Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Experimental neurotransplantation treatment for hereditary cerebellar ataxias

Cendelin J.

Narrative Review on Scar, published in Cerebellum Ataxias (2016) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
Cerebellum Ataxias (2016)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
27047666
PMCID
PMC4819278
DOI
10.1186/s40673-016-0045-3
Citations
6

Abstract (original English)

Hereditary cerebellar degenerations are a heterogeneous group of diseases often having a detrimental impact on patients' quality of life. Unfortunately, no sufficiently effective causal therapy is available for human patients at present. There are several therapies that have been shown to affect the pathogenetic process and thereby to delay the progress of the disease in mouse models of cerebellar ataxias. The second experimental therapeutic approach for hereditary cerebellar ataxias is neurotransplantation. Grafted cells might provide an effect via delivery of a scarce neurotransmitter, substitution of lost cells if functionally integrated and rescue or trophic support of degenerating cells. The results of cerebellar transplantation research over the past 30 years are reviewed here and potential benefits and limitations of neurotransplantation therapy are discussed.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research