Corrigendum to: Enhancing the alignment of the preclinical and clinical stroke recovery research pipeline: Consensus-based core recommendations from the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable translational working group (International Journal of Stroke, (2017), 12, 5, (462-471), 10.1177/ 1747493017711814);Enhancing the alignment of the preclinical and clinical stroke recovery research pipeline: Consensus-based core recommendations from the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable translational working group

International Journal of Stroke

Volumn 12, Issue 5, 2017, Pages 462-471

  Corbett, Dale ^a   Carmichael, S Thomas ^b   Murphy, Timothy H ^c   Jones, Theresa A ^d   Schwab, Martin E ^e,f   Jolkkonen, Jukka ^g   Clarkson, Andrew N ^h,i   Dancause, Numa ^j   Weiloch, Tadeusz ^k   Johansen Berg, Heidi ^l   Nilsson, Michael ^m   McCullough, Louise D ⁿ   Joy, Mary T ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^e University of Zurich Brain Research Institute   (Switzerland)

^f ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^g UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND   (Finland)

^h UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^j UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^k Department of Clinical Neuroscience   (Sweden)

^l JOHN RADCLIFFE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^m UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE   (Australia)

ⁿ UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

consensus; neurorecovery; neurorehabilitation; Rehabilitation; stroke; stroke recovery; translational medicine

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER;

ARTICLE; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONVALESCENCE; DISEASE MODEL; HUMAN; NEUROIMAGING; NEUROREHABILITATION; NONHUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRECLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSORIMOTOR FUNCTION; TISSUE REACTION; ANIMAL; BRAIN; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; MOTOR ACTIVITY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; SENSATION; STROKE REHABILITATION; TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH;

ANIMALS; BRAIN; HUMANS; MOTOR ACTIVITY; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; SENSATION; STROKE; STROKE REHABILITATION; TRANSLATIONAL MEDICAL RESEARCH;

EID: 85023773620     PISSN: 17474930     EISSN: 17474949     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1747493017738693     Document Type: Erratum

References (73)

1. Hay M, Thomas DW, Craighead JL, Economides C, Rosenthal J. Clinical development success rates for investigational drugs. Nat Biotechnol 2014; 32: 40–51.
2. Marchetti S, Schellens JHM. The impact of FDA and EMEA guidelines on drug development in relation to Phase 0 trials. Br J Cancer 2007; 97: 577–581.
3. Gladstone DJ, Black SE, Hakim AM. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario Centre of Excellence in Stroke Recovery. Toward wisdom from failure: lessons from neuroprotective stroke trials and new therapeutic directions. Stroke 2002; 33: 2123–2136.
4. O’Collins VE, Macleod MR, Donnan GA, Horky LL, van der Worp BH, Howells DW. 1,026 experimental treatments in acute stroke. Ann Neurol 2006; 59: 467–477.
5. Kochanek PM, Bramlett HM, Dixon CE. Approach to modeling, therapy evaluation, drug selection, and biomarker assessments for a multicenter pre-clinical drug screening consortium for acute therapies in severe traumatic brain injury: operation brain trauma therapy. J Neurotrauma 2016; 33: 513–522.
6. Carmichael ST. Emergent properties of neural repair: elemental biology to therapeutic concepts. Ann Neurol 2016; 79: 895–906.
7. Biernaskie J, Chernenko G, Corbett D. Efficacy of rehabilitative experience declines with time after focal ischemic brain injury. J Neurosci 2004; 24: 1245–1254.
8. Murphy TH, Corbett D. Plasticity during stroke recovery: from synapse to behaviour. Nat Rev Neurosci 2009; 10: 861–872.
9. Wahl A-S, Schwab ME. Finding an optimal rehabilitation paradigm after stroke: enhancing fiber growth and training of the brain at the right moment. Front Hum Neurosci 2014; 8: 381.
10. Bernhardt J, Borschmann K, Boyd L. Moving rehabilitation research forward: developing consensus statements for rehabilitation and recovery research. Int J Stroke 2016; 11: 454–458.
11. Fisher M, Feuerstein G, Howells DW. Update of the stroke therapy academic industry roundtable preclinical recommendations. Stroke 2009; 40: 2244–2250.
12. Savitz SI, Chopp M, Deans R. Stem cell therapy as an emerging paradigm for stroke (STEPS) II. Stroke 2011; 42: 825–829.
13. Cumming TB, Marshall RS, Lazar RM. Stroke, cognitive deficits, and rehabilitation: still an incomplete picture. Int J Stroke 2013; 8: 38–45.
14. Fluri F, Schuhmann MK, Kleinschnitz C. Animal models of ischemic stroke and their application in clinical research. Drug Des Dev Ther 2015; 9: 3445–3454.
15. Caleo M. Rehabilitation and plasticity following stroke: insights from rodent models. Neuroscience 2015; 311: 180–194.
16. Jolkkonen J, Jokivarsi K, Laitinen T, Gröhn O. Subacute hemorrhage and resolution of edema in rose bengal stroke model in rats coincides with improved sensorimotor functions. Neurosci Lett 2007; 428: 99–102.
17. Lai S, Panarese A, Spalletti C. Quantitative kinematic characterization of reaching impairments in mice after a stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2015; 29: 382–392.
18. Cho J, Kwon D-H, Kim RG. Remodeling of neuronal circuits after reach training in chronic capsular stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2016; 30: 941–950.
19. Bouet V, Boulouard M, Toutain J. The adhesive removal test: a sensitive method to assess sensorimotor deficits in mice. Nat Protoc 2009; 4: 1560–1564.
20. Bogousslavsky J, Van Melle G, Regli F. The Lausanne Stroke Registry: analysis of 1,000 consecutive patients with first stroke. Stroke 1988; 19: 1083–1092.
21. Corbetta M, Ramsey L, Callejas A. Common behavioral clusters and subcortical anatomy in stroke. Neuron 2015; 85: 927–941.
22. El Amki M, Clavier T, Perzo N, Bernard R, Guichet PO, Castel H. Hypothalamic, thalamic and hippocampal lesions in the mouse MCAO model: potential involvement of deep cerebral arteries? J Neurosci Meth 2015; 254: 80–85.
23. Sharkey J, Ritchie IM, Kelly PAT. Perivascular microapplication of endothelin-1: a new model of focal cerebral ischaemia in the rat. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1993; 13: 865–871.
24. Windle V, Szymanska A, Granter-Button S. An analysis of four different methods of producing focal cerebral ischemia with endothelin-1 in the rat. Exp Neurol 2006; 201: 324–334.
25. Sozmen EG, Hinman JD, Carmichael ST. Models that matter: white matter stroke models. Neurotherapeutics 2012; 9: 349–358.
26. Rouiller EM, Moret V, Liang F. Comparison of the connectional properties of the two forelimb areas of the rat sensorimotor cortex: support for the presence of a premotor or supplementary motor cortical area. Somatosens Mot Res 1993; 10: 269–289.
27. Alstermark B, Ogawa J, Isa T. Lack of monosynaptic corticomotoneuronal EPSPs in rats: disynaptic EPSPs mediated via reticulospinal neurons and polysynaptic EPSPs via segmental interneurons. J Neurophysiol 2004; 91: 1832–1839.
28. Yang H-W, Lemon RN. An electron microscopic examination of the corticospinal projection to the cervical spinal cord in the rat: lack of evidence for cortico-motoneuronal synapses. Exp Brain Res 2003; 149: 458–469.
29. Cook DJ, Teves L, Tymianski M. Treatment of stroke with a PSD-95 inhibitor in the gyrencephalic primate brain - with comments. Nature 2012; 483: 213–217.
30. Mergenthaler P, Meisel A. Do stroke models model stroke? Dis Model Mech 2012; 5: 718–725.
31. Whishaw IQ, Pellis SM. The structure of skilled forelimb reaching in the rat: a proximally driven movement with a single distal rotatory component. Behav Brain Res 1990; 41: 49–59.
32. Montoya CP, Campbell-Hope LJ, Pemberton KD, Dunnett SB. The “staircase test” a measure of independent forelimb reaching and grasping abilities in rats. J Neurosci Meth 1993; 36: 219–228.
33. Allred RP, Jones TA. Experience – a double edged sword for restorative neural plasticity after brain damage. Future Neurol 2008; 3: 189–198.
34. Maclellan CL, Langdon KD, Botsford A, Butt S, Corbett D. A model of persistent learned nonuse following focal ischemia in rats. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2013; 27: 900–907.
35. Jones TA, Schallert T. Use-dependent growth of pyramidal neurons after neocortical damage. J Neurosci 1994; 14: 2140–2152.
36. Biernaskie J, Corbett D. Enriched rehabilitative training promotes improved forelimb motor function and enhanced dendritic growth after focal ischemic injury. J Neurosci 2001; 21: 5272–5280.
37. Metz GA, Whishaw IQ. Cortical and subcortical lesions impair skilled walking in the ladder rung walking test: a new task to evaluate fore-and hindlimb stepping, placing and coordination. J Neurosci Meth 2002; 115: 169–179.
38. Zörner B, Schwab ME. Anti-Nogo on the go: from animal models to a clinical trial. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2010; 1198: E22–E34.
39. Kerr AL, Cheffer KA, Curtis MC, Rodriguez A. Long-term deficits of the paretic limb follow post-stroke compensatory limb use in C57BL/6 mice. Behav Brain Res 2016; 303: 103–108.
40. Clarkson AN, Overman JJ, Zhong S, Mueller R, Lynch G, Carmichael ST. AMPA receptor-induced local brain-derived neurotrophic factor signaling mediates motor recovery after stroke. J Neurosci 2011; 31: 3766–3775.
41. Tennant KA, Jones TA. Sensorimotor behavioral effects of endothelin-1 induced small cortical infarcts in C57BL/6 mice. J Neurosci Meth 2009; 181: 18–26.
42. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, Van der Grond JV, Prevo AJH. Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. Stroke 2003; 34: 2181–2186.
43. Teasell R, Rice D, Richardson M. The next revolution in stroke care. Expert Rev Neurother 2014; 14: 1307–1314.
44. Levin MF, Kleim JA, Wolf SL. What do motor “recovery” and “compensation” mean in patients following stroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009; 23: 313–319.
45. Lambercy O, Schubring-Giese M, Vigaru B, Gassert R, Luft AR, Hosp JA. Sub-processes of motor learning revealed by a robotic manipulandum for rodents. Behav Brain Res 2015; 278: 569–576.
46. Dancause N, Nudo RJ. Shaping plasticity to enhance recovery after injury. Prog Brain Res 2011; 192: 273–295.
47. Stroemer RP, Kent TA, Hulsebosch CE. Neocortical neural sprouting, synaptogenesis, and behavioral recovery after neocortical infarction in rats. Stroke 1995; 26: 2135–2144.
48. Kohmura E, Yuguchi T, Yamada K, Sakaguchi T, Hayakawa T. Recombinant basic fibroblast growth factor spares thalamic neurons from retrograde degeneration after ablation of the somatosensory cortex in rats. Restor Neurol Neurosci 1994; 6: 309–16.
49. Zhang Y-H, Belegu V, Zou Y. Endoplasmic reticulum protein 29 protects axotomized neurons from apoptosis and promotes neuronal regeneration associated with erk signal. Mol Neurobiol 2015; 52: 522–532.
50. Hung C, Lin C-H, Chang H. Astrocytic GAP43 induced by the TLR4/NF-κB/STAT3 axis attenuates astrogliosis-mediated microglial activation and neurotoxicity. J Neurosci 2016; 36: 2027–2043.
51. Bachmann LC, Lindau NT, Felder P, Schwab ME. Sprouting of brainstem-spinal tracts in response to unilateral motor cortex stroke in mice. J Neurosci 2014; 34: 3378–3389.
52. Wahl AS, Omlor W, Rubio JC. Neuronal repair. Asynchronous therapy restores motor control by rewiring of the rat corticospinal tract after stroke. Science 2014; 344: 1250–1255.
53. Carter A, Shulman G, Corbetta M. Why use a connectivity-based approach to study stroke and recovery of function? Neuroimage 2012; 62: 2271–2280.
54. Grefkes C, Fink G. Connectivity-based approaches in stroke and recovery of function. Lancet Neurol 2014; 13: 206–216.
55. Dacosta-Aguayo R, Graña M, Savio A. Prognostic value of changes in resting-state functional connectivity patterns in cognitive recovery after stroke: a 3T fMRI pilot study. Hum Brain Mapp 2014; 35: 3819–3831.
56. Brown CE, Aminoltejari K, Erb H, Winship IR, Murphy TH. In vivo voltage-sensitive dye imaging in adult mice reveals that somatosensory maps lost to stroke are replaced over weeks by new structural and functional circuits with prolonged modes of activation within both the peri-infarct zone and distant sites. J Neurosci 2009; 29: 1719–1734.
57. Cheng MY, Wang EH, Woodson WJ. Optogenetic neuronal stimulation promotes functional recovery after stroke. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2014; 111: 12913–12918.
58. Li S, Nie EH, Yin Y. GDF10 is a signal for axonal sprouting and functional recovery after stroke. Nat Neurosci 2015; 18: 1737–1745.
59. Overman JJ, Clarkson AN, Wanner IB. A role for ephrin-A5 in axonal sprouting, recovery, and activity-dependent plasticity after stroke. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012; 109: E2230–E2239.
60. Silasi G, Murphy TH. Stroke and the connectome: how connectivity guides therapeutic intervention. Neuron 2014; 83: 1354–1368.
61. Stinear C. Prediction of recovery of motor function after stroke. Lancet Neurol 2010; 9: 1228–1232.
62. Ward NS. Does neuroimaging help to deliver better recovery of movement after stroke? Curr Opin Neurol 2015; 28: 323–329.
63. van Meer MPA, Otte WM, van der Marel K. Extent of bilateral neuronal network reorganization and functional recovery in relation to stroke severity. J Neurosci 2012; 32: 4495–4507.
64. van Meer MPA, van der Marel K, van der Sprenkel JWB, Dijkhuizen RM. MRI of bilateral sensorimotor network activation in response to direct intracortical stimulation in rats after unilateral stroke. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2011; 31: 1583–1587.
65. Carmichael ST. Cellular and molecular mechanisms of neural repair after stroke: making waves. Ann Neurol 2006; 59: 735–742.
66. Clarkson AN, Huang BS, Macisaac SE, Mody I, Carmichael ST. Reducing excessive GABA-mediated tonic inhibition promotes functional recovery after stroke. Nature 2010; 468: 305–309.
67. Starkey ML, Schwab ME. Anti-Nogo-A and training: can one plus one equal three? Exp Neurol 2012; 235: 53–61.
68. Zai L, Ferrari C, Dice C. Inosine augments the effects of a nogo receptor blocker and of environmental enrichment to restore skilled forelimb use after stroke. J Neurosci 2011; 31: 5977–5988.
69. Chollet F, Tardy J, Albucher JF. Fluoxetine for motor recovery after acute ischaemic stroke (FLAME): a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Neurol 2011; 10: 123–130.
70. Ward NS, Newton JM, Swayne OB. Motor system activation after subcortical stroke depends on corticospinal system integrity. Brain 2006; 129: 809–819.
71. Ploughman M, Windle V, MacLellan CL, White N, Doré JJ, Corbett D. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor contributes to recovery of skilled reaching after focal ischemia in rats. Stroke 2009; 40: 1490–1495.
72. Lake EMR, Chaudhuri J, Thomason L. The effects of delayed reduction of tonic inhibition on ischemic lesion and sensorimotor function. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2015; 35: 1601–1609.
73. Barak S, Duncan PW. Issues in selecting outcome measures to assess functional recovery after stroke. NeuroRx 2006; 3: 505–524.