SynthesisCells2024
Targeting NETosis in Acute Brain Injury: A Systematic Review of Preclinical and Clinical Evidence.
Synthesis in Cells, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of NETs Markers with Clinical and Radiological Outcomes in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke Undergoing Thrombectomy: Does Heparin Treatment Modify This?Translational stroke research · 2025Trial
- Targeting Peptidylarginine Deiminases in Neurons and Astrocytes in Central Nervous System Injury-Effects of Pan-PAD Inhibitor Cl-Amidine in an Oxygen-Glucose Deprivation Model of Ischaemia (OGD/R) and LPS Stimulation In Vitro.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Neutrophil Extracellular Traps Are Associated With Early Neurological Deterioration in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Receiving Intravenous Thrombolysis: A Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- The Interaction of Neutrophil Extracellular Traps and Complement in Intracerebral Hemorrhage.Cellular and molecular neurobiology · 2026Review
- Pathophysiological mechanisms underlying early brain injury and delayed cerebral ischemia in the aftermath of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a comprehensive analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute brain injury (ABI) remains one of the leading causes of death and disability world-wide. Its treatment is challenging due to the heterogeneity of the mechanisms involved and the variability among individuals. This systematic review aims at evaluating the impact of anti-histone treatments on outcomes in ABI patients and experimental animals and defining the trend of nucleosome levels in biological samples post injury. We performed a search in Pubmed/Medline and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies involving humans or experimental settings with various causes of ABI. We formulated the search using the PICO method, considering ABI patients or animal models as population (P), comparing pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapy targeting the nucleosome as Intervention (I) to standard of care or no treatment as Control (C). The outcome (O) was mortality or functional outcome in experimental animals and patients affected by ABI undergoing anti-NET treatments. We identified 28 studies from 1246 articles, of which 7 were experimental studies and 21 were human clinical studies. Among these studies, only four assessed the effect of anti-NET therapy on circulating markers. Three of them were preclinical and reported better outcome in the interventional arm compared to the control arm. All the studies observed a significant reduction in circulating NET-derived products. NETosis could be a target for new treatments. Monitoring NET markers in blood and cerebrospinal fluid might predict mortality and long-term outcomes. However, longitudinal studies and randomized controlled trials are warranted to fully evaluate their potential, as current evidence is limited.
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.