ArticleNeural regeneration research2018
Dynamic changes in growth factor levels over a 7-day period predict the functional outcomes of traumatic brain injury.
Article in Neural regeneration research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Serum Biomarkers of Regeneration and Plasticity are Associated with Functional Outcome in Pediatric Neurocritical Illness: An Exploratory Study.Neurocritical care · 2021Trial
- Neuroprotective Effects of Piceatannol on Olfactory Bulb Injury after Subarachnoid Hemorrhage.Molecular neurobiology · 2023Article
- Development of an Animal Model for Traumatic Brain Injury Augmentation of Heterotopic Ossification in Response to Local Injury.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Induces Time- and Sex-Dependent Cerebrovascular Dysfunction and Stroke Vulnerability.Journal of neurotrauma · 2023Article
- The role of G-CSF neuroprotective effects in neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE): current status.Journal of neuroinflammation · 2021Review
- Article
- Biological characteristics of dynamic expression of nerve regeneration related growth factors in dorsal root ganglia after peripheral nerve injury.Neural regeneration research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) can result in poor functional outcomes and death, and overall outcomes are varied. Growth factors, such as angiopoietin-1 (Ang-1), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), play important roles in the neurological functions. This study investigated the relationship between serum growth factor levels and long-term outcomes after TBI. Blood samples from 55 patients were collected at 1, 3 and 7 days after TBI. Blood samples from 39 healthy controls were collected as a control group. Serum Ang-1, G-CSF, and VEGF levels were measured using ELISA. Patients were monitored for 3 months using the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE). Patients having a GOSE score of > 5 at 3 months were categorized as a good outcome, and patients with a GOSE score of 1-5 were categorized as a bad outcome. Our data demonstrated that TBI patients showed significantly increased growth factor levels within 7 days compared with healthy controls. Serum levels of Ang-1 at 1 and 7 days and G-CSF levels at 7 days were significantly higher in patients with good outcomes than in patients with poor outcomes. VEGF levels at 7 days were remarkably higher in patients with poor outcomes than in patients with good outcomes. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that the best cut-off points of serum growth factor levels at 7 days to predict functional outcome were 1,333 pg/mL for VEGF, 447.2 pg/mL for G-CSF, and 90.6 ng/mL for Ang-1. These data suggest that patients with elevated levels of serum Ang-1, G-CSF, and decreased VEGF levels had a better prognosis in the acute phase of TBI (within 7 days). This study was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (registration number: ChiCTR1800018251) on September 7, 2018.
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.