ReviewGlia2015
Reactive astrocytes as neural stem or progenitor cells: In vivo lineage, In vitro potential, and Genome-wide expression analysis.
Review in Glia, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 116 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
116 citing papers in PubMed.
- Focal astrocyte loss reveals nuclear translocation during lesion repopulation.Nature neuroscience · 2026Article
- Müller glia-mediated regeneration restores neuronal diversity and retinal circuit organization in the adult zebrafish.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Sox9 regulation of hexokinase 1 controls neuroinflammatory astrocyte subtypes in a rat model of neuropathic pain.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Immunohistochemical and Ultrastructural Analysis of Adult Neurogenesis Involving Glial and Non-Glial Progenitors in the Cerebellum of Juvenile Chum SalmonInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Astrocytic YAP prevents the glutamate neurotoxicity by upregulation of EAAT2 expression and promotes the gain of stemness in astrocytes in ischemic stroke mice.Cell death & disease · 2025Article
- Cell fate acquisition and reprogramming by the proneural transcription factor ASCL1.Open biology · 2025Review
- Changing genes, cells and networks to reprogram the brain after stroke.Nature neuroscience · 2025Review
- Transcription Factor-Based Gene Therapy Enables Functional Repair of Rat Following Chronic Ischemic Stroke.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2025Article
- Pathophysiologic Mechanisms of Severe Spinal Cord Injury and Neuroplasticity Following Decompressive Laminectomy and Expansive Duraplasty: A Systematic Review.Neurology international · 2025Review
- Challenges and Efficacy of Astrocyte-to-Neuron Reprogramming in Spinal Cord Injury: In Vitro Insights and In Vivo Outcomes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Topoisomerase IIα-mediated stemness response in reactive astrocytes to traumatic brain injury.Theranostics · 2025Article
- Beyond the canonical niche: how astrocytes carried neurogenic potential into the brain parenchyma.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
- Investigating the Pathology-Related Astroglial Plasticity in the Human Cerebral Cortex.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Astrocytic centrin-2 expression in entorhinal cortex correlates with Alzheimer's disease severity.Glia · 2024Article
- Dynamic spatiotemporal activation of a pervasive neurogenic competence in striatal astrocytes supports continuous neurogenesis following injury.Stem cell reports · 2024Article
- Diverse signaling mechanisms and heterogeneity of astrocyte reactivity in Alzheimer's disease.Journal of neurochemistry · 2024Review
- Derivation and transcriptional reprogramming of border-forming wound repair astrocytes after spinal cord injury or stroke in mice.Nature neuroscience · 2024Article
- Review
- Reversal of Postnatal Brain Astrocytes and Ependymal Cells towards a Progenitor Phenotype in Culture.Cells · 2024Article
- Adult Neurogenesis of Teleost Fish Determines High Neuronal Plasticity and Regeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
56 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Here, we review the stem cell hallmarks of endogenous neural stem cells (NSCs) during development and in some niches of the adult mammalian brain to then compare these with reactive astrocytes acquiring stem cell hallmarks after traumatic and ischemic brain injury. Notably, even endogenous NSCs including the earliest NSCs, the neuroepithelial cells, generate in most cases only a single type of progeny and self-renew only for a rather short time in vivo. In vitro, however, especially cells cultured under neurosphere conditions reveal a larger potential and long-term self-renewal under the influence of growth factors. This is rather well comparable to reactive astrocytes in the traumatic or ischemic brain some of which acquire neurosphere-forming capacity including multipotency and long-term self-renewal in vitro, while they remain within their astrocyte lineage in vivo. Both reactive astrocytes and endogenous NSCs exhibit stem cell hallmarks largely in vitro, but their lineage differs in vivo. Both populations generate largely a single cell type in vivo, but endogenous NSCs generate neurons and reactive astrocytes remain in the astrocyte lineage. However, at some early postnatal stages or in some brain regions reactive astrocytes can be released from this fate restriction, demonstrating that they can also enact neurogenesis. Thus, reactive astrocytes and NSCs share many characteristic hallmarks, but also exhibit key differences. This conclusion is further substantiated by genome-wide expression analysis comparing NSCs at different stages with astrocytes from the intact and injured brain parenchyma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.