ArticleExperimental and clinical cardiology2012
Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor does not enhance recruitment of bone marrow-derived cells in rats with acute myocardial infarction.
Article in Experimental and clinical cardiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Choroidal thickness and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in tears improve the prediction model for coronary artery disease.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2022Article
- Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor attenuates myocardial remodeling and ventricular arrhythmia susceptibility via the JAK2-STAT3 pathway in a rabbit model of coronary microembolization.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2020Article
- Bone marrow mononuclear cell angiogenic competency is suppressed by a high-salt diet.American journal of physiology. Cell physiology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the potential benefit of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI), the efficacy of G-CSF in regenerating the heart after MI remains controversial. The authors hypothesize that the limited efficacy of G-CSF is related to its inhibitory effect on recruitment of bone marrow-derived cells (BMCs) to the infarcted tissue. MI was induced in rats with intrabone marrow-bone marrow transplantation from syngenic rats expressing green fluorescence protein to track BMCs. G-CSF was administered for five days after the onset of MI. G-CSF increased the number of CD45(+) cells in the peripheral circulation but did not increase their recruitment to the heart. G-CSF had no effect on myocardial stromal-derived factor-1 alpha and chemokine (C-X-C motif) receptor 4 (CXCR4) expression in mononuclear cells in the peripheral blood and CXCR4(+) cells in the heart. G-CSF had no effect on angiogenesis, myocardial fibrosis or left ventricular function four weeks after MI. These results suggest that G-CSF mobilizes BMCs to the peripheral circulation but does not increase recruitment to the infarcted myocardium despite preservation of the stromal-derived factor-1 alpha/CXCR4 axis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23620693PMC3628418W2152844028What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.