MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412097401 · doi:10.1186/s13619-025-00247-9

Schwann cells modified to secrete MANF is a potential cellular therapy for peripheral nerve regeneration

2025· article· en· W4412097401 on OpenAlexafffund
Bhadrapriya Sivakumar, V. Martinez, Nickson Joseph, Johnson V. John, Anil Kumar, Anand Krishnan

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Regeneration · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanCameco (Canada)
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsRegeneration (biology)AxonNeurotrophic factorsNeuroscienceNerve guidance conduitNerve growth factorSchwann cellNeurotrophinBiologyAstrocyteCell biologyCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective therapies for peripheral nerve repair are still lacking despite active research in this field over the past years. The limited knowledge of biomolecules that equally promote axon regeneration and glial cell dynamics, which are critical for nerve regeneration, poses a major challenge in developing effective therapies. Here, we showed that the neurotrophic factor mesencephalic astrocyte-derived neurotrophic factor (MANF) equally promotes axon regeneration and glial cell dynamics favorable for nerve regeneration. Using adult rodent models, we showed that the endogenous expression of MANF is restricted to non-peptidergic sensory neurons. However, supplementation of exogenous MANF promoted the growth of all subtypes of adult sensory neurons. We also demonstrated that exogenous MANF promotes the proliferation and migration of adult primary Schwann Cells (SCs). Furthermore, we showed that local and repeated administration of MANF to injured nerves promotes axon regeneration in mice models. Finally, we devised a therapeutic approach by programming nerve-resident SCs to locally and continuously deliver MANF to injured nerves and showed that this approach improves axon regeneration. Overall, this work developed a therapeutic approach by harnessing the power of SCs as a local delivery system for MANF for nerve repair.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell RegenerationSame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207