Dopaminergic Cell Replacement for Parkinson’s Disease: Addressing the Intracranial Delivery Hurdle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parkinson's disease (PD) is an increasingly prevalent neurological disorder, affecting more than 8.5 million individuals worldwide. α-Synucleinopathy in PD is considered to cause dopaminergic neuronal loss in the substantia nigra, resulting in characteristic motor dysfunction that is the target for current medical and surgical therapies. Standard treatment for PD has remained unchanged for several decades and does not alter disease progression. Furthermore, symptomatic therapies for PD are limited by issues surrounding long-term efficacy and side effects. Cell replacement therapy (CRT) presents an alternative approach that has the potential to restore striatal dopaminergic input and ameliorate debilitating motor symptoms in PD. Despite promising pre-clinical data, CRT has demonstrated mixed success clinically. Recent advances in graft biology have renewed interest in the field, resulting in several worldwide ongoing clinical trials. However, factors surrounding the effective neurosurgical delivery of cell grafts have remained under-studied, despite their significant potential to influence therapeutic outcomes. Here, we focus on the key neurosurgical factors to consider for the clinical translation of CRT. We review the instruments that have been used for cell graft delivery, highlighting current features and limitations, while discussing how future devices could address these challenges. Finally, we review other novel developments that may enhance graft accessibility, delivery, and efficacy. Challenges surrounding neurosurgical delivery may critically contribute to the success of CRT, so it is crucial that we address these issues to ensure that CRT does not falter at the final hurdle.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".