ReviewNeural regeneration research2015
Cell replacement therapy for central nervous system diseases.
Review in Neural regeneration research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transplantation of Chemical Compound-Induced Cells from Human Fibroblasts Improves Locomotor Recovery in a Spinal Cord Injury Rat Model.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Microfluidic and Microscale Assays to Examine Regenerative Strategies in the Neuro Retina.Micromachines · 2020Review
- Paths to Successful Translation of New Therapies for Severe Traumatic Brain Injury in the Golden Age of Traumatic Brain Injury Research: A Pittsburgh Vision.Journal of neurotrauma · 2020Review
- MRI Tracking of iPS Cells-Induced Neural Stem Cells in Traumatic Brain Injury Rats.Cell transplantation · 2019Article
- Protective Role of SOCS3 Modified Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Hypoxia-Induced Injury of PC12 Cells.Journal of molecular neuroscience : MN · 2019Article
- Functional Recovery Following the Transplantation of Olfactory Ensheathing Cells in Rat Spinal Cord Injury Model.Asian spine journal · 2018Article
- Adult Neural Stem Cells: Basic Research and Production Strategies for Neurorestorative Therapy.Stem cells international · 2018Review
- Globose basal cells for spinal cord regeneration.Neural regeneration research · 2017Article
- The Role of Stem Cells in the Treatment of Cerebral Palsy: a Review.Molecular neurobiology · 2017Review
- Stem cells for spinal cord injury: Strategies to inform differentiation and transplantation.Biotechnology and bioengineering · 2017Review
- Neural Progenitor Cells Promote Axonal Growth and Alter Axonal mRNA Localization in Adult Neurons.eNeuroArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The brain and spinal cord can not replace neurons or supporting glia that are lost through traumatic injury or disease. In pre-clinical studies, however, neural stem and progenitor cell transplants can promote functional recovery. Thus the central nervous system is repair competent but lacks endogenous stem cell resources. To make transplants clinically feasible, this field needs a source of histocompatible, ethically acceptable and non-tumorgenic cells. One strategy to generate patient-specific replacement cells is to reprogram autologous cells such as fibroblasts into pluripotent stem cells which can then be differentiated into the required cell grafts. However, the utility of pluripotent cell derived grafts is limited since they can retain founder cells with intrinsic neoplastic potential. A recent extension of this technology directly reprograms fibroblasts into the final graftable cells without an induced pluripotent stem cell intermediate, avoiding the pluripotent caveat. For both types of reprogramming the conversion efficiency is very low resulting in the need to amplify the cells in culture which can lead to chromosomal instability and neoplasia. Thus to make reprogramming biology clinically feasible, we must improve the efficiency. The ultimate source of replacement cells may reside in directly reprogramming accessible cells within the brain.
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.