Elezanumab, a human anti-RGMa monoclonal antibody, promotes neuroprotection, neuroplasticity, and neurorecovery following a thoracic hemicompression spinal cord injury in non-human primates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a devastating condition characterized by loss of function, secondary to damaged spinal neurons, disrupted axonal connections, and myelin loss. Spontaneous recovery is limited, and there are no approved pharmaceutical treatments to reduce ongoing damage or promote repair. Repulsive guidance molecule A (RGMa) is upregulated following injury to the central nervous system (CNS), where it is believed to induce neuronal apoptosis and inhibit axonal growth and remyelination. We evaluated elezanumab, a human anti-RGMa monoclonal antibody, in a novel, newly characterized non-human primate (NHP) hemicompression model of thoracic SCI. Systemic intravenous (IV) administration of elezanumab over 6 months was well tolerated and associated with significant improvements in locomotor function. Treatment of animals for 16 weeks with a continuous intrathecal infusion of elezanumab below the lesion was not efficacious. IV elezanumab improved microstructural integrity of extralesional tissue as reflected by higher fractional anisotropy and magnetization transfer ratios in treated vs. untreated animals. IV elezanumab also reduced SCI-induced increases in soluble RGMa in cerebrospinal fluid, and membrane bound RGMa rostral and caudal to the lesion. Anterograde tracing of the corticospinal tract (CST) from the contralesional motor cortex following 20 weeks of IV elezanumab revealed a significant increase in the density of CST fibers emerging from the ipsilesional CST into the medial/ventral gray matter. There was a significant sprouting of serotonergic (5-HT) fibers rostral to the injury and in the ventral horn of lower thoracic regions. These data demonstrate that 6 months of intermittent IV administration of elezanumab, beginning within 24 h after a thoracic SCI, promotes neuroprotection and neuroplasticity of key descending pathways involved in locomotion. These findings emphasize the mechanisms leading to improved recovery of neuromotor functions with elezanumab in acute SCI in NHPs.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".