Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25173879›Full record

ReviewStem cell reviews and reports2015

Stem cells in canine spinal cord injury--promise for regenerative therapy in a large animal model of human disease.

Barbara G McMahill, Dori L Borjesson, Maya Sieber-Blum, Jan A Nolta, Beverly K Sturges

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cell reviews and reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Companion animal models of neurological disease.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2020
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

5 authors.

Barbara G McMahillStem Cell Program, Institute for Regenerative Cures, 2921 Stockton Boulevard, CA, 95817, USA.
Dori L Borjesson
Maya Sieber-Blum
Jan A Nolta
Beverly K Sturges

Funding

Medical Research Council 22358Medical Research Council G0802547
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of cell transplantation for spinal cord injury is a rapidly evolving field in regenerative medicine. Numerous animal models are currently being used. However, translation to human patients is still a challenging step. Dogs are of increasing importance as a translational model for human disease since there is a greater awareness of the need to increase the quality of preclinical data. The use of dogs ultimately brings benefit to both human and veterinary medicine. In this review we analyze experimental and clinical studies using cell transplantation for canine spinal cord injury. Overall, in experimental studies, transplantation groups showed improvement over control groups. Improvements were measured at the functional, electrophysiological, histological, RNA and protein levels. Most clinical studies support beneficial effects of cell transplantation despite the fact that methodological limitations preclude definitive conclusions. However, the mechanisms of action and underlying the behavior of transplanted cells in the injured spinal cord remain unclear. Overall, we conclude here that stem cell interventions are a promising avenue for the treatment of spinal cord injury. Canines are a promising model that may help bridge the gap between translational research and human clinical trials.

Indexed as

Disease Models, AnimalAnimalsDogsHumansRecovery of FunctionRegenerative MedicineSpinal Cord InjuriesStem Cell TransplantationTransplantation, HeterologousTransplantation, Homologous

Identifiers

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.