ReviewNeural regeneration research2016
The progress in optic nerve regeneration, where are we?
Review in Neural regeneration research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- WFS1 gene delivery rescues visual function in a mouse model of Wolfram syndrome.Acta neuropathologica communications · 2026Article
- Allogeneic whole-eye transplantation: advancements, challenges, and future directions in vision restoration.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Unlocking the potential for optic nerve regeneration over long distances: a multi-therapeutic intervention.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- Localized co-delivery of CNTF and FK506 using a thermosensitive hydrogel for retina ganglion cells protection after traumatic optic nerve injury.Drug delivery · 2020Article
- Carvacrol Protects Against Paclitaxel-Induced Retinal and Optic Nerve Cytotoxicity: A Histopathological Study.Beyoglu eye journal · 2020Article
- Special Commentary: Early Clinical Development of Cell Replacement Therapy: Considerations for the National Eye Institute Audacious Goals Initiative.Ophthalmology · 2017Review
- Wnt signaling promotes axonal regeneration following optic nerve injury in the mouse.Neuroscience · 2017Article
- Glaucoma: Biological Trabecular and Neuroretinal Pathology with Perspectives of Therapy Innovation and Preventive Diagnosis.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2017Review
- Treatment synergy in axon regeneration.Nature neuroscience · 2016Article
- Increases in Retrograde Injury Signaling Complex-Related Transcripts in Central Axons following Injury.Neural plasticity · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optic nerve regeneration is an important area of research. It can be used to treat patients suffering from optic neuropathy and provides insights into the treatment of numerous neurodegenerative diseases. There are many hurdles impeding optic regeneration in mammals. The mammalian central nervous system is non-permissive to regeneration and intrinsically lacks the capacity for axonal regrowth. Any axonal injury also triggers a vicious cycle of apoptosis. Understanding these hurdles provides us with a rough framework to appreciate the essential steps to bring about optic nerve regeneration: enhancing neuronal survival, axon regeneration, remyelination and establishing functional synapses to the original neuronal targets. In this review article, we will go through current potential treatments for optic nerve regeneration, which includes neurotrophic factor provision, inflammatory stimulation, growth inhibition suppression, intracellular signaling modification and modeling of bridging substrates.
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.