Stem Cell Therapy for Neurodegenerative Diseases: Strategies for Regeneration against Degeneration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurodegeneration is a general term for the progressive loss of structure and/ or function of neurons, gives rise to dysfunction or death of neurons. Neurodegenerative diseases including Alzheimer´s disease (AD), Parkinson’s disease (PD), Huntington’s disease (HD), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), multiple sclerosis (MS), spinal cord injury (SCI) and brain ischemia (BI) occur as a result of neurodegenerative processes leading to different degrees of paralysis and loss of sensation and cognition in the patients. Unfortunately, no successful cure for neurodegenerative disorders has been developed so far, and most of the currently available pharmacological therapies are mainly palliative. In recent years, stem cells have provided a great opportunity to develop potentially powerful innovative strategies to cure neurodegenerative diseases. Stem cells transplantation is capable of restoring injured neuronal tissue by replacement of the damaged cells via using directly differentiated cells or by protecting of existing healthy neurons and glial cells from further damage, or by repairing through providing a conductive environment in favour of regeneration. Here we have brought together some of these examples, discuss possible therapeutic means using different types of stem cells, mainly adult stem cells (ASCs), to treat neurodegenerative diseases.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".