4.5 Article

Safety and Efficacy of Rose Bengal Derivatives for Glial Scar Ablation in Chronic Spinal Cord Injury

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROTRAUMA
Volume 35, Issue 15, Pages 1745-1754

Publisher

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/neu.2017.5398

Keywords

chronic spinal cord injury; photochemical scar ablation; rose Bengal

Funding

  1. University of Minnesota Foundation (UMF)
  2. State of Minnesota Spinal Cord Injury and Traumatic Brain Injury Research Grant Program [105005]
  3. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [UL1TR000114]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There are no effective therapies available currently to ameliorate loss of function for patients with spinal cord injuries (SCIs). In addition, proposed treatments that demonstrated functional recovery in animal models of acute SCI have failed almost invariably when applied to chronic injury models. Glial scar formation in chronic injury is a likely contributor to limitation on regeneration. We have removed existing scar tissue in chronically contused rat spinal cord using a rose Bengal-based photo ablation approach. In this study, we compared two chemically modified rose bengal derivatives to unmodified rose bengal, both confirming and expanding on our previously published report. Rats were treated with unmodified rose bengal (RB1) or rose bengal modified with hydrocarbon (RB2) or polyethylene glycol (RB3), to determine the effects on scar components and spared tissue post-treatment. Our results showed that RB1 was more efficacious than RB2, while still maintaining minimal collateral effects on spared tissue. RB3 was not taken up by the cells, likely because of its size, and therefore had no effect. Treatment with RB1 also resulted in an increase in serotonin eight days post-treatment in chronically injured spinal cords. Thus, we suggest that unmodified rose Bengal is a potent candidate agent for the development of a therapeutic strategy for scar ablation in chronic SCI.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available