Skip to main content
Figure 2 | Journal of Neuroinflammation

Figure 2

From: Central but not systemic administration of XPro1595 is therapeutic following moderate spinal cord injury in mice

Figure 2

Centrally administered XPro1595 improves motor functions and decreases lesion size after SCI. (A) Analysis of BMS scores in mice treated centrally for three consecutive days with either saline, XPro1595, or etanercept showed that XPro1595-treated mice significantly improved their BMS score from 3 to 35 days after SCI compared to both saline- and etanercept-treated mice (*P <0.05 and ***P <0.001, two-way repeated measures ANOVA). All groups of mice significantly improved their BMS score over time (***P <0.001). (B) Rung walk analysis showed that XPro1595-treated mice significantly decreased their number of mistakes compared to saline- and etanercept-treated mice (*P <0.05 and **P <0.01). (C) Thermal stimulation using the Hargreave’s test showed no differences in latency time to withdraw paws between saline-, XPro1595-, and etanercept-treated mice. All mice decreased their latency to remove their paws over time after SCI (****P <0.0001). (D) Luxol fast blue stained thoracic spinal cord sections from mice treated with either saline, XPro1595, or etanercept and allowed 35 days survival after SCI. Scale bar: 100 μm. (E) Analysis of lesion volumes 35 days after SCI showed that the lesion size was significantly smaller in XPro1595-treated mice compared to both saline- and etanercept-treated mice (one-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey’s test). (F) Representative thoracic spinal cord sections from saline-, XPro1595-, and etanercept-treated mice stained for anti-GFAP allowed 35 days survival. Scale bar: 100 μm. (G) Quantification of GFAP protein expression in spinal cord tissue of saline-, XPro1595-, and etanercept-treated mice at 7 and 28 days after SCI. Data are normalized to β-actin protein expression. Results, expressed as percent of control, are the mean ± SEM of three animals per group. *P <0.05, **P <0.01, and ***P <0.001 versus control by one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test.

Back to article page