Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16856086›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Colony stimulating factors (including erythropoietin, granulocyte colony stimulating factor and analogues) for stroke.

P M W Bath, N Sprigg

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Edaravone for acute intracerebral haemorrhage.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011
    Pooled it
  2. Stem cell therapy as a promising approach for ischemic stroke treatment.Current research in pharmacology and drug discovery · 2024
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Cell-based therapy in ischemic stroke.Expert review of neurotherapeutics · 2008
    Review
  8. Stem cells and neurological diseases.Cell proliferation · 2008
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

P M W BathUniversity of Nottingham, Division of Stroke Medicine, South Block D Floor, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, UK NG7 2UH. philip.bath@nottingham.ac.uk
N Sprigg
Queen's Medical Centre · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColony stimulating factors (CSFs), also called haematopoietic growth factors, regulate bone marrow production of circulating red and white cells, and platelets. They have been shown to be neuroprotective in experimental stroke. Some CSFs also mobilise the release of bone marrow stem cells into the circulation.

objectivesWe systematically assessed the effects of CSFs on functional outcome and haematology measures in patients with acute or subacute stroke enrolled into randomised controlled trials. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched February 2005), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (1985 to March 2006), EMBASE (1985 to November 2005), and Science Citation Index (1985 to November 2005). In an attempt to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials we contacted manufacturers and principal investigators of trials (last contacted 2005). We also searched reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Unconfounded randomised controlled trials recruiting patients with acute or subacute ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke were included. CSFs included stem cell factor (SCF), erythropoietin (EPO), granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF), macrophage-colony stimulating factor (M-CSF, CSF-1), and thrombopoietin (TPO), or analogues of these. The primary outcome was functional outcome (assessed as combined death or disability and dependency using scales such as the modified Rankin Scale or Barthel Index) at the end of the trial. Secondary outcomes included safety at the end of treatment (death, impairment, deterioration, extension or recurrence), death at the end of follow up, and haematology measures (blood counts at or around day seven after treatment commenced). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data on measures by intention to treat (where available) were collected and analysed as dichotomous or continuous outcomes, as relevant, using random-effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed. MAIN

resultsNo large trials were identified. EPO therapy was associated with a non-significant reduction in neurological impairment in one small trial (n = 40 participants) but had no significant effect on haematological measures. Further small trials of EPO and G-CSF are ongoing. AUTHORS'

conclusionsNo large trials of EPO, G-CSF or other colony stimulating factors have been performed and it is too early to know whether CSFs improve functional outcome.

Indexed as

Colony-Stimulating FactorsErythropoietinHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStrokeColony-Stimulating FactorsErythropoietin

Identifiers

PMID16856086
OpenAlexW4239660403

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.