The definitive version is available at http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v13/n5/pdf/nm1595.pdf
Progress continues in developing reparative interventions to enhance recovery after experimental spinal cord injury (SCI). Much of the progress has been made with rodents, but they differ in some important ways from humans and other primates in size, neuroanatomy, neurophysiology, physiology,
biochemistry, immunology, and behavior. Questions discussed were to what extent SCI rodent models present limitations for ensuring the efficacy and safety of a treatment for humans, and under what
circumstances it would be advantageous or necessary to test treatments in non-human primates before or as an adjunct to clinical trials in human patients. We focus on the recovery of skilled motor control, which enables us to compare and contrast the known differences in the organization of the motor systems and in the behavior among rodents, non-human primates, and humans. In addition, we point out critical issues related to safety in the context of promoting neural connections after an injury
that could lead to malfunction. Non-human primates and humans share a myriad of similarities between the structure of their motor systems and motor behavior. Therefore, the non-human primate SCI model provides many unique advantages for testing experimental effects and understanding the
safeness of a reparative intervention to promote functional recovery following SCI with the appropriate relevance for humans. We conclude that non-human primate studies are critical for the timely and safe
translation of selected potential interventions designed to repair neuromotor impairments in humans.
This paper summarizes the discussions that took place in a workshop sponsored and organized by the Christopher Reeve Foundation (CRF).
Peer reviewed