Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29852748›Full record

ReviewCell transplantation2018

Enhancing the Therapeutic Potential of Olfactory Ensheathing Cells in Spinal Cord Repair Using Neurotrophins.

A A Wright, M Todorovic, J Tello-Velasquez, A J Rayfield, J A St John, J A Ekberg

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cell transplantation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Rewiring the Spine-Cutting-Edge Stem Cell Therapies for Spinal Cord Repair.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Olfactory ensheathing cells and neuropathic pain.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A A Wright1 Clem Jones Centre for Neurobiology and Stem Cell Research, Griffith Institute for Drug Discovery, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia.
M Todorovic1 Clem Jones Centre for Neurobiology and Stem Cell Research, Griffith Institute for Drug Discovery, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia.
J Tello-Velasquez1 Clem Jones Centre for Neurobiology and Stem Cell Research, Griffith Institute for Drug Discovery, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia.
A J Rayfield1 Clem Jones Centre for Neurobiology and Stem Cell Research, Griffith Institute for Drug Discovery, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia.
J A St John1 Clem Jones Centre for Neurobiology and Stem Cell Research, Griffith Institute for Drug Discovery, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia.
J A Ekberg1 Clem Jones Centre for Neurobiology and Stem Cell Research, Griffith Institute for Drug Discovery, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia.
Griffith University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Autologous olfactory ensheathing cell (OEC) transplantation is a promising therapy for spinal cord injury; however, the efficacy varies between trials in both animals and humans. The main reason for this variability is that the purity and phenotype of the transplanted cells differs between studies. OECs are susceptible to modulation with neurotrophic factors, and thus, neurotrophins can be used to manipulate the transplanted cells into an optimal, consistent phenotype. OEC transplantation can be divided into 3 phases: (1) cell preparation, (2) cell administration, and (3) continuous support to the transplanted cells in situ. The ideal behaviour of OECs differs between these 3 phases; in the cell preparation phase, rapid cell expansion is desirable to decrease the time between damage and transplantation. In the cell administration phase, OEC survival and integration at the injury site, in particular migration into the glial scar, are the most critical factors, along with OEC-mediated phagocytosis of cellular debris. Finally, continuous support needs to be provided to the transplantation site to promote survival of both transplanted cells and endogenous cells within injury site and to promote long-term integration of the transplanted cells and angiogenesis. In this review, we define the 3 phases of OEC transplantation into the injured spinal cord and the optimal cell behaviors required for each phase. Optimising functional outcomes of OEC transplantation can be achieved by modulation of cell behaviours with neurotrophins. We identify the key growth factors that exhibit the strongest potential for optimizing the OEC phenotype required for each phase.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell ProliferationHumansNerve Growth FactorsNeurogliaOlfactory BulbSpinal Cord InjuriesSpinal Cord RegenerationTransplantation, AutologousNerve Growth Factorsautologous transplantationcell proliferationgliagrowth factorsneuron

Identifiers

PMID29852748
PMCPMC6050907
OpenAlexW2806799340

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.