MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103706525 · doi:10.3171/foc.2009.26.2.e3

The role of neurotrophic factors in nerve regeneration

2009· review· en· W2103706525 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurosurgical FOCUS · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGlial cell line-derived neurotrophic factorNeurotrophic factorsAxonAxotomyRegeneration (biology)NeurotrophinNeuroscienceNerve growth factorBiologyNerve guidance conduitBrain-derived neurotrophic factorCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review considers the 2 sources of neurotrophic factors in the peripheral nervous system (PNS), the neurons and the nonneuronal cells in the denervated distal nerve stumps, and their role in axon regeneration. Morphological assessment of regenerative success in response to administration of exogenous growth factors after nerve injury and repair has indicated a role of the endogenous neurotrophic factors from Schwann cells in the distal nerve stump. However, the increased number of axons may reflect more neurons regenerating their axons and/or increased numbers of axon sprouts from the same number of neurons. Using fluorescent dyes to count neurons that regenerated their axons across a suture site and into distal nerve stumps, brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and glial cell-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) were found not to increase the number of neurons that regenerated their axons after immediate nerve repair. Nevertheless, the factors did reverse the deleterious effect of delayed nerve repair, indicating that the axons that regenerate into the distal nerve stump normally have access to sufficient levels of endogenous neurotrophic factors to sustain their regeneration, while neurons that do not have access to these factors require exogenous factors to sustain axon regeneration. Neurons upregulate neurotrophic factors after axotomy. The upregulation is normally slow, beginning after 7 days and occurring in association with a protracted period of axonal regeneration in which axons grow out from the proximal nerve stump across a suture site over a period of 1 month in rodents. This staggered axon regeneration across the suture site is accelerated by a 1-hour period of low-frequency electrical stimulation that simultaneously accelerates the expression of BDNF and its trkB receptor in the neurons. Elevation of the level of BDNF after 2 days to > 3 times that found in unstimulated neurons was accompanied by elevation of the level of cAMP and followed by accelerated upregulation of growth-associated genes, tubulin, actin, and GAP-43 and downregulation of neurofilament protein. Elevation of cAMP levels via rolipram inhibition of phosphodiesterase 4 mimicked the effect of the low-frequency electrical stimulation. In conclusion, the enhanced upregulation of neurotrophic factors in the electrically stimulated axotomized neurons accelerates axon outgrowth into the distal nerve stumps where endogenous sources of growth factors in the Schwann cells support the regeneration of the axons toward the denervated targets. The findings provide strong support for endogenous neurotrophic factors of axotomized neurons and of denervated Schwann cells playing a critical role in supporting axon regeneration in the PNS.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it