Cited by 329Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryNerve injury and regeneration

Human neural stem cells enhance structural plasticity and axonal transport in the ischaemic brain

Open access
Andres, Robert H., Horie, Nobutaka, Slikker, William, Keren-Gill, Hadar, Zhan, Ke, Sun, Guohua, Manley, Nathan C., Pereira, Marta P. +6 more·2011·Brain

Abstract

Stem cell transplantation promises new hope for the treatment of stroke although significant questions remain about how the grafted cells elicit their effects. One hypothesis is that transplanted stem cells enhance endogenous repair mechanisms activated after cerebral ischaemia. Recognizing that bilateral reorganization of surviving circuits is associated with recovery after stroke, we investigated the ability of transplanted human neural progenitor cells to enhance this structural plasticity. Our results show the first evidence that human neural progenitor cell treatment can significantly increase dendritic plasticity in both the ipsi- and contralesional cortex and this coincides with stem cell-induced functional recovery. Moreover, stem cell-grafted rats demonstrated increased corticocortical, corticostriatal, corticothalamic and corticospinal axonal rewiring from the contralesional side; with the transcallosal and corticospinal axonal sprouting correlating with functional recovery. Furthermore, we demonstrate that axonal transport, which is critical for both proper axonal function and axonal sprouting, is inhibited by stroke and that this is rescued by the stem cell treatment, thus identifying another novel potential mechanism of action of transplanted cells. Finally, we established in vitro co-culture assays in which these stem cells mimicked the effects observed in vivo. Through immunodepletion studies, we identified vascular endothelial growth factor, thrombospondins 1 and 2, and slit as mediators partially responsible for stem cell-induced effects on dendritic sprouting, axonal plasticity and axonal transport in vitro. Thus, we postulate that human neural progenitor cells aid recovery after stroke through secretion of factors that enhance brain repair and plasticity.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/brain/awr094

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • With simple growth factor withdrawal for three weeks, most iPS-NPCs develop into neurons expressing Tuj1 or MAP2.

    “With simple growth factor withdrawal for three weeks, most of these iPS-NPCs develop into neurons expressing Tuj1 or MAP250”

    From GDF10 is a signal for axonal sprouting and functional recovery after stroke (2015) · cites this paper as [50]

    The Materials and methods section identifies the studied NPCs as derived from foetal cortical tissue, not induced pluripotent stem cells. The Results section reports that most transplanted NPCs remained immature after five weeks in the rat brain, but does not test three weeks of growth-factor withdrawal. Searches for iPS-NPC differentiation under that condition found no passage addressing the claim; the different experimental condition is not a contradiction. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In rodents, beneficial effects of neurorestorative treatments were reported even when treatments were initiated days, weeks, or months after stroke.

    “In rodents, beneficial effects were reported even when treatments were initiated days, weeks, or months after stroke.14–20”
  • Treatments promoting neurological recovery by remodelling brain tissue can be instituted during the stroke recovery phase, unlike neuroprotection which requires acute intervention.

    “By contrast with neuroprotection, which requires an acute intervention, treatments promoting neurological recovery by remodelling of brain tissue can be instituted during the stroke recovery phase.10–15”
  • The efficacy of neurorestorative therapies does not depend on successful reperfusion of ischaemic brain tissue, unlike neuroprotection.

    “By sharp contrast with neuroprotection, the efficacy of neuro restorative therapies does not depend on the successful reperfusion of ischaemic brain tissue.11,12,15,17,21”
  • The finding that neural precursor cells prevent ischaemic injury and promote neurological recovery could be attributed to bystander effects from interaction of neuroblasts with microvasculature near the lesion, creating an environment that promotes brain remodelling.

    “The finding that neural precursor cells prevent ischaemic injury and promote neurological recovery could be attributed to bystander effects related to the interaction of neuroblasts with the microvasculature in the vicinity of the ischaemic lesion, which creates an environment that promotes brain remodelling (figure 2).14,15,37,45”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Andres, R. H., Horie, N., Slikker, W., Keren-Gill, H., Zhan, K., Sun, G., Manley, N. C., Pereira, M. P., Sheikh, L. A., McMillan, E. L., Schaar, B. T., Svendsen, C. N., Bliss, T. M., & Steinberg, G. K.
Affiliations
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
  • Bliss, Tonya M.
  • Steinberg, Gary K.
Venue
Brain
Published
2011-05-24
Volume
134
Issue
6
Pages
1777-1789
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2009703235
Cited by
329
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 24
FWCI
10.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Brain (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bern Open Repository and Information System (University of Bern) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Hearst Foundations
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (123221, 117034, PASMP3-123221/1)
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01 NS27292, R01NS058784, P01 NS 37520, P01NS057778, P01NS037520, R01NS027292)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Nerve injury and regeneration
Keywords
neural stem cell transplantation, neural progenitor cells, stroke, cerebral ischemia, structural plasticity, dendritic sprouting, axonal transport, corticospinal axons, functional recovery, vascular endothelial growth factor, thrombospondin, slits, co-culture, brain repair
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Animals, Axonal Transport, Biotin, Cell Survival, Cells, Cultured, Cerebral Cortex, Brain Ischemia, Corpus Callosum, Dendrites, Dextrans, Disease Models, Animal, Fetus, Gene Expression Regulation, Humans, Male, Nerve Tissue Proteins, Neuronal Plasticity, Psychomotor Performance, Rats, Nude, RNA, Messenger, Time Factors, Vibrissae, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Brain Infarction, Rats, Neural Stem Cells

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review