Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30951894›Full record

ReviewSeminars in cell & developmental biology2020

Epigenetics in neuronal regeneration.

Leah S VandenBosch, Thomas A Reh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Seminars in cell & developmental biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Epigenetic Regulation of Optic Nerve Development, Protection, and Repair.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Retina stem cells, hopes and obstacles.World journal of stem cells · 2021
    Review
  12. Epigenetic regulation of retinal development.Epigenetics & chromatin · 2021
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

2 authors.

Leah S VandenBoschDepartment of Biological Structure, Molecular and Cellular Biology Graduate Program, Institute for Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine, University of Washington, School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, 98195, United States.
Thomas A RehDepartment of Biological Structure, Molecular and Cellular Biology Graduate Program, Institute for Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine, University of Washington, School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, 98195, United States. Electronic address: tomreh@uw.edu.

Funding

TRAINING IN MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR BIOLOGYT32GM007270 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI RAIBLE, DAVID W · 1985 to 2020
$21.0M
Supplement to EY021482 to carry out a screen for retinal regeneration using CRISPR-Cas9 gene activation.R01EY021482 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI THOMAS A REH · 2011 to 2026
$6.3M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY021482NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM007270
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Damage to neuronal tissues in mammals leads to permanent loss of tissue function that can have major health consequences. While mammals have no inherent regenerative capacity to functionally repair neuronal tissue, other species such as amphibians and teleost fish readily replace damaged tissue. The exploration of development and native regeneration can thus inform the process of inducing regeneration in non-regenerative systems, which can be used to develop new therapeutics. Increasing evidence points to an epigenetic component in the regulation of the changes in cellular gene expression necessary for regeneration. In this review, we compare evidence of epigenetic roles in development and regeneration of neuronal tissue. We have focused on three key systems of important clinical significance: the neural retina, the inner ear, and the spinal cord in regenerative and non-regenerative species. While evidence for epigenetic regulation of regeneration is still limited, changes in DNA accessibility, histone acetylation and DNA methylation have all emerged as key elements in this process. To date, most studies have used broadly acting experimental manipulations to establish a role for epigenetics in regeneration, but the advent of more targeted approaches to modify the epigenome will be critical to dissecting the relative contributions of these regulatory factors in this process and the development of methods to stimulate the regeneration in those organisms like ourselves where only limited regeneration occurs in these neural systems.

Indexed as

AnimalsEpigenesis, GeneticHumansNerve RegenerationCochleaHistoneNeurogenesisRetinaSpinal cord

Identifiers

PMID30951894
PMCPMC6952058

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.