ReviewFrontiers in neurology2018
Enduring Neuroprotective Effect of Subacute Neural Stem Cell Transplantation After Penetrating TBI.
Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neural stem cell-derived exosomes and regeneration: cell-free therapeutic strategies for traumatic brain injury.Stem cell research & therapy · 2023Review
- Commonly Overlooked Factors in Biocompatibility Studies of Neural Implants.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- Injury-Transplantation Interval-Dependent Amelioration of Axonal Degeneration and Motor Deficit in Rats with Penetrating Traumatic Brain Injury.Neurotrauma reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Conversion of human urine-derived cells into neuron-like cells by small molecules.Molecular biology reports · 2020Article
- Human neural stem cell transplants to address multiple pathologies associated with traumatic brain injury.Neural regeneration research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the largest cause of death and disability of persons under 45 years old, worldwide. Independent of the distribution, outcomes such as disability are associated with huge societal costs. The heterogeneity of TBI and its complicated biological response have helped clarify the limitations of current pharmacological approaches to TBI management. Five decades of effort have made some strides in reducing TBI mortality but little progress has been made to mitigate TBI-induced disability. Lessons learned from the failure of numerous randomized clinical trials and the inability to scale up results from single center clinical trials with neuroprotective agents led to the formation of organizations such as the Neurological Emergencies Treatment Trials (NETT) Network, and international collaborative comparative effectiveness research (CER) to re-orient TBI clinical research. With initiatives such as TRACK-TBI, generating rich and comprehensive human datasets with demographic, clinical, genomic, proteomic, imaging, and detailed outcome data across multiple time points has become the focus of the field in the United States (US). In addition, government institutions such as the US Department of Defense are investing in groups such as Operation Brain Trauma Therapy (OBTT), a multicenter, pre-clinical drug-screening consortium to address the barriers in translation. The consensus from such efforts including "The Lancet Neurology Commission" and current literature is that unmitigated cell death processes, incomplete debris clearance, aberrant neurotoxic immune, and glia cell response induce progressive tissue loss and spatiotemporal magnification of primary TBI. Our analysis suggests that the focus of neuroprotection research needs to shift from protecting dying and injured neurons at acute time points to modulating the aberrant glial response in sub-acute and chronic time points. One unexpected agent with neuroprotective properties that shows promise is transplantation of neural stem cells. In this review we present (i) a short survey of TBI epidemiology and summary of current care, (ii) findings of past neuroprotective clinical trials and possible reasons for failure based upon insights from human and preclinical TBI pathophysiology studies, including our group's inflammation-centered approach, (iii) the unmet need of TBI and unproven treatments and lastly, (iv) present evidence to support the rationale for sub-acute neural stem cell therapy to mediate enduring neuroprotection.
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.