ArticleBiological research2024
Neuronal repair after spinal cord injury by in vivo astrocyte reprogramming mediated by the overexpression of NeuroD1 and Neurogenin-2.
Article in Biological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Therapeutic potential of astrocyte transdifferentiated neurons.Neural regeneration research · 2026Article
- Electrical stimulation and stem cell subdural implantation decrease microglia reactivity after spinal cord injury.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Ferroptosis modulation enhances astrocyte-to-neuron conversion induced by a novel chemical cocktail in the hemorrhagic brain.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Article
- Transcriptomics Insights into Spinal Cord Injury for Therapy Development.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Direct neuronal reprogramming for neurological diseases: applications, translational Challenges, and future directions.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- [Electroacupuncture combined with rehabilitation training improves neurological function of mice with cerebral ischemia by promoting astrocyte transdifferentiation].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2025Article
- Effect of in vivo reprogramming of astrocytes combined with exercise training on neurorepair in rats with spinal cord injury.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2025Article
- Cell reprogramming: methods, mechanisms and applications.Cell regeneration (London, England) · 2025Review
- Exosomes: a promising microenvironment modulator for spinal cord injury treatment.International journal of biological sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAs a common disabling disease, irreversible neuronal death due to spinal cord injury (SCI) is the root cause of functional impairment; however, the capacity for neuronal regeneration in the developing spinal cord tissue is limited. Therefore, there is an urgent need to investigate how defective neurons can be replenished and functionally integrated by neural regeneration; the reprogramming of intrinsic cells into functional neurons may represent an ideal solution.
methodsA mouse model of transection SCI was prepared by forceps clamping, and an adeno-associated virus (AAV) carrying the transcription factors NeuroD1 and Neurogenin-2(Ngn2) was injected in situ into the spinal cord to specifically overexpress these transcription factors in astrocytes close to the injury site. 5-bromo-2´-deoxyuridine (BrdU) was subsequently injected intraperitoneally to continuously track cell regeneration, neuroblasts and immature neurons marker expression, neuronal regeneration, and glial scar regeneration. In addition, immunoprotein blotting was used to measure the levels of transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) pathway-related protein expression. We also evaluated motor function, sensory function, and the integrity of the blood-spinal cord barrier(BSCB).
resultsThe in situ overexpression of NeuroD1 and Ngn2 in the spinal cord was achieved by specific AAV vectors. This intervention led to a significant increase in cell regeneration and the proportion of cells with neuroblasts and immature neurons cell properties at the injury site(p < 0.0001). Immunofluorescence staining identified astrocytes with neuroblasts and immature neurons cell properties at the site of injury while neuronal marker-specific staining revealed an increased number of mature astrocytes at the injury site. Behavioral assessments showed that the intervention did not improve The BMS (Basso mouse scale) score (p = 0.0726) and gait (p > 0.05), although the treated mice had more sensory sensitivity and greater voluntary motor ability in open field than the non-intervention mice. We observed significant repair of the BSCB at the center of the injury site (p < 0.0001) and a significant improvement in glial scar proliferation. Electrophysiological assessments revealed a significant improvement in spinal nerve conduction (p < 0.0001) while immunostaining revealed that the levels of TGF-β protein at the site of injury in the intervention group were lower than control group (p = 0.0034); in addition, P70 s6 and PP2A related to the TGF-β pathway showed ascending trend (p = 0.0036, p = 0.0152 respectively).
conclusionsThe in situ overexpression of NeuroD1 and Ngn2 in the spinal cord after spinal cord injury can reprogram astrocytes into neurons and significantly enhance cell regeneration at the injury site. The reprogramming of astrocytes can lead to tissue repair, thus improving the reduced threshold and increasing voluntary movements. This strategy can also improve the integrity of the blood-spinal cord barrier and enhance nerve conduction function. However, the simple reprogramming of astrocytes cannot lead to significant improvements in the striding function of the lower limbs.
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.