in old age23.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > OSK stimulates axon regeneration
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [23] Roska, B. & Sahel, J. A. Restoring vision. Nature 557, 359–367 (2018). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cells were confirmed as negative for mycoplasma”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Human neuron differentiation and regeneration assay
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“RNA integrity was determined using TapeStation (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA).”
- Also stated in: § Ultra-low input RNA library preparation and multiplexing · plain
“RNA integrity was ascertained using a 2100 TapeStation (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Total RNA extraction and sample quality control
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Also stated in: § Ultra-low input RNA library preparation and multiplexing · plain
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All animal procedures were approved by the IACUC of the respective institutions and according to appropriate animal welfare regulations.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Surgery
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Any mice that developed signs of inflammation (clouding or an edematous cornea) were excluded.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Microbead-induced elevated intraocular pressure (IOP)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A sensitivity analysis was conducted by performing TF and histone enrichment for five sets of 1,226 random CpGs from the 702,357 unselected sites, which was then compared against the enrichment for our selected set in in order to identify TFs and histone marks that were specific to the selected set but not CpGs in general.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Transcription factor (TF) binding and histone modification enrichment
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All cell lines used were mycoplasma negative.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Cell culture of ear fibroblasts
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“PI-stained samples were analyzed on a BD LSR II analyzer and only single cells were gated for analysis.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Cell cycle analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two outliers were excluded by low intercorrelation (< 0.93) within the batch (Supplementary Table 5).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > DNA methylation analysis of mouse RGC
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two individuals blinded to the experimental groups performed all RGC counts.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Quantification of retinal ganglion cells in the glaucoma model
plainn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A blinded observer, unable to see the direction of the moving bars, monitored the tracking behavior of the mouse.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Optomotor response
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mice that had intravitreal bleeding or developed signs of inflammation (clouding or an edematous cornea) during or post intravitreal injection were excluded from OMR and histological analyses.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Optomotor response
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The final library was assessed by a Qubit 2.0 Fluorometer and an Agilent TapeStation.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Ultra-low input RNA library preparation and multiplexing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Only CpG sites covered in all samples were considered for analysis (BioProject PRJNA655981).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > DNA methylation analysis of mouse RGC
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All IOPs were taken at the same time of day (between 10:00 and 12:00 hrs) due to the variation of IOP throughout the day.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > IOP measurements
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All animal work was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs) at Harvard Medical School, Boston Children’s Hospital, and the Mass Eye and Ear Institution.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Mouse lines
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Exclusion criteria were pre-determined before experimentation.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Optomotor response
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Individuals performing axon counts were blinded to the experimental groups.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Quantification of optic nerve axons in the glaucoma model
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Using the eye as a model system, we present evidence that ectopically expressed OSK safely induces in vivo epigenetic restoration of aged CNS neurons, without causing a loss of cell identity or pluripotency.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Here, we show that it is possible to safely reverse the age of a complex tissue and restore its biological function in vivo.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Discussion
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Due to the repetitive nature of ribosomal DNA sequence, it is not suitable to whole-genome bisulfite mapping.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > DNA methylation analysis of mouse RGC
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Responses were measured before and after treatment by individuals blinded to the group of the animal and the treatment.”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Optomotor response
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To avoid batch effects, subsamples were evaluated separately as 6 mo and 18 mo in Batch 1, and 1 mo, 12 mo, and 30 mo in Batch 2 (Supplementary Table 5).”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > DNAm ageing signature
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
DNA methylation patterns are established during embryonic development to set cell type and function.
“DNA methylation patterns are laid down during embryonic development to establish cell type and function.”
The paper relies on this without support.
During ageing, almost all species experience a decline in regenerative potential.
“During ageing, almost all species experience a decline in regenerative potential.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Currently, there is no known treatment that can induce robust RGC axon regeneration when started after crush injury.
“Currently, there is no known treatment that can induce robust RGC axon regeneration when started after crush injury.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Glaucoma is a leading cause of age-related blindness worldwide, characterized by progressive loss of RGCs and their axons and often coinciding with increased intraocular pressure.
“Glaucoma is a leading cause of age-related blindness worldwide, characterized by a progressive loss of RGCs and their axons and often coinciding with increased intraocular pressure (IOP).”
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?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“and active DNA methylation via TET and TDG enzymes is required for rejuvenation 92 .”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“These findings are consistent with the Information Theory of Aging, which proposes that a decline in information, specifically epigenetic information, triggers a cascade of events, including mitochondrial dysfunction, inflammation, and cellular senescence [5, 7–9], leading to a progressive decline in cell and tissue function, manifesting as aging and age-related diseases.”
From Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Numerous tissues, including brain tissue, kidney, and muscle, have now been reprogrammed without causing cancer [7, 8, 22, 24, 25].”
From Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Currently, translational applications that aim to reverse aging, treat injuries, and cure age-related diseases, rely on the delivery of genetic material to target tissues.”
From Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Recent advances have shown that such regeneration is possible in mice and humans25,26.”
From The economic value of targeting aging (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This transient cellular perturbation, variously known as 'partial' , ' transient ' or ' intermediate ' reprogramming, is able to rejuvenate cellular markers of aging such as the DNA methylation clock, DNA damage, epigenetic patterns and aging-associated changes in the transcriptome, both in vitro and in vivo 213 -217 .”
From Hallmarks of aging: An expanding universe (2023) · cites this paper as [215]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“There is also evidence that changes to methylation occur in parallel with the observed alteration in chromatin contacts, and active DNA methylation via TET and TDG enzymes is required for rejuvenation 92 .”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“this study is also the first to show that cellular damage accelerates epigenetic aging”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“whole-body overexpression of OSK for a year was found to have no observable negative effects”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“the ectopic and constant expression of OSK in retinal ganglion cells in vivo is able to restore vision by promoting axon regeneration in aged and glaucomatous mice without increasing cell proliferation (Fig. 3g).”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“further supporting the idea that specific levels of OSK expressions of the elements in addition to cell identity are essential to exert optimal function.”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We have previously shown that the ectopic induction of the Yamanaka factors OCT4, SOX2, and KLF4 (OSK) in mammals can restore youthful DNA methylation patterns, transcript profiles, and tissue function, without erasing cellular identity”
From Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We have previously shown that the ectopic induction of the Yamanaka factors OCT4, SOX2, and KLF4 (OSK) in mammals can restore youthful DNA methylation patterns, transcript profiles, and tissue function, without erasing cellular identity”
From Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“But work by the Belmonte lab, our lab, and others have confirmed that it is possible to safely improve the function of tissues in vivo by pulsing OSKM expression [22, 23] or by continuously expressing only OSK, leaving out the oncogene c-MYC [7, 8].”
From Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In the optic nerve, for example, expression of a three Yamanaka factor combination safely resets DNA methylomes and gene expression patterns, improving vision in old and glaucomatous mice via a largely obscure mechanism that requires TET DNA demethylases [8].”
From Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We have previously shown that the ectopic induction of the Yamanaka factors OCT4, SOX2, and KLF4 (OSK) in mammals can restore youthful DNA methylation patterns, transcript profiles, and tissue function, without erasing cellular identity”
From Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We have previously shown that the ectopic induction of the Yamanaka factors OCT4, SOX2, and KLF4 (OSK) in mammals can restore youthful DNA methylation patterns, transcript profiles, and tissue function, without erasing cellular identity”
From Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Together, these results are consistent with the existence of a “back-up copy” of a youthful epigenome, one that can be reset via partial reprogramming to regain tissue function, without erasing cellular identity or causing tumorigenesis [7–9].”
From Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Ectopic expression of Yamanaka factors OCT4, SOX2, and KLF4 (OSK) restores youthful gene expression patterns, epigenetic age, and youthful functions to old cells and tissues [7, 8].”
From Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Given that VC6TF has not been reported to be capable of fully reprogramming human cells to CiPSCs, and the maximum duration of any chemical treatment was limited to only four days, this study substantiates the notion that the rejuvenation is inherent to early phases of reprogramming and is at least partially separable from pluripotency programs [7, 8].”
From Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Besides amelioration of cellular aging hallmarks, reprogramming factors promote tissue regeneration in aged mice8,10.”
From In vivo partial reprogramming of myofibers promotes muscle regeneration by remodeling the stem cell niche (2021) · cites this paper as [10]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Reprogramming factors have been shown to promote axon regeneration through intrinsic rejuvenation of retinal ganglion cells10.”
From In vivo partial reprogramming of myofibers promotes muscle regeneration by remodeling the stem cell niche (2021) · cites this paper as [10]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Also, tissue dysfunctions characteristic of natural aging, such as reduced visual acuity 215 and the loss of adult neurogenesis in the hippocampus and long-term memory 220 , can be partially reversed by transient reprogramming.”
From Hallmarks of aging: An expanding universe (2023) · cites this paper as [215]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This increased repair capacity has been shown for models of tissue damage in the endocrine pancreas 214 , skeletal muscle 214 , nerve fibers 215 , eye 215 , skin 216 , heart 218 and liver 219 .”
From Hallmarks of aging: An expanding universe (2023) · cites this paper as [215]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“| Stem cell exhaustion | Mouse | AAV2-driven expression of OSK in the eye | Restoration of visual acuity to old mice and to mice with glaucoma. Improved repair of crushed optical nerve | 215”
From Hallmarks of aging: An expanding universe (2023) · cites this paper as [215]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“and that long-term reprogramming can be achieved using a specific subset of reprogramming factors came from Lu et al. in 2020 (ref.92).”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“suggesting that MYC might be responsible for some of the toxicity.”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“some studies have not seen any detriment to tissues after more than a year of overexpression 92”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“indicating a critical role for dynamic DNA methylation during partial reprogramming.”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The demonstration that the DNA methylation clock can be reversed in vivo by reprogramming”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“a change that OSK counteracts to allow cells to regain youthful gene expression patterns and functions.”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Similar results were also obtained in human neurons”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“when OSK were co-delivered as monocistronic vectors, no axon regeneration was observed”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“suggesting an evolutionarily conserved mechanism 92 .”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“the observed regenerative phenotype is mediated by the active contribution of TET1 and TET2 DNA demethylases and the TDG DNA glycosylase”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“induction of the factors both before and after the optical nerve injury led to increased regeneration capability of retinal ganglion cells.”
From Mechanisms, pathways and strategies for rejuvenation through epigenetic reprogramming (2023) · cites this paper as [92]
In the citing paper
“Epigenetic alteration is a hallmark of ageing4, and recent studies have demonstrated cellular and functional rejuvenation by transient epigenetic reprogramming17,51,52.”
From Measuring biological age using omics data (2022) · cites this paper as [17]
In the citing paper
“Lu et al.17 found that DNA methylation enzymes were required for epigenetic reprogramming of mouse retinal cells but much more work is needed.”
From Measuring biological age using omics data (2022) · cites this paper as [17]
In the citing paper
“Reprogramming factors also affect differentiated cells in the brain: viral transduction of cells in vivo with OSK (no MYC) restores a youthful regenerative potential of axons emanating from aged mouse retinal ganglion cells231.”
From Ageing and rejuvenation of tissue stem cells and their niches (2023) · cites this paper as [231]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated major: it would touch a result — a value a result rests on, reported and recomputed p-values on opposite sides of the significance level, two passages that conflict with no sign which is right, or a cited work retracted before this paper was published.
In the paper
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Quantification of retinal ganglion cells in the glaucoma model
“two to four images (248.53 μm by 248.53 μm in size) were taken from the midperipheral and peripheral regions of each quadrant”
§ Reprogramming to recover youthful epigenetic information and restore vision > Methods > Quantification of retinal ganglion cells in the glaucoma model
“all Brn3a stained RGCs within each image (0.025 mm2)”
Citations
Cites
A Mathematical Theory of Communication
Shannon, C. E. (1948) · Bell System Technical Journal · doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x · Cited by 88,486
Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology
Ashburner, M., Ball, C. A., Blake, J. A., Botstein, D., Butler, H., Cherry, J. M., Davis, A. P., Dolinski, K., Dwight, S. S., Eppig, J. T., et al. (2000) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/75556 · Cited by 43,206
Robinson, M. D., McCarthy, D. J., & Smyth, G. K. (2010) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btp616 · Cited by 41,364
featureCounts: an efficient general purpose program for assigning sequence reads to genomic features
Liao, Y., Smyth, G. K., & Shi, W. (2014) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btt656 · Cited by 27,219
Takahashi, K., & Yamanaka, S. (2006) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2006.07.024 · Cited by 26,673
HISAT: a fast spliced aligner with low memory requirements
Kim, D., Langmead, B., & Salzberg, S. L. (2015) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.3317 · Cited by 24,112
López-Otín, C., Blasco, M. A., Partridge, L., Serrano, M., & Kroemer, G. (2013) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2013.05.039 · Cited by 14,982
DNA methylation age of human tissues and cell types
Horvath, S. (2013) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2013-14-10-r115 · Cited by 7,075
Self-citationThe Gene Ontology Resource: 20 years and still GOing strong
The Gene Ontology Consortium (2019) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gky1055 · Cited by 4,747
The Polycomb complex PRC2 and its mark in life
Margueron, R., & Reinberg, D. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature09784 · Cited by 3,347
AmiGO: online access to ontology and annotation data
Carbon, S., Ireland, A., Mungall, C., Shu, S., Marshall, B., Lewis, S., Hub, T. A., & the Web Presence Working Group (2008) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btn615 · Cited by 1,918
Promoting Axon Regeneration in the Adult CNS by Modulation of the PTEN/mTOR Pathway
Park, K. K., Liu, K., Hu, Y., Smith, P. D., Wang, C., Cai, B., Xu, B., Connolly, L., Kramvis, I., Sahin, M., et al. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1161566 · Cited by 1,686
Self-citationTET-mediated active DNA demethylation: mechanism, function and beyond
Wu, X., & Zhang, Y. (2017) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg.2017.33 · Cited by 1,661
Hydroxylation of 5-Methylcytosine by TET1 Promotes Active DNA Demethylation in the Adult Brain
Guo, J. U., Su, Y., Zhong, C., Ming, G., & Song, H. (2011) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2011.03.022 · Cited by 1,404
Tet2 loss leads to increased hematopoietic stem cell self-renewal and myeloid transformation
Moran-Crusio, K., Reavie, L., Shih, A., Abdel-Wahab, O., Ndiaye-Lobry, D., Lobry, C., Figueroa, M. E., Vasanthakumar, A., Patel, J., Zhao, X., et al. (2011) · Cancer Cell · doi:10.1016/j.ccr.2011.06.001 · Cited by 1,339
In Vivo Amelioration of Age-Associated Hallmarks by Partial Reprogramming.
Ocampo, A., Reddy, P., Martinez-Redondo, P., Platero-Luengo, A., Hatanaka, F., Hishida, T., Li, M., Lam, D., Kurita, M., Beyret, E., et al. (2016) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2016.11.052 · Cited by 988
Epigenetic mechanisms of longevity and aging
Sen, P., Shah, P. P., Nativio, R., & Berger, S. L. (2016) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2016.07.050 · Cited by 956
Low-level processing of Illumina Infinium DNA Methylation BeadArrays
Triche, T. J., Weisenberger, D. J., Berg, D. V. D., Laird, P. W., & Siegmund, K. D. (2013) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkt090 · Cited by 909
Preprocessing, normalization and integration of the Illumina HumanMethylationEPIC array with minfi
Fortin, J.-P., Triche, T. J., & Hansen, K. D. (2016) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btw691 · Cited by 871 · cited 1×
““Noob” normalization was implemented using the “minfi” R package 55,56 .”
SIRT1 redistribution on chromatin promotes genomic stability but alters gene expression during aging
Oberdoerffer, P., Michan, S., McVay, M., Mostoslavsky, R., Vann, J., Park, S.-K., Hartlerode, A., Stegmuller, J., Hafner, A., Loerch, P., et al. (2008) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2008.10.025 · Cited by 852
Self-citationHorvath, S., Oshima, J., Martin, G. M., Lu, A. T., Quach, A., Cohen, H., Felton, S., Matsuyama, M., Lowe, D., Kabacik, S., et al. (2018) · Aging · doi:10.18632/aging.101508 · Cited by 815
Self-citationKoh, K. P., Yabuuchi, A., Rao, S., Huang, Y., Cunniff, K., Nardone, J., Laiho, A., Tahiliani, M., Sommer, C. A., Mostoslavsky, G., et al. (2011) · Cell Stem Cell · doi:10.1016/j.stem.2011.01.008 · Cited by 776
Mertens, J., Paquola, A. C. M., Ku, M., Hatch, E., Böhnke, L., Ladjevardi, S., McGrath, S., Campbell, B., Lee, H., Herdy, J. R., et al. (2015) · Cell Stem Cell · doi:10.1016/j.stem.2015.09.001 · Cited by 765
Sustained axon regeneration induced by co-deletion of PTEN and SOCS3
Sun, F., Park, K. K., Belin, S., Wang, D., Lu, T., Chen, G., Zhang, K., Yeung, C., Feng, G., Yankner, B. A., et al. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10594 · Cited by 754
Self-citationKLF Family Members Regulate Intrinsic Axon Regeneration Ability
Moore, D. L., Blackmore, M. G., Hu, Y., Kaestner, K. H., Bixby, J. L., Lemmon, V. P., & Goldberg, J. L. (2009) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1175737 · Cited by 714
Reprogramming in vivo produces teratomas and iPS cells with totipotency features
Abad, M., Mosteiro, L., Pantoja, C., Cañamero, M., Rayon, T., Ors, I., Graña, O., Megías, D., Domínguez, O., Martínez, D., et al. (2013) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature12586 · Cited by 547
Differentiation of the SH-SY5Y Human Neuroblastoma Cell Line
Shipley, M. M., Mangold, C. A., & SZPARA, M. L. (2016) · Journal of Visualized Experiments · doi:10.3791/53193 · Cited by 508
Amacrine-Signaled Loss of Intrinsic Axon Growth Ability by Retinal Ganglion Cells
Goldberg, J. L., Klassen, M. P., Hua, Y., & Barres, B. A. (2002) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1068428 · Cited by 488
Ohnishi, K., Semi, K., Yamamoto, T., Shimizu, M., Tanaka, A., Mitsunaga, K., Okita, K., Osafune, K., Arioka, Y., Maeda, T., et al. (2014) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2014.01.005 · Cited by 460
Accelerated Aging and Nucleolar Fragmentation in Yeast sgs1 Mutants
Sinclair, D. A., Mills, K., & Guarente, L. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.277.5330.1313 · Cited by 401
Self-citationUsing DNA methylation profiling to evaluate biological age and longevity interventions
Petkovich, D. A., Podolskiy, D. I., Lobanov, A. V., Lee, S.-G., Miller, R. A., & Gladyshev, V. N. (2017) · Cell Metabolism · doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2017.03.016 · Cited by 398
Self-citationGao, Y., Chen, J., Li, K., Wu, T., Huang, B., Liu, W., Kou, X., Zhang, Y., Huang, H., Jiang, Y., et al. (2013) · Cell Stem Cell · doi:10.1016/j.stem.2013.02.005 · Cited by 362
Sarkar, T. J., Quarta, M., Mukherjee, S., Colville, A., Paine, P., Doan, L., Tran, C. M., Chu, C. R., Horvath, S., Qi, L. S., et al. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-15174-3 · Cited by 308
Self-citationThe role of nuclear architecture in genomic instability and ageing.
Oberdoerffer, P., & Sinclair, D. A. (2007) · Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology · doi:10.1038/nrm2238 · Cited by 305
Self-citationReduced Expression of MYC Increases Longevity and Enhances Healthspan
Hofmann, J. W., Zhao, X., De Cecco, M., Peterson, A. L., Pagliaroli, L., Manivannan, J., Hubbard, G. B., Ikeno, Y., Zhang, Y., Feng, B., et al. (2015) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2014.12.016 · Cited by 293
Restoration of vision after de novo genesis of rod photoreceptors in mammalian retinas
Yao, K., Qiu, S., Wang, Y. V., Park, S. J. H., Mohns, E. J., Mehta, B., Liu, X., Chang, B., Zenisek, D., Crair, M. C., et al. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0425-3 · Cited by 251
Marmorstein, L. Y., Munier, F. L., Arsenijevic, Y., Schorderet, D. F., McLaughlin, P. J., Chung, D., Traboulsi, E., & Marmorstein, A. D. (2002) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.202491599 · Cited by 230
Changes in Regenerative Capacity through Lifespan
Yun, M. (2015) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms161025392 · Cited by 216
A multi-tissue full lifespan epigenetic clock for mice
Thompson, M. J., Chwiałkowska, K., Rubbi, L., Lusis, A. J., Davis, R. C., Srivastava, A., Korstanje, R., Churchill, G. A., Horvath, S., & Pellegrini, M. (2018) · Aging · doi:10.18632/aging.101590 · Cited by 203
Self-citationTet3 regulates synaptic transmission and homeostatic plasticity via DNA oxidation and repair
Yu, H., Su, Y., Shin, J., Zhong, C., Guo, J. U., Weng, Y., Gao, F., Geschwind, D. H., Coppola, G., Ming, G., et al. (2015) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn.4008 · Cited by 199
The cerebellum ages slowly according to the epigenetic clock
Horvath, S., Mah, V., Lu, A. T., Woo, J. S., Choi, O.-W., Jasinska, A. J., Riancho, J. A., Tung, S., Coles, N. S., Braun, J., et al. (2015) · Aging · doi:10.18632/aging.100742 · Cited by 191
Self-citationPartial reprogramming induces a steady decline in epigenetic age before loss of somatic identity
Olova, N., Simpson, D. J., Marioni, R. E., & Chandra, T. (2019) · Aging Cell · doi:10.1111/acel.12877 · Cited by 190
RELATION OF AGE TO MOTOR IMPAIRMENT IN MAN AND IN SUBHUMAN PRIMATES
KENNARD, M. A. (1940) · Archives of Neurology And Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archneurpsyc.1940.02280080137008 · Cited by 185
Neri, F., Incarnato, D., Krepelova, A., Rapelli, S., Pagnani, A., Zecchina, R., Parlato, C., & Oliviero, S. (2013) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2013-14-8-r91 · Cited by 179
An Intrinsic Epigenetic Barrier for Functional Axon Regeneration
Weng, Y., An, R., Cassin, J., Joseph, J., Mi, R., Wang, C., Zhong, C., Jin, S., Pfeifer, G. P., Bellacosa, A., et al. (2017) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2017.03.034 · Cited by 178
Self-citationA whole lifespan mouse multi-tissue DNA methylation clock
Meer, M. V., Podolskiy, D. I., Tyshkovskiy, A., & Gladyshev, V. N. (2018) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.40675 · Cited by 176
Self-citationRegenerating optic pathways from the eye to the brain
Laha, B., Stafford, B. K., & Huberman, A. D. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aal5060 · Cited by 172
Roska, B., & Sahel, J.-A. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0076-4 · Cited by 161
Geoffroy, C. G., Hilton, B. J., Tetzlaff, W., & Zheng, B. (2016) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2016.03.028 · Cited by 159
Krishnan, A., Kocab, A. J., Zacks, D. N., Marshak‐Rothstein, A., & Gregory-Ksander, M. S. (2019) · Journal of Neuroinflammation · doi:10.1186/s12974-019-1576-3 · Cited by 140
Self-citationElevating Growth Factor Responsiveness and Axon Regeneration by Modulating Presynaptic Inputs
Zhang, Y., Williams, P. R., Jacobi, A., Wang, C., Goel, A., Hirano, A. A., Brecha, N. C., Kerschensteiner, D., & He, Z. (2019) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2019.04.033 · Cited by 132
Self-citationRibosomal DNA harbors an evolutionarily conserved clock of biological aging
Wang, M., & Lemos, B. (2019) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.241745.118 · Cited by 131
Optic nerve astrocyte reactivity protects function in experimental glaucoma and other nerve injuries
Sun, D., Moore, S., & Jakobs, T. C. (2017) · Journal of Experimental Medicine · doi:10.1084/jem.20160412 · Cited by 130
Luo, X., Ribeiro, M., Bray, E. R., Lee, D.-H., Yungher, B. J., Mehta, S. T., Thakor, K., Díaz, F., Lee, J. K., Moraes, C. T., et al. (2016) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2016.03.029 · Cited by 128
Neuroprotection in Glaucoma: Animal Models and Clinical Trials
Almasieh, M., & Levin, L. A. (2017) · Annual Review of Vision Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-vision-102016-061422 · Cited by 111 · cited 1×
“To our knowledge, this is the first example of vision loss reversal after glaucomatous injury has occurred, with previous attempts focusing on neuroprotection delivered at an early stage to prevent further disease progression 41,42 (Supplementary discussion).”
Small molecules facilitate rapid and synchronous iPSC generation
Bar‐Nur, O., Brumbaugh, J., Verheul, C., Apostolou, E., Pruteanu-Malinici, I., Walsh, R. M., Ramaswamy, S., & Hochedlinger, K. (2014) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.3142 · Cited by 107
Self-citationOcular Surface Disease and Dacryoadenitis in Aging C57BL/6 Mice
McClellan, A. J., Volpe, E. A., Zhang, X., Darlington, G., Li, D., Pflugfelder, S. C., & de Paiva, C. S. (2014) · American Journal Of Pathology · doi:10.1016/j.ajpath.2013.11.019 · Cited by 104
Waddington, C. H. (1957) · Cited by 102
(1998) · Experimental Gerontology · doi:10.1016/s0531-5565(98)00037-0 · Cited by 82
Mackay, D. S., Bennett, T. M., & Shiels, A. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0132529 · Cited by 71
Krishnan, A., Fei, F., Jones, A., Busto, P., Marshak-Rothstein, A., Ksander, B. R., & Gregory-Ksander, M. (2016) · The Journal of Immunology · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1601488 · Cited by 68
Self-citationNeuroprotection for glaucoma: Requirements for clinical translation
Levin, L. A., Crowe, M. E., Quigley, H. A., Cordeiro, M. F., Donoso, L. A., Liao, Y. J., Libby, R. T., Masland, R. H., Nickells, R. W., Sieving, P. A., et al. (2017) · Experimental Eye Research · doi:10.1016/j.exer.2016.12.005 · Cited by 66
AAV vector-mediated in vivo reprogramming into pluripotency
Senís, E., Mosteiro, L., Wilkening, S., Wiedtke, E., Nowrouzi, A., Afzal, S., Fronza, R., Landerer, H., Abad, M., Niopek, D., et al. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-05059-x · Cited by 64
Synchrony and asynchrony between an epigenetic clock and developmental timing
Hoshino, A., Horvath, S., Sridhar, A., Chitsazan, A., & Reh, T. A. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-39919-3 · Cited by 55 · cited 1×
“In agreement with previous studies 57,63,64 , DNAm age estimates of neurons tend to be lower than their chronological age but remain correlated.”
Self-citationA rat epigenetic clock recapitulates phenotypic aging and co-localizes with heterochromatin
Levine, M., McDevitt, R. A., Meer, M., Perdue, K., Di Francesco, A., Meade, T., Farrell, C., Thrush, K., Wang, M., Dunn, C., et al. (2020) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.59201 · Cited by 52
Self-citationLi, H., Li, T., Horns, F., Li, J., Xie, Q., Xu, C., Wu, B., Kebschull, J. M., McLaughlin, C. N., Kolluru, S. S., et al. (2019) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2020.01.049 · Cited by 51
Mozhui, K., & Pandey, A. K. (2017) · Mechanisms of Ageing and Development · doi:10.1016/j.mad.2017.02.006 · Cited by 46
Decoding the role of TET family dioxygenases in lineage specification
Wu, X., Li, G., & Xie, R. (2018) · Epigenetics & Chromatin · doi:10.1186/s13072-018-0228-7 · Cited by 43
An open-source computational tool to automatically quantify immunolabeled retinal ganglion cells
Dordea, A. C., Bray, M., Allen, K. N., Logan, D. J., Fei, F., Malhotra, R. K., Gregory, M. S., Carpenter, A. E., & Buys, E. S. (2016) · Experimental Eye Research · doi:10.1016/j.exer.2016.04.012 · Cited by 38 · cited 1×
“The images were obtained as z-stacks (0.5 μm), and all Brn3a positive cells in the ganglion cell layer of each image were counted using an automated counting platform as previously described 59,60 .”
InfluentialErosion of the Epigenetic Landscape and Loss of Cellular Identity as a Cause of Aging in Mammals
Yang, J.-H., Griffin, P. T., Vera, D. L., Apostolides, J. K., Hayano, M., Meer, M. V., Salfati, E. L., Su, Q., Munding, E. M., Blanchette, M., et al. (2019) · doi:10.1101/808642 · Cited by 38
Self-citationRand, T. A., Sutou, K., Tanabe, K., Jeong, D., Nomura, M., Kitaoka, F., Tomoda, E., Narita, M., Nakamura, M., Nakamura, M., et al. (2018) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2018.03.057 · Cited by 37
Differentiation of the SH-SY5Y Human Neuroblastoma Cell Line
Shipley, M. M., Mangold, C. A., & Szpara, M. L. (2016) · Journal of Visualized Experiments · doi:10.3791/53193-v
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hallmarks of aging: An expanding universe
López-Otín, C., Blasco, M. A., Partridge, L., Serrano, M., & Kroemer, G. (2023) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2022.11.001 · Cited by 6,549
Epigenetic regulation of aging: implications for interventions of aging and diseases
Kang, W., Liu, H., Hu, Q., Wang, L., Liu, J., Zheng, Z., Zhang, W., Ren, J., Zhu, F., & Liu, G. (2022) · Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy · doi:10.1038/s41392-022-01211-8 · Cited by 732
“The DNA demethylation induced by OSK expression is confirmed to be necessary for the rejuvenation process of retinal ganglion cells.(291) Although long-term reprogramming rejuvenates aged cells to varying degrees, some of the aged somatic cells will be fully reversed to iPSCs, which makes it impossible to be used to d…”
BackgroundLoss of epigenetic information as a cause of mammalian aging
Yang, J.-H., Hayano, M., Griffin, P. T., Amorim, J. A., Bonkowski, M. S., Apostolides, J. K., Salfati, E. L., Blanchette, M., Munding, E. M., Bhakta, M., et al. (2023) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2022.12.027 · Cited by 643
Self-citationHeterogeneous aging across multiple organ systems and prediction of chronic disease and mortality
Tian, Y. E., Cropley, V., Maier, A. B., Lautenschlager, N. T., Breakspear, M., & Zalesky, A. (2023) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-023-02296-6 · Cited by 618
Measuring biological age using omics data
Rutledge, J., Oh, H., & Wyss-Coray, T. (2022) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41576-022-00511-7 · Cited by 570
“Emerging evidence in epigenetic reprogramming suggests that CpG methylation may play a causal role 17,150 ; Lu et al. 17 found that DNA methylation enzymes were required for epigenetic reprogramming of mouse retinal cells but much more work is needed.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Lu, Y., Brommer, B., Tian, X., Krishnan, A., Meer, M., Wang, C., Vera, D. L., Zeng, Q., Yu, D., Bonkowski, M. S., Yang, J.-H., Zhou, S., Hoffmann, E. M., Karg, M. M., Schultz, M. B., Kane, A. E., Davidsohn, N., Korobkina, E., Chwalek, K., Rajman, L. A., Church, G. M., Hochedlinger, K., Gladyshev, V. N., Horvath, S., Levine, M. E., Gregory-Ksander, M. S., Ksander, B. R., He, Z., & Sinclair, D. A.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Boston Children's Hospital (US)
- Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary (US)
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Yale University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Sinclair, David A.
- ORCID
- Lu, Yuancheng
- Brommer, Benedikt
- Tian, Xiao
- Krishnan, Anitha
- Meer, Margarita
- Wang, Chen
- Vera, Daniel L.
- Zeng, Qiurui
- Yu, Doudou
- Bonkowski, Michael S.
- Yang, Jae-Hyun
- Zhou, Songlin
- Kane, Alice E.
- Davidsohn, Noah
- Korobkina, Ekaterina
- Chwalek, Karolina
- Rajman, Luis A.
- Church, George M.
- Hochedlinger, Konrad
- Gladyshev, Vadim N.
- Horvath, Steve
- Levine, Morgan E.
- Gregory-Ksander, Meredith S.
- Ksander, Bruce R.
- He, Zhigang
- Sinclair, David A.
- Venue
- Nature
- Published
- 2020-12-02
- Volume
- 588
- Issue
- 7836
- Pages
- 124-129
- ISSN
- 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-4687
- PMC
- PMC7752134
- OpenAlex
- W3108896277
- Semantic Scholar
- aa9b261d01ca36831459cb82af4c0c4d460f7d14
- Cited by
- 820
- References
- 72
- Citations by year
- 2026: 125 · 2025: 132 · 2024: 154 · 2023: 172 · 2022: 140 · 2021: 89 · 2020: 7
- FWCI
- 33.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Nature (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute on Aging (R01AG067782, R37AG028730, R01AG019719, T32AG023480, K99AG068303, R01AG065403)
- National Eye Institute (R24EY028767, R21EY030276, R01EY021526, R01EY026939, P30EY012196, P30EY003790, R01EY025794)
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R37GM065204, R01GM065204)
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (U54HD090255)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Pluripotent Stem Cells Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Development and Disorders
- Keywords
- cellular reprogramming, epigenetic aging, DNA methylation, Oct4, SOX2, KLF4, Yamanaka factors, retinal ganglion cells, axon regeneration, glaucoma, vision loss, TET1, TET2, demethylation, tissue regeneration, aged mice, epigenetic noise
- MeSH terms
- Kruppel-Like Factor 4, Dependovirus, Aging, Animals, Axons, Cell Survival, Disease Models, Animal, DNA-Binding Proteins, Eye, Female, Genetic Vectors, Glaucoma, Humans, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Nerve Regeneration, Proto-Oncogene Proteins, Retinal Ganglion Cells, Vision, Ocular, DNA Methylation, Optic Nerve Injuries, Epigenesis, Genetic, Cell Line, Tumor, Dioxygenases, Octamer Transcription Factor-3, Mice, Kruppel-Like Transcription Factors, SOXB1 Transcription Factors, Transcriptome, 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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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