Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,477

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Redefining endothelial progenitor cells via clonal analysis and hematopoietic stem/progenitor cell principals

Open access
Yoder, Mervin C., Mead, Laura E., Prater, Daniel, Krier, Theresa R., Mroueh, Karim N., Li, Fang, Krasich, Rachel, Temm, Constance J., Prchal, Josef T., Ingram, David A.·2007·Blood

Abstract

The limited vessel-forming capacity of infused endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) into patients with cardiovascular dysfunction may be related to a misunderstanding of the biologic potential of the cells. EPCs are generally identified by cell surface antigen expression or counting in a commercially available kit that identifies “endothelial cell colony-forming units” (CFU-ECs). However, the origin, proliferative potential, and differentiation capacity of CFU-ECs is controversial. In contrast, other EPCs with blood vessel-forming ability, termed endothelial colony-forming cells (ECFCs), have been isolated from human peripheral blood. We compared the function of CFU-ECs and ECFCs and determined that CFU-ECs are derived from the hematopoietic system using progenitor assays, and analysis of donor cells from polycythemia vera patients harboring a Janus kinase 2 V617F mutation in hematopoietic stem cell clones. Further, CFU-ECs possess myeloid progenitor cell activity, differentiate into phagocytic macrophages, and fail to form perfused vessels in vivo. In contrast, ECFCs are clonally distinct from CFU-ECs, display robust proliferative potential, and form perfused vessels in vivo. Thus, these studies establish that CFU-ECs are not EPCs and the role of these cells in angiogenesis must be re-examined prior to further clinical trials, whereas ECFCs may serve as a potential therapy for vascular regeneration.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1182/blood-2006-08-043471

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 1,477

Metadata

Authors
Yoder, M. C., Mead, L. E., Prater, D., Krier, T. R., Mroueh, K. N., Li, F., Krasich, R., Temm, C. J., Prchal, J. T., & Ingram, D. A.
Venue
Blood
Published
2006-10-19
Volume
109
Issue
5
Pages
1801-1809
ISSN
  • 0006-4971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1528-0020
OpenAlex
W1986991023
Cited by
1,477
References
3
FWCI
31.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Redefining endothelial progenitor cells via clonal analysis and hematopoietic stem/progenitor cell principals. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1182/blood-2006-08-043471
The paper
Yoder, M. C., Mead, L. E., Prater, D., Krier, T. R., Mroueh, K. N., Li, F., Krasich, R., Temm, C. J., Prchal, J. T., & Ingram, D. A. (2007). Redefining endothelial progenitor cells via clonal analysis and hematopoietic stem/progenitor cell principals. Blood. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2006-08-043471

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.