Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28203046›Full record

ReviewMediators of inflammation2017

Neuroinflammation as Fuel for Axonal Regeneration in the Injured Vertebrate Central Nervous System.

Ilse Bollaerts, Jessie Van Houcke, Lien Andries, Lies De Groef, Lieve Moons

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Mediators of inflammation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Effective treatment of optic neuropathies by intraocular delivery of MSC-sEVs through augmenting the G-CSF-macrophage pathway.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Pathophysiology and Therapeutic Approaches for Spinal Cord Injury.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    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.

Ilse BollaertsLaboratory of Neural Circuit Development and Regeneration, Animal Physiology and Neurobiology Section, Department of Biology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-3313-6022
Jessie Van HouckeLaboratory of Neural Circuit Development and Regeneration, Animal Physiology and Neurobiology Section, Department of Biology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Lien AndriesLaboratory of Neural Circuit Development and Regeneration, Animal Physiology and Neurobiology Section, Department of Biology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0779-0570
Lies De GroefLaboratory of Neural Circuit Development and Regeneration, Animal Physiology and Neurobiology Section, Department of Biology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-3329-3474
Lieve MoonsLaboratory of Neural Circuit Development and Regeneration, Animal Physiology and Neurobiology Section, Department of Biology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0186-1411

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Damage to the central nervous system (CNS) is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in elderly, as repair after lesions or neurodegenerative disease usually fails because of the limited capacity of CNS regeneration. The causes underlying this limited regenerative potential are multifactorial, but one critical aspect is neuroinflammation. Although classically considered as harmful, it is now becoming increasingly clear that inflammation can also promote regeneration, if the appropriate context is provided. Here, we review the current knowledge on how acute inflammation is intertwined with axonal regeneration, an important component of CNS repair. After optic nerve or spinal cord injury, inflammatory stimulation and/or modification greatly improve the regenerative outcome in rodents. Moreover, the hypothesis of a beneficial role of inflammation is further supported by evidence from adult zebrafish, which possess the remarkable capability to repair CNS lesions and even restore functionality. Lastly, we shed light on the impact of aging processes on the regenerative capacity in the CNS of mammals and zebrafish. As aging not only affects the CNS, but also the immune system, the regeneration potential is expected to further decline in aged individuals, an element that should definitely be considered in the search for novel therapeutic strategies.

Indexed as

Nerve RegenerationAnimalsAxonsCentral Nervous SystemHumansInflammationMacrophagesNeuronsOptic NerveZebrafish

Identifiers

PMID28203046
PMCPMC5288536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.