Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26415641›Full record

ArticleSpinal cord2016

Adenoviral vector carrying glial cell-derived neurotrophic factor for direct gene therapy in comparison with human umbilical cord blood cell-mediated therapy of spinal cord injury in rat.

Y O Mukhamedshina, G F Shaymardanova, Е Е Garanina, I I Salafutdinov, А А Rizvanov, R R Islamov, Y A Chelyshev

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Spinal cord, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Combined Delivery of theCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Combination of epidural electrical stimulation withNeural regeneration research · 2021
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Y O MukhamedshinaOpenLab Gene and Cell Technologies, Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University, Kazan, Russia.
G F ShaymardanovaKazan Institute of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Kazan, Russia.
Е Е GaraninaOpenLab Gene and Cell Technologies, Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University, Kazan, Russia.
I I SalafutdinovOpenLab Gene and Cell Technologies, Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University, Kazan, Russia.
А А RizvanovOpenLab Gene and Cell Technologies, Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University, Kazan, Russia.
R R IslamovDepartment of Hystology, Kazan State Medical University, Kazan, Russia.
Y A ChelyshevDepartment of Hystology, Kazan State Medical University, Kazan, Russia.
Kazan Federal University · RUKazan State Medical University · RUKazan Institute of Biochemistry and Biophysics · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designExperimental study.

objectiveTo evaluate the treatment of spinal cord injury with glial cell-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) delivered using an adenoviral vector (AdV-GDNF group) in comparison with treatment performed using human umbilical cord blood mononuclear cells (UCB-MCs)-transduced with an adenoviral vector carrying the GDNF gene (UCB-MCs+AdV-GDNF group) in rat.

settingKazan, Russian Federation.

methodsWe examined the efficacy of AdV-GDNF and UCB-MCs+AdV-GDNF therapy by conducting behavioral tests on the animals and morphometric studies on the spinal cord, performing immunofluorescence analyses on glial cells, investigating the survival and migration potential of UCB-MCs, and evaluating the expression of the recombinant GDNF gene.

resultsAt the 30th postoperative day, equal positive locomotor recovery was observed after both direct and cell-based GDNF therapy. However, after UCB-MCs-mediated GDNF therapy, the area of preserved tissue and the number of spared myelinated fibers were higher than those measured after direct GDNF gene therapy. Moreover, we observed distinct changes in the populations of glial cells; expression patterns of the specific markers for astrocytes (GFAP, S100B and AQP4), oligodendrocytes (PDGFαR and Cx47) and Schwann cells (P0) differed in various areas of the spinal cord of rats treated with AdV-GDNF and UCB-MCs+AdV-GDNF.

conclusionThe differences detected in the AdV-GDNF and UCB-MCs+AdV-GDNF groups could be partially explained by the action of UCB-MCs. We discuss the insufficiency and the advantages of these two methods of GDNF gene delivery into the spinal cord after traumatic injury.

Indexed as

Genetic TherapyRecovery of FunctionAnimalsAquaporin 4Cell- and Tissue-Based TherapyConnexinsDisease Models, AnimalFemaleGenetic VectorsGene Transfer TechniquesGlial Cell Line-Derived Neurotrophic FactorGlial Fibrillary Acidic ProteinGreen Fluorescent ProteinsHEK293 CellsHumansLocomotionAquaporin 4Connexinsenhanced green fluorescent proteinGDNF protein, humanGlial Cell Line-Derived Neurotrophic FactorGlial Fibrillary Acidic ProteinGreen Fluorescent ProteinsMyelin P0 ProteinNerve Tissue ProteinsReceptor, Platelet-Derived Growth Factor alphaRNA, MessengerS100b protein, ratS100 Calcium Binding Protein beta Subunit

Identifiers

PMID26415641
OpenAlexW2311214989

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.