Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16871234›Full record

ArticleGene therapy2006

Comparative evaluation of IGF-I gene transfer and IGF-I protein administration for enhancing skeletal muscle regeneration after injury.

J D Schertzer, G S Lynch

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Gene therapy, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Regenerative Medicine: Advanced Therapy for Muscle Tissue Restoration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Wearable Bioelectronics for Home-Based Monitoring and Treatment of Muscle Atrophy.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The MouseFrontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Gene and cell therapy for muscle regeneration.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2015
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Optimizing IGF-I for skeletal muscle therapeutics.Growth hormone & IGF research : official journal of the Growth Hormone Research Society and the International IGF Research Society · 2014
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

J D SchertzerBasic and Clinical Myology Laboratory, Department of Physiology, The University of Melbourne, Grattan Street, Victoria 3010, Australia.
G S Lynch
University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Developing methodologies to enhance skeletal muscle regeneration and hasten the restoration of muscle function has important implications for minimizing disability after injury and for treating muscle diseases such as Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Although delivery of various growth factors, such as insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), have proved successful in promoting skeletal muscle regeneration after injury, no study has compared the efficacy of different delivery methods directly. We compared the efficacy of systemic delivery of recombinant IGF-I protein via mini-osmotic pump (approximately 1.5 mg/kg/day) with a single electrotransfer-assisted plasmid-based gene transfer, to hasten functional repair of mouse tibialis anterior muscles after myotoxic injury. The relative efficacy of each method was assessed at 7, 21 and 28 days post-injury. Our findings indicate that IGF-I hastened functional recovery, regardless of the route of IGF-I administration. However, gene transfer of IGF-I was superior to systemic protein administration because in the regenerating muscle, this delivery method increased IGF-I levels, activated intracellular signals (Akt phosphorylation), induced a greater magnitude of myofiber hypertrophy and hastened functional recovery at an earlier time point (14 days) after injury than did protein administration (21 days). Thus, the relative efficacy of different modes of delivery is an important consideration when assessing the therapeutic potential of various proteins for treating muscle injuries and skeletal muscle diseases.

Indexed as

RegenerationAnimalsDNADrug ImplantsElectroporationGene ExpressionGenetic TherapyImmunohistochemistryInjections, IntramuscularInsulin-Like Growth Factor IMiceMice, Inbred C57BLMicroscopy, FluorescenceMuscle ContractionMuscle, SkeletalRecombinant ProteinsDNADrug ImplantsInsulin-Like Growth Factor IRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID16871234
OpenAlexW2065085872

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.