ArticlePloS one2021
An enhanced therapeutic effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with antibody treatment in a primate model of spinal cord injury.
Article in PloS one, 2021. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Human-relevant transcranial magnetic stimulation in awake rhesus macaques assisted by a non-invasive head and arm fixation apparatus.iScience · 2026Article
- Repulsive Guidance Molecule-A as a Therapeutic Target Across Neurological Disorders: An Update.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Spinal Cord Injury: Current Status and Perspective.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Exosomes derived from CD271Theranostics · 2024Article
- Research progress on the application of transcranial magnetic stimulation in spinal cord injury rehabilitation: a narrative review.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Review
- circ_014260/miR-384/THBS1 aggravates spinal cord injury in rats by promoting neuronal apoptosis and endoplasmic reticulum stress.American journal of translational research · 2022Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) targeting the primary motor cortex (MI) is expected to provide a therapeutic impact on spinal cord injury (SCI). On the other hand, treatment with antibody against repulsive guidance molecule-a (RGMa) has been shown to ameliorate motor deficits after SCI in rodents and primates. Facilitating activity of the corticospinal tract (CST) by rTMS following rewiring of CST fibers by anti-RGMa antibody treatment may exert an enhanced effect on motor recovery in a primate model of SCI. To address this issue, we examined whether such a combined therapeutic strategy could contribute to accelerating functional restoration from SCI. In our SCI model, unilateral lesions were made between the C6 and the C7 level. Two macaque monkeys were used for each of the combined therapy and antibody treatment alone, while one monkey was for rTMS alone. The antibody treatment was continuously carried out for four weeks immediately after SCI, and rTMS trials applying a thermoplastic mask and a laser distance meter lasted ten weeks. Behavioral assessment was performed over 14 weeks after SCI to investigate the extent to which motor functions were restored with the antibody treatment and/or rTMS. While rTMS without the preceding antibody treatment produced no discernible sign for functional recovery, a combination of the antibody and rTMS exhibited a greater effect, especially at an early stage of rTMS trials, on restoration of dexterous hand movements. The present results indicate that rTMS combined with anti-RGMa antibody treatment may exert a synergistic effect on motor recovery from SCI.
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.