The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Regeneration of Lesioned Corticospinal Tract Fibers in the Adult Rat Induced by a Recombinant, Humanized IN-1 Antibody Fragment
Open accessAbstract
Axons in the CNS of higher vertebrates generally fail to regenerate after injury. This lack of regeneration is crucially influenced by neurite growth inhibitory protein constituents of CNS myelin. We have shown previously that a monoclonal antibody (mAb IN-1) capable of binding and neutralizing Nogo-A, a myelin-associated inhibitor of neurite growth, can induce long-distance axonal regeneration and increased structural plasticity with improved functional recovery in rat models of CNS injury. In this paper we demonstrate that a partially humanized, recombinant Fab fragment (rIN-1 Fab) derived from the original mAb IN-1, was able to promote long-distance regeneration of injured axons in the spinal cord of adult rats. When infused into a spinal cord injury site, regrowth of corticospinal fibers in 11 of 18 animals was observed after a survival time of 2 weeks. Regenerating fibers grew for >9 mm beyond the lesion site and arborized profusely in the distal cord. Regenerated fibers formed terminal arbors with varicosities in the spinal cord gray matter, strongly resembling synaptic points of contact to neurons in the spinal cord distal to the lesion. In animals that had received a bovine serum albumin solution or a recombinant IN-1 fragment that had been mutated in the antigen binding site (mutIN-1 Fab), no significant growth beyond normal lesion-induced sprouting was observed. Neutralization of endogenous nerve growth inhibitors represents a novel use of recombinant antibody technology with potential therapeutic applications after traumatic CNS lesions.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Why is Wallerian degeneration in the CNS so slow?
Vargas, M. E., & Barres, B. A. (2007) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.30.051606.094354 · Cited by 510
Fouad, K., Schnell, L., Bunge, M. B., Schwab, M. E., Liebscher, T., & Pearse, D. D. (2005) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3562-04.2005 · Cited by 473
Self-citationRepairing the Injured Spinal Cord
Schwab, M. E. (2002) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1067840 · Cited by 403
Self-citationThe Corticospinal System: From Development to Motor Control
Martin, J. H. (2005) · The Neuroscientist · doi:10.1177/1073858404270843 · Cited by 358
Nogo‐A antibody improves regeneration and locomotion of spinal cord–injured rats
Liebscher, T., Schnell, L., Schnell, D., Scholl, J., Schneider, R., Gullo, M., Fouad, K., Mir, A., Rausch, M., Kindler, D., et al. (2005) · Annals of Neurology · doi:10.1002/ana.20627 · Cited by 351
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Brösamle, C., Huber, A. B., Fiedler, M., Skerra, A., & Schwab, M. E.
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2000-11-01
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 8061-8068
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- OpenAlex
- W1826494938
- Cited by
- 233
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Regeneration of Lesioned Corticospinal Tract Fibers in the Adult Rat Induced by a Recombinant, Humanized IN-1 Antibody Fragment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1523/jneurosci.20-21-08061.2000
- The paper
- Brösamle, C., Huber, A. B., Fiedler, M., Skerra, A., & Schwab, M. E. (2000). Regeneration of Lesioned Corticospinal Tract Fibers in the Adult Rat Induced by a Recombinant, Humanized IN-1 Antibody Fragment. The Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.20-21-08061.2000
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.