ArticleEye and brain2022
Neuroplasticity of the Lateral Geniculate Nucleus in Response to Retinal Gene Therapy in a Group of Patients with
Article in Eye and brain, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lateral Geniculate Nucleus Volume Assessment Using Linear Mixed Model in Moderate and Advanced Retinitis Pigmentosa.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Previous works on experience-dependent brain plasticity have been limited to the cortical structures, overlooking subcortical visual structures such as the lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN). Animal studies have shown substantial experience dependent plasticity and using fMRI, human studies have demonstrated similar properties in patients with cataract surgery. However, in neither animal nor human studies LGN has not been directly assessed, mainly due to its small size, tissue heterogeneity, low contrast/noise ratio, and low spatial resolution. Methods: Utilizing a new algorithm that markedly improves the LGN visibility, LGN was evaluated in a group of low vision patients before and after retinal intervention to reinstate vision and normal sighted matched controls. Results: Between and within groups comparisons showed that patients had significantly smaller left (p< 0.0001) and right (p < 0.00002) LGN volumes at baseline as compared to the one-year follow-up volumes. The same baseline and one year comparison in controls was not significant. Significant positive correlations were observed between the incremental volume increase after gene therapy of the left LGN and the incremental increase in the right (r = 0.71, p < 0.02) and left (r = 0.72, p = 0.018) visual fields. Incremental volume increase of the right LGN also showed a similar positive slope but did not reach significance. Discussion: These results show that despite significantly less volume at baseline, retinal gene therapy promotes robust expansion and increase in LGN volume. Reinstating vision may have facilitated the establishment of new connections between the retina and the LGN and/or unmasking of the dormant connections. The exact trajectory of the structural changes taking place in LGN is unclear but our data shows that even after years of low vision, the LGN in RPE65 patients has the potential for plasticity and expansion to a nearly normal volume one year after gene therapy administration.
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.