English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Direct cellular reprogramming exhibits distinct advantages over reprogramming from an induced pluripotent stem cell intermediate. These include a reduced risk of tumorigenesis and the likely preservation of epigenetic data.  In vitro  direct reprogramming approaches primarily aim to model the pathophysiological development of neurological disease and identify therapeutic targets, while  in vivo  direct reprogramming aims to develop treatments for various neurological disorders, including cerebral injury and cancer. In both approaches, there is progress toward developing increased control of subtype-specific production of induced neurons. A majority of research primarily utilizes fibroblasts as the donor cells. However, there are a variety of other somatic cell types that have demonstrated the potential for reprogramming into induced neurons. This review highlights studies that utilize non-fibroblastic cell sources for reprogramming, such as astrocytes, olfactory ensheathing cells, peripheral blood cells, Müller glia, and more. We will examine benefits and obstructions for translation into therapeutics or disease modeling, as well as efficiency of the conversion. A summary of donor cells, induced neuron types, and methods of induction is also provided.

Induced Neurons for Disease Modeling and Repair: A Focus on Non-fibroblastic Cell Sources in Direct Reprogramming