Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36624495›Full record

ArticleCell & bioscience2023

Electric field stimulation boosts neuronal differentiation of neural stem cells for spinal cord injury treatment via PI3K/Akt/GSK-3β/β-catenin activation.

Qian Liu, Vsevolod Telezhkin, Wenkai Jiang, Yu Gu, Yan Wang, Wei Hong, Weiming Tian, Polina Yarova, Gaofeng Zhang, Simon Ming-Yuen Lee and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cell & bioscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

16 authors at 8 institutions in 7 countries.

Qian LiuInstitute of Biomedical and Health Engineering, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China. liuqian@siat.ac.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1937-0568
Vsevolod TelezhkinInstitute of Biomedical and Health Engineering, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China.
Wenkai JiangSchool of Dentistry, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF14 4XY, UK.
Yu GuSchool of Dentistry, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF14 4XY, UK.
Yan WangInstitute of Biomedical and Health Engineering, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China.
Wei HongThe Brain Cognition and Brain Disease Institute (BCBDI), Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen-Hong Kong Institute of Brain Science-Shenzhen Fundamental Research Institution, Shenzhen, China.
Weiming TianBio-X Centre, School of Life Science and Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150080, China.
Polina YarovaInstitute of Biomedical and Health Engineering, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China.
Gaofeng ZhangSchool of Dentistry, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF14 4XY, UK.
Simon Ming-Yuen LeeState Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine and, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau, Macao, China.
Peng ZhangInstitute of Biomedical and Health Engineering, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China.
Min ZhaoDepartment of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, University of California at Davis, Sacramento, CA, 95616, USA.
Nicholas D AllenSchool of Biosciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF10 3AX, UK.
Emilio HirschDepartment of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Josef PenningerInstitute of Molecular Biotechnology of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, VBC - Vienna BioCenter, Vienna, Austria.
Bing SongInstitute of Biomedical and Health Engineering, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China. bing.song@siat.ac.cn.
Chinese Academy of Sciences · CNCardiff University · GBShenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology · CNHarbin Institute of Technology · CNInstitute of Molecular Biotechnology · ATUniversity of California, Davis · USUniversity of Macau · MOUniversity of Turin · IT

Funding

European Resuscitation Council StG 243261Medical Research Council MC_EX_MR/N50192X/1National Natural Science Foundation of China 81528010National Natural Science Foundation of China 81701230National Natural Science Foundation of China 81903875National Natural Science Foundation of China 82174033
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeural stem cells (NSCs) are considered as candidates for cell replacement therapy in many neurological disorders. However, the propensity for their differentiation to proceed more glial rather than neuronal phenotypes in pathological conditions limits positive outcomes of reparative transplantation. Exogenous physical stimulation to favor the neuronal differentiation of NSCs without extra chemical side effect could alleviate the problem, providing a safe and highly efficient cell therapy to accelerate neurological recovery following neuronal injuries.

resultsWith 7-day physiological electric field (EF) stimulation at 100 mV/mm, we recorded the boosted neuronal differentiation of NSCs, comparing to the non-EF treated cells with 2.3-fold higher MAP2 positive cell ratio, 1.6-fold longer neuronal process and 2.4-fold higher cells ratio with neuronal spontaneous action potential. While with the classical medium induction, the neuronal spontaneous potential may only achieve after 21-day induction. Deficiency of either PI3Kγ or β-catenin abolished the above improvement, demonstrating the requirement of the PI3K/Akt/GSK-3β/β-catenin cascade activation in the physiological EF stimulation boosted neuronal differentiation of NSCs. When transplanted into the spinal cord injury (SCI) modelled mice, these EF pre-stimulated NSCs were recorded to develop twofold higher proportion of neurons, comparing to the non-EF treated NSCs. Along with the boosted neuronal differentiation following transplantation, we also recorded the improved neurogenesis in the impacted spinal cord and the significantly benefitted hind limp motor function repair of the SCI mice.

conclusionsIn conclusion, we demonstrated physiological EF stimulation as an efficient method to boost the neuronal differentiation of NSCs via the PI3K/Akt/GSK-3β/β-catenin activation. Pre-treatment with the EF stimulation induction before NSCs transplantation would notably improve the therapeutic outcome for neurogenesis and neurofunction recovery of SCI.

Indexed as

Electric field stimulationNeural stem cellsNeuronal differentiationPI3K/Akt/GSK-3β/β-cateninSpinal cord injury

Identifiers

PMID36624495
PMCPMC9830810
OpenAlexW4313828796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.