ReviewCurrent opinion in pharmacology2024
Optic nerve regeneration: Potential treatment approaches.
Review in Current opinion in pharmacology, 2024. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epidermal growth factor receptor modulation for neural repair: Implications for neurodegenerative disease therapy.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2026Review
- Multifunctional nanoplatforms for optic nerve regeneration integrating anti-inflammatory, epigenetic, and ionic mechanisms with emerging artificial intelligence technologies.Cell biology and toxicology · 2025Review
- Applications of Modern Cell Therapies: The Latest Data in Ophthalmology.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Zebrafish optic nerve injury results in systemic retinal ganglion cell dedifferentiation.PLoS genetics · 2025Article
- Optimized intraorbital optic nerve exposure: a translational surgical paradigm for neural regeneration in rat model.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Local delivery of nerve growth factor in traumatic optic neuropathy: neuroprotective effects in a rat model.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The optic nerve, predominantly constituted by the axons of retinal ganglion cells (RGCs), lacks the ability to regenerate and re-establish function after injury. RGCs are crucial for visual function, and thus, RGC death contributes to the development of numerous progressive neurodegenerative optic neuropathies including glaucoma, ischemic optic neuropathy, and optic neuritis. Regenerating optic nerve axons poses numerous challenges due to factors such as the intricate and inhibitory conditions that exist within their environment, intrinsic breaks to regeneration, and the geometric tortuosity that offers physical hindrance to axon growth. However, recent research advancements offer hope for clinically meaningful regeneration for those who suffer from optic nerve damage. In this review, we highlight the current treatment approaches for optic nerve axon regeneration.
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.