ArticleScientific reports2019
Neurite regrowth stimulation by a red-light spot focused on the neuronal cell soma following blue light-induced retraction.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. 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.
- Combined effects of red light and direct-current electric fields on neurite growth in 3D neural cell cultures.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Physical modulation and peripheral nerve regeneration: a literature review.Cell regeneration (London, England) · 2024Review
- Implication of thermal signaling in neuronal differentiation revealed by manipulation and measurement of intracellular temperature.Nature communications · 2024Article
- MLKL overexpression leads to CaCell calcium · 2024Article
- Infrared Laser Effects on Cell Projection Depend on Irradiation Intermittence and Cell Activity.Cells · 2023Article
- Attenuation Aβ1-42-induced neurotoxicity in neuronal cell by 660nm and 810nm LED light irradiation.PloS one · 2023Article
- Control of actin polymerizationFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The interaction of light with biological tissues has been considered for various therapeutic applications. Light-induced neurite growth has the potential to be a clinically useful technique for neuron repair. However, most previous studies used either a large illumination area to accelerate overall neurite growth or employed a light spot to guide a growing neurite. It is not clear if optical stimulation can induce the regrowth of a retracted neurite. In the present work, we used blue light (wavelength: 473 nm) to cause neurite retraction, and we proved that using a red-light (wavelength: 650 nm) spot to illuminate the soma near the junction of the retracted neurite could induce neurite regrowth. As a comparison, we found that green light (wavelength 550 nm) had a 62% probability of inducing neurite regrowth, while red light had a 75% probability of inducing neurite regrowth at the same power level. Furthermore, the neurite regrowth length induced by red light was increased by the pre-treatment with inhibitors of myosin functions. We also observed actin propagation from the soma to the tip of the re-growing neurite following red-light stimulation of the soma. The red light-induced extension and regrowth were abrogated in the calcium-free medium. These results suggest that illumination with a red-light spot on the soma may trigger the regrowth of a neurite after the retraction caused by blue-light illumination.
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.