Protection and repair of the injured spinal cord: a review of completed, ongoing, and planned clinical trials for acute spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past 2 decades, advances in understanding the pathophysiology of spinal cord injury (SCI) have stimulated the recent emergence of several therapeutic strategies that are being examined in Phase I/II clinical trials. Ten randomized controlled trials examining methylprednisolone sodium succinate, tirilizad mesylate, monosialotetrahexosylganglioside, thyrotropin releasing hormone, gacyclidine, naloxone, and nimodipine have been completed. Although the primary outcomes in these trials were laregely negative, a secondary analysis of the North American Spinal Cord Injury Study II demonstrated that when administered within 8 hours of injury, methylprednisolone sodium succinate was associated with modest clinical benefits, which need to be weighed against potential complications. Thyrotropin releasing hormone (Phase II trial) and monosialotetrahexosylganglioside (Phase II and III trials) also showed some promise, but we are unaware of plans for future trials with these agents. These studies have, however, yielded many insights into the conduct of clinical trials for SCI. Several current or planned clinical trials are exploring interventions such as early surgical decompression (Surgical Treatment of Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study) and electrical field stimulation, neuroprotective strategies such as riluzole and minocycline, the inactivation of myelin inhibition by blocking Nogo and Rho, and the transplantation of various cellular substrates into the injured cord. Unfortunately, some experimental and poorly characterized SCI therapies are being offered outside a formal investigational structure, which will yield findings of limited scientific value and risk harm to patients with SCI who are understandably desperate for any intervention that might improve their function. Taken together, recent advances suggest that optimism for patients and clinicians alike is justified, as there is real hope that several safe and effective therapies for SCI may become available over the next decade.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".