Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34916416›Full record

ReviewNeural regeneration research2022

Neuronal reprogramming in treating spinal cord injury.

Xuanyu Chen, Hedong Li

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neural regeneration research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Rewiring of NestinNeuroscience bulletin · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting the prognosis in children with spinal cord injuries.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Neural regeneration research · 2023
    Article
  15. Life medicine · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xuanyu ChenDepartment of Neuroscience & Regenerative Medicine, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.
Hedong LiDepartment of Neuroscience & Regenerative Medicine, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.
Augusta University · US

Funding

MicroRNA Function During Neuronal Reprogramming in Treating Spinal Cord InjuryR01NS117918 · NINDS · AUGUSTA UNIVERSITY · PI LI, HEDONG · 2020 to 2024
$1.8M
In Vivo Reprogramming Reactive Astrocytes into Functional Neuorons by MicroRNA-124 in the Injured Spinal CordR21NS104394 · NINDS · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI LI, HEDONG · 2018 to 2019
$440k
Manipulating NeuroD1 expression by MicroRNAs to Optimize Neuronal Conversion for Spinal Cord Injury RepairR21NS119732 · NINDS · AUGUSTA UNIVERSITY · PI LI, HEDONG · 2021 to 2022
$424k
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS117918NINDS NIH HHS R21 NS104394NINDS NIH HHS R21 NS119732
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spinal cord injury represents a devastating central nervous system injury that could impair the mobility and sensory function of afflicted patients. The hallmarks of spinal cord injury include neuroinflammation, axonal degeneration, neuronal loss, and reactive gliosis. Furthermore, the formation of a glial scar at the injury site elicits an inhibitory environment for potential neuroregeneration. Besides axonal regeneration, a significant challenge in treating spinal cord injury is to replenish the neurons lost during the pathological process. However, despite decades of research efforts, current strategies including stem cell transplantation have not resulted in a successful clinical therapy. Furthermore, stem cell transplantation faces serious hurdles such as immunorejection of the transplanted cells and ethical issues. In vivo neuronal reprogramming is a recently developed technology and leading a major breakthrough in regenerative medicine. This innovative technology converts endogenous glial cells into functional neurons for injury repair in the central nervous system. The feasibility of in vivo neuronal reprogramming has been demonstrated successfully in models of different neurological disorders including spinal cord injury by numerous laboratories. Several reprogramming factors, mainly the pro-neural transcription factors, have been utilized to reprogram endogenous glial cells into functional neurons with distinct phenotypes. So far, the literature on in vivo neuronal reprogramming in the model of spinal cord injury is still small. In this review, we summarize a limited number of such reports and discuss several questions that we think are important for applying in vivo neuronal reprogramming in the research field of spinal cord injury as well as other central nervous system disorders.

Indexed as

astrocytemicroRNANeuroD1neuronal relayneuronal reprogrammingNG2 gliapericytereactive gliosisSox2spinal cord injury

Identifiers

PMID34916416
PMCPMC8771113
OpenAlexW4200475755

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.