Traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains a significant public health concern, with current treatments primarily addressing acute symptoms while failing to mitigate secondary injuries that contribute to long-term neurological deficits. This article discusses emerging therapeutic strategies, including stem cell–based approaches, biomaterials, and exosome-based treatments, which show promise in promoting tissue repair, reducing inflammation, and enhancing neurological function. Despite these advancements, challenges such as immune rejection, scalability, and the absence of standardized clinical protocols persist, underscoring the need for further refinement and interdisciplinary collaboration across molecular biology, bioengineering, and clinical neuroscience. In particular, integrating regenerative strategies with advanced biomaterials may result in synergistic effects improving recovery outcomes. Additionally, this article explores the potential of novel materials, such as carbogenic nanozymes, and innovations in tissue engineering, including hydrogels and nanocarriers, to mitigate oxidative stress, preserve blood–brain barrier integrity, and modulate neuroinflammation. Furthermore, macrophage-based therapies, such as backpack–macrophage therapy and photobiomodulation (PBM) are emerging as promising interventions to address chronic TBI complications, including post-traumatic epilepsy and cognitive impairments. However, further research is needed to optimize treatment parameters and overcome barriers to clinical translation. Ultimately, the integration of these advanced therapeutic strategies, combined with a deeper understanding of neuroinflammatory and neurodegenerative processes, has the potential to revolutionize TBI treatment, offering improved recovery and quality of life for affected individuals.
Citation: Moawiah M Naffaa. Innovative therapeutic strategies for traumatic brain injury: integrating regenerative medicine, biomaterials, and neuroengineering[J]. AIMS Bioengineering, 2025, 12(1): 90-144. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2025005
Related Papers:
[1]
Hengjie Peng, Changcheng Xiang .
A Filippov tumor-immune system with antigenicity. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 19699-19718.
doi: 10.3934/math.20231004
[2]
Shifan Luo, Dongshu Wang, Wenxiu Li .
Dynamic analysis of a SIV Filippov system with media coverage and protective measures. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 13469-13492.
doi: 10.3934/math.2022745
[3]
Saima Rashid, Fahd Jarad, Sobhy A. A. El-Marouf, Sayed K. Elagan .
Global dynamics of deterministic-stochastic dengue infection model including multi specific receptors via crossover effects. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 6466-6503.
doi: 10.3934/math.2023327
[4]
Liang Hong, Jie Li, Libin Rong, Xia Wang .
Global dynamics of a delayed model with cytokine-enhanced viral infection and cell-to-cell transmission. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 16280-16296.
doi: 10.3934/math.2024788
[5]
Noufe H. Aljahdaly, Nouf A. Almushaity .
A diffusive cancer model with virotherapy: Studying the immune response and its analytical simulation. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 10905-10928.
doi: 10.3934/math.2023553
[6]
Ru Meng, Yantao Luo, Tingting Zheng .
Stability analysis for a HIV model with cell-to-cell transmission, two immune responses and induced apoptosis. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 14786-14806.
doi: 10.3934/math.2024719
[7]
Ahmed M. Elaiw, Ghadeer S. Alsaadi, Aatef D. Hobiny .
Global co-dynamics of viral infections with saturated incidence. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 13770-13818.
doi: 10.3934/math.2024671
[8]
Irina Volinsky, Svetlana Bunimovich-Mendrazitsky .
Mathematical analysis of tumor-free equilibrium in BCG treatment with effective IL-2 infusion for bladder cancer model. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16388-16406.
doi: 10.3934/math.2022896
[9]
S. M. E. K. Chowdhury, J. T. Chowdhury, Shams Forruque Ahmed, Praveen Agarwal, Irfan Anjum Badruddin, Sarfaraz Kamangar .
Mathematical modelling of COVID-19 disease dynamics: Interaction between immune system and SARS-CoV-2 within host. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2618-2633.
doi: 10.3934/math.2022147
[10]
Qiongru Wu, Ling Yu, Xuezhi Li, Wei Li .
Dynamic analysis of a Filippov blood glucose insulin model. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 18356-18373.
doi: 10.3934/math.2024895
Abstract
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains a significant public health concern, with current treatments primarily addressing acute symptoms while failing to mitigate secondary injuries that contribute to long-term neurological deficits. This article discusses emerging therapeutic strategies, including stem cell–based approaches, biomaterials, and exosome-based treatments, which show promise in promoting tissue repair, reducing inflammation, and enhancing neurological function. Despite these advancements, challenges such as immune rejection, scalability, and the absence of standardized clinical protocols persist, underscoring the need for further refinement and interdisciplinary collaboration across molecular biology, bioengineering, and clinical neuroscience. In particular, integrating regenerative strategies with advanced biomaterials may result in synergistic effects improving recovery outcomes. Additionally, this article explores the potential of novel materials, such as carbogenic nanozymes, and innovations in tissue engineering, including hydrogels and nanocarriers, to mitigate oxidative stress, preserve blood–brain barrier integrity, and modulate neuroinflammation. Furthermore, macrophage-based therapies, such as backpack–macrophage therapy and photobiomodulation (PBM) are emerging as promising interventions to address chronic TBI complications, including post-traumatic epilepsy and cognitive impairments. However, further research is needed to optimize treatment parameters and overcome barriers to clinical translation. Ultimately, the integration of these advanced therapeutic strategies, combined with a deeper understanding of neuroinflammatory and neurodegenerative processes, has the potential to revolutionize TBI treatment, offering improved recovery and quality of life for affected individuals.
1.
Introduction
Epidemics have posed a significant threat to global public health over the years. The emergence of COVID-19 in 2019 has had a profound impact on human health, the global economy, and social behavior. Nevertheless, the effective addressing of disease transmission remains a challenge. Mathematical modeling has emerged as a crucial tool in tackling this challenge. Numerous disease models have been developed in existing literature to study and control the spread of epidemics. It is important to note that mathematical models based on ordinary differential equations (i.e., classical derivatives) have their limitations and may not accurately capture biological phenomena. On the other hand, fractional models can offer a relatively more accurate understanding of disease outbreaks. Therefore, they are increasingly being used to simulate disease transmission with higher accuracy. Relevant literature on fractional models can be found in [1,2,3,4,5]. In addition, as another epidemic that endangers human health, the acute viral infection caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) studied in this paper is also a hot issue in society. Many researchers aim to capture the dynamics between viral and antiviral immune responses through mathematical modeling.
As we all know, HIV, which causes AIDS, can directly infect the immune system (mainly regulating CD4+ T cells). The consequences of this impact are a continuous decrease in the number of CD4+ T cells, ultimately leading to the death of infected individuals due to immune system collapse. The highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) currently in widespread use has been shown to improve the survival probability of HIV patients and reduce the incidence rate [6,7]. This therapy effectively suppresses the plasma virus to levels below the standard detection for extended periods and even halts viral evolution [8,9]. However, many complex problems arise after long-term use, such as obvious drug resistance, and, due to the side effects of antiviral drugs, some AIDS patients have poor compliance with antiviral therapy [10,11,12].
In fact, numerous mathematical models have been put forth to describe the dynamics of HIV and elucidate various phenomena. The effect of antiviral therapy has been investigated by some researchers [13,14,15,16]. In their work, Xiao et al.[13] analyzed the free terminal time optimal tracking control problem to determine the optimal multidrug therapy for HIV, considering both the optimal time frame and therapeutic strategies. The literature [17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24] incorporated the expansion delay of immune cells to discuss the local and global stability of equilibrium solutions. In particular, [17] indicates that such an unstable equilibrium will exhibit oscillatory solutions of increasing amplitude. In recent years, realizing gradually the multiple effects of spatial heterogeneity and mobility, many scholars utilized the reaction-diffusion equation to investigate the spatial effect of viral infection [23,24,25].
Several recent clinical studies have exhibited that structured treatment interruptions (STIs) can be used for early treatment of HIV infection to achieve sustained specific immunity. For some chronically infected individuals who may require lifelong medication, this may be a beneficial option as it can help patients rebuild their immune system during periods of non-medication[26]. While numerous mathematical models have been employed for simulating continuous therapy [27,28,29], there is scant investigation on modeling structured interruptions in treatment.
To investigate strategies for STIs, Tang et al.[30] suggested a piecewise model for delineating CD4 cell-guided STIs. The system provides an explanation for some controversial clinical research results. In 2017, Tang et al.[31] proposed a mathematical model to describe the dynamics of the interplay between the virus and the immune system. This model takes into consideration the structured treatment guided by effector cells while also incorporating the use of combined antiretroviral therapy and interleukin (IL)-2 treatment. However, they posit a linear growth pattern for the HIV virus [31], which does not accurately reflect the true dynamics of the virus. Some clinical facts show that the growth of HIV may have a saturation effect[32].
To better illustrate the non-linear evolutionary characteristics of the interplay between virus and immune response, the immunosuppressive infection model was devised by Komarova et al.[33]. The model is given as follows:
{dydt=ry(1−yK)−ay−pyz,dzdt=cyz1+ηy−bz−qyz,
(1.1)
The assumptions in model (1.1) are as follows:
❑ y and z represent the population sizes of the virus and immune cells, respectively. The virus population is assumed to grow logistically: The replication rate at low viral loads, denoted as r, is expected to decrease linearly with an increase in the viral load until it becomes zero at a viral load K.
❑ c represents the immune intensity, while the proliferation term is denoted as cyz/(1+hy). Thus, the assessment of immune cell proliferation depends on both the immune cells and the virus. The inhibitory effect of the virus on the proliferation of immune cells is represented by the variable η.
❑ The viral elimination rate, denoted as a, is a result of natural decay and antiretroviral therapy. Immune cells, which have the ability to kill the virus at a rate pyz, also have a death rate b. Furthermore, these immune cells can be inhibited by the virus at a rate qyz.
The study conducted in [33] aimed to investigate the optimal timing and duration of antiviral treatment. The research elucidates the presence of bistability dynamics, wherein a stable state without immunity coexists alongside a stable state with immunity. Meanwhile, this model demonstrates the attainment of sustained immunity following the interruption of therapy. Additionally, Wang et al.[34] expanded on this model and uncovered that bistability arises within the range delineated by the post-treatment control threshold and the elite control threshold.
Following the pioneer works above[30,31,32,33,34], in this thesis, we extend model (1.1) by proposing a Filippov immunosuppressive infection model with viral logistic growth and effector cell-guided therapy. We have proposed the following model:
We assume that the sole course of action is to administer antiretroviral therapy to the patient if the number of effector cells exceeds the critical value ET. Conversely, when the count falls below the ET threshold, a combination of antiretroviral therapy and immune therapy is concurrently implemented. In this context, ε represents the rate at which effector cells grow as a result of immune therapy, like the treatment of interleukin (IL)-2. As the interpretation of other parameters is consistent with a model (1.1), all parameters in (1.2) remain nonnegative.
This paper presents a switching model with viral load logistic growth to analyze effector cell-guided treatment and assess the threshold strategy's effectiveness. The following section provides an overview of the model, defining the switching system, and summarizing the dynamic behavior of the subsystems. Additionally, in Section 3, there is a discussion on sliding mode and dynamics, exploring the presence of a sliding domain and pseudo-equilibrium. The global dynamics of the proposed model are examined in Section 4, while Section 5 focuses on the boundary equilibrium bifurcation of the system. Finally, the paper concludes with discussions and biological implications.
2.
Filippov model and preliminaries
2.1. Model formulation
By rearranging the system (1.2), we can obtain a generic planar system in the form of Filippov given by
{dydt=ry(1−yK)−ay−pyz,dzdt=cyz1+ηy−bz−qyz+ϕεz,
(2.1)
with
{ϕ=0,ifH(X)=z−ET>0,ϕ=1,ifH(X)=z−ET<0.
(2.2)
Systems (2.1) and (2.2) describe a Filippov immunosuppressive infection model where (2.1) is considered a free system when ϕ=0(i.e.,z>ET), indicating that the patient receives antiretroviral therapy. On the other hand, (2.1) as a control system when ϕ=1(i.e.,z<ET) reflects the simultaneous utilization of antiretroviral therapy and immune therapy.
Let R2+={X=(y,z)T|y⩾0,z⩾0},S1={X∈R2+|H(X)>0}, and S2={X∈R2+|H(X)<0} with H(X) being a smooth scale function. For convenience, we further denote
We can rewrite model (1.2) to represent the Filippov system as follows:
˙X={FS1(X),X∈S1,FS2(X),X∈S2.
(2.4)
The discontinuous boundary Σ that separates the two areas can be represented as:
Σ={X∈R2+|H(X)=0}.
(2.5)
It is evident that R2+=S1∪Σ∪S2. Henceforth, we shall designate the Filippov system (2.4) as subsystem S1 when it is defined within region S1, and as subsystem S2 when defined within region S2.
where ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ represents the standard scalar product and HX(X) denotes the gradient of H(X) that remains nonvanishing on Σ. FSiH(X)=FSi⋅gradH(X) is the Lie derivative of H with respect to the vector field FSi(i=1,2) at X. To analyze the direction of the vector field [FS1(X),FS2(X)], through a specific point X∈Σ, we categorize the areas on Σ based on whether the vector field points towards it:
(a) Crossing region:
Σc={X∈Σ|FS1H(X)⋅FS2H(X)>0},
(2.7)
(b) Sliding region:
Σs={X∈Σ|FS1H(X)<0,FS2H(X)>0},
(2.8)
(c) Escaping region:
Σe={X∈Σ|FS1H(X)>0,FS2H(X)<0}.
(2.9)
Throughout the paper, it is crucial to have a clear understanding of the definitions regarding all types of equilibria in Filippov systems [35,36].
Definition 2.1.If FS1(X∗)=0,H(X∗)>0, or FS2(X∗)=0, H(X∗)<0, then X∗ is defined as a real equilibrium of the Filippov system (2.4). Analogously, if FS1(X∗)=0, H(X∗)<0, or FS2(X∗)=0,H(X∗)>0, then X∗ is a virtual equilibrium. Both the real and virtual equilibriums are named as regular equilibria.
Definition 2.2.If X∗ is an equilibrium of the sliding mode of system (2.4), and satisfies (1−λ)FS1(X∗)+λFS2(X∗)=0,H(X∗)=0 with 0<λ<1, then X∗ is a pseudo-equilibrium, where
λ=⟨HX(X∗),FS1(X∗)⟩⟨HX(X∗),FS1(X∗)−FS2(X∗)⟩.
(2.10)
Definition 2.3.If FS1(X∗)=0,H(X∗)=0, or FS2(X∗)=0,H(X∗)=0, then X∗ is defined a boundary equilibrium of Filippov system (2.4).
Definition 2.4.If FS1H(X∗)=0 but F2S1H(X∗)>0(F2S1H(X∗)<0), then X∗ is a visible (invisible) Σ-fold point of FS1. The same definition applies to FS2.
Definition 2.5.If X∗∈Σs and FS1H(X∗)=0 or FS2H(X∗)=0, then X∗ is defined a tangent point of Filippov system (2.4).
2.2. Qualitative analysis of subsystems
The model equation for the free system S1 is as follows:
{dydt=ry(1−yK)−ay−pyz,dzdt=cyz1+ηy−bz−qyz.
(2.11)
We can easily define a threshold R0=ra. If R0<1, subsystem S1 has only one uninfected equilibrium E10=(0,0); if R0>1, then subsystem S1 also has an immune-free equilibrium E11=(y1,0)=(K(1−ar),0).
We certainly get an equation for y
S1(y)=qηy2−(c−q−bη)y+b=0,
(2.12)
It can be confirmed that S1(y)=0 has a sole solution when c=q+bη±2√bqη. Denote c1=q+bη−2√bqη and c2=q+bη+2√bqη. Thus, we have two possible positive roots
y11=B−√B2−4bqη2qη,y12=B+√B2−4bqη2qη,
(2.13)
when c>c2, where B=c−q−bη. Substituting y11 or y12 into the first equation of (2.11), we get
z1i=r(1−y1iK)−ap=a[ra(1−y1iK)−1]p(i=1,2).
(2.14)
Let R1i=ra(1−y1iK)(i=1,2). Hence, the subsystem S1 has two immune equilibriums E11=(y11,z11) and E12=(y12,z12) when R1i>1 and c>c2 are satisfied.
In fact, subsystem S1 has been extensively examined in a previous study. Therefore, we will provide an overview of the main findings without delving into specific calculations. For more details on the discussion of the stability analysis of this system, please consult [34]. Here, we define three thresholds by referring [34], i.e., c∗=q+bη+2qηK(1−ar),c∗∗=q+bη+bK(1−ar)+qηK(1−ar), and threshold Rc1=1+r√bqηaqηK. Moreover, we have the following
Lemma 2.1.If R0<1, the infection-free equilibrium E10 is globally asymptotically stable (GAS). If R0>1, we have E11 as locally asymptotically stable (LAS) when 0<c<c2 or c2<c<c∗∗, and E11 is unstable when c>c∗∗. The immune equilibrium E11 is LAS when Rc1>R0>1 and c>c∗∗ or R0>Rc1 and c2<c. Suppose R0>Rc1>1 and c2<c<c∗, then positive equilibrium E11 is LAS and E12 is a unstable saddle.
Remark 2.1.For R0>Rc1>1 and c2<c<c∗∗, subsystem S1 has bistable behavior, i.e., E11 and E11 are bistable but the equilibrium E12 is an unstable saddle. In other cases, subsystem S1 does not exhibit bistable behavior. Note that the post-treatment control threshold is represented by c2, while the elite control threshold is denoted as c∗∗. The range between c2 and c∗∗ is referred to as the bistable interval.
Dynamical analysis of the subsystem S1 is presented in Table 1.
The basic reproduction number is also R0=ra for subsystem S2. Similarly, we can get uninfected equilibrium E20=(0,0) and the immune-free equilibrium E21=(K(1−ar),0). Thus, we use E10=E20=E0 and E21=E11=E1 in the following.
Using the same method as subsystem S1, we can derive the following quadratic equation for y
S2(y)=qηy2−(c−q−bη+εη)y+b−ε=0.
(2.16)
Let c3=q+(b−ε)η−2√qη(b−ε) and c4=q+(b−ε)η+2√qη(b−ε), then there are two possible positive roots
y2i=D∓√D2−4qη(b−ε)2qη(i=1,2),
(2.17)
when c>c4, where D=c−q−bη+εη. It follows that
z21=a[ra(1−y21K)−1]p,z22=a[ra(1−y22K)−1]p.
(2.18)
In fact, we can obtain y21<y11<y12<y22 by doing a simple calculation. Now, we define R2i=ra(1−y2iK)(i=1,2). For subsystem S2, we have two positive equilibriums E21=(y21,z21) and E22=(y22,z22) when c>c4, b>ε and R2i>1(i=1,2) hold. Furthermore, following a similar approach to subsystem S1, we can also define thresholds c†=q+(b−ε)η+2qηK(1−ar), c††=q+(b−ε)η+b−εK(1−ar)+qηK(1−ar), and Rc2=1+r√qη(b−ε)aqηK. Meanwhile, we have the following results about the behaviors of subsystem S2 by using the consistent method with S1.
Lemma 2.2.Suppose R0<1, the equilibrium E20 is GAS. Suppose R0>1, then E21 is LAS when 0<c<c4 or c4<c<c††, and E21 is unstable when c>c††. If Rc2>R0>1 and c>c†† or R0>Rc2 and c4<c, the subsystem S2 has a locally asymptotically stable immune equilibrium E21; if R0>Rc2>1 and c4<c<c†, then positive equilibrium E21 is LAS and E22 is an unstable saddle.
Dynamical analysis of the subsystem S2 is shown in Table 2.
In this section, we will provide a brief overview of the definitions pertaining to the sliding segment and crossing segment discussed in Section 2. We have σ(X)=⟨HX(X),FS1(X)⟩⋅⟨HX(X),FS2(X)⟩. Here, HX(X)=(∂H∂y,∂H∂z) is the non-vanishing gradient on the discontinuity boundary Σ, where H=z−ET. Therefore, we denote
σ(X)=(cyz1+ηy−bz−qyz)(cyz1+ηy−bz−qyz+εz),
(3.1)
and calculating the inequality σ(X)<0 obtains y21<y<y11 and y12<y<y22. Naturally, we can verify that there are ⟨FS1,HX(X)⟩=cyz1+ηy−bz−qyz<0 and ⟨FS2,HX(X)⟩=cyz1+ηy−bz−qyz+εz>0 for y21<y<y11 or y12<y<y22. Therefore, the Filippov system (2.4) always comprises two sliding segments, which can be obtained as
Naturally, the crossing region we can get is Σc={(y,z)∈R2+|0<y<y21, or y11<y<y12, or y>y22,z=ET}. Notably, every trajectory within the segment {(y,z)∈R2+|0<y<y21 or y>y22,z=ET} will intersect the z=ET line, moving from region S1 to S2. Similarly, the trajectory within the segment {(y,z)∈R2+|y11<y<y12,z=ET} will cross the z=ET line, transitioning from region S2 to S1.
The Filippov convex method is employed in this study to analyze the sliding domain and sliding mode dynamics of the switching system (2.4). According to Definition 2.2, we have
Therefore, the dynamic equation of the switching system (2.4) on the sliding mode domain is
{dydt=ry(1−yK)−ay−pyET,dzdt=0.
(3.6)
There exists one positive equilibrium Ec=(yc,ET), where yc=K(1−a+pETr). We can easily obtain that r>a+pET. According to Definition 2.2, the equilibrium Ec is referred to as a pseudo-equilibrium.
(i.e.,z11<ET<z21). Thus, the equilibrium Ec is located on the sliding segment Σ1s when z11<ET<z21. It can be readily confirmed that cyz/(1+hy)<0 holds on the segment Σ2s. Similariy, if y12<yc<y22, we conclude that
(i.e.,z22<ET<z12). Under this circumstance, the pseudo-equilibrium Ec is located on the sliding segment Σ2s={(y,z)|y12<y<y22,z=ET} for z22<ET<z12, meanwhile, we can get cyz/(1+hy)>0 holds on the segment Σ1s.
Theorem 3.1.If z11<ET<z21, system (2.4) has one pseudo-equilibrium Ec=(K(1−a+pETr),ET) on the sliding segment Σ1s, which is always LAS when it exists; analogously, if z22<ET<z12, then pseudo-equilibrium Ec is LAS on the sliding segment Σ2s.
Proof. Without loss of generality, we only consider the proof for the first case. Let y′=ry(1−yK)−ay−pyz.=g(y). Substituting H=z−ET=0 into the g(y), we will get g(y)=−rKy2+(r−a−pET)y. Based on the function g(y), we know g(y21)>0,g(y11)<0. Further, we note that y′=g(y), then g′(y)=−2rKy+(r−a−pET). Naturally g′(yc)=−2rK⋅K(1−a+pETr)+(r−a−pET)=−r+a+pET<0, which implies that Ec is LAS. Thus, the equilibrium Ec is locally stable provided it is feasible. Likewise, we can use a similar method to prove Ec is LAS on the Σ2s.
4.
Global dynamics of system (2.3)
This part focuses on examining the global dynamics of a switching system. To certify the global stability of the equilibrium of the system (2.4), it is necessary to rule out the presence of limit cycles. Firstly, we let the Dulac function be V(y,z)=1/yz. For subsystem Si(i=1,2), this gives ∂∂y(V(y,z)dydt)+∂∂z(V(y,z)dzdt)=−rzK<0. Based on the Dulac-Bendixson criterion, it can be concluded that there are no limit cycles present. Consequently, we can derive the following Lemma 4.1.
Lemma 4.1.There exists no limit cycle that is entirely situated within the region Si(i=1,2).
Next, we will exclude limit cycles that intersect with the sliding segment or surrounding the whole sliding segment. Note that this exclusion is necessary for us to follow up with better explanations.
Lemma 4.2.There does not exist a limit cycle that includes a portion of the sliding segment.
Proof. We need to establish the proofs of Lemma 4.2 for the cases ET>z21, z11<ET<z21, z12<ET<z11, z22<ET<z12, and 0<ET<z22.
If ET>z21, the absence of pseudo-equilibrium is deduced from the demonstration of Theorem 3.1, which indicates the presence of dy/dt<0 on the sliding segments Σis(i=1,2) under such circumstances. Therefore, any trajectory reaching Σ1s or Σ2s will approach the boundary points (y21,ET), and E21 is a real stable node. Note that (y21,ET) is visible Σ-fold points of subsystem S2 (see Definition 2.4 in Section 2). Thus, the trajectory initiating at (y21,ET) tends to either approach the stable state E21 directly or in a spiral manner [shown in Figure 1(a)], without touching the switching line again. Therefore, there are no closed orbits that include any part of the sliding segment.
Figure 1.
The blue lines represent possible closed tracks that contain a portion of the sliding segment.
If z11<ET<z21, we know that the pseudo-equilibrium Ec is LAS on the segment Σ1s (see Theorem 3.1 in Section 3) under this scenario, which means the nonexistence of a limit cycle that contains part of the sliding segment Σ1s. Beyond that, there is dy/dt<0 on the segment {(y,z)|y12<y<y22,z=ET} when z11<ET<z21. This implies that the orbits reaching sliding segment Σ2s firstly slide towards the boundary point (y12,ET), which is a visible Σ-fold point as well, enter into the S1, and then tend to Ec. Therefore, there exists no limit cycle incorporating any portion of the sliding segment.
If z12<ET<z11, there exists one real stable equilibrium E11 in region S1. Thus, we can employ a way similar to that applied in the first case to demonstrate the conclusion [shown in Figure 1(b)].
If z22<ET<z12, we have that pseudo-equilibrium Ec is LAS on the sliding segment Σ2s. We get dy/dt>0 on the segment Σ1s in this case. Clearly, the proof process is similar to the second case, so we have omitted here.
If 0<ET<z22, we know that there is no pseudo-equilibrium, and dy/dt>0 holds on the sliding segments Σis(i=1,2), since there exists a stable equilibrium E1, and (y22,ET) is visible Σ-fold point. Thus, the orbits starting from segments Σis(i=1,2) move from the left to the right along the sliding line to the boundary point (y22,ET). Then, they proceed into region S1 and eventually converge to E1, without experiencing hitting the switching line z=ET again. Thus, the proof for Lemma 4.2 is thereby completed.
Significantly, the following lemma is similar to previous studies [37,38], which is obtained by constructing a cycle around the sliding segment and then using the method of counter-evidence to draw a contradiction.
Lemma 4.3.There exists no closed orbit containing the whole sliding segment.
Combined with analysis in Section 2, we obtain the two sets of key parameters, i.e., R0,Rc1,Rc2, and c2,c4,c∗,c∗∗,c†,c††. They are the crucial elements that determine the dynamic behavior of the system (2.4). Next, we will discuss the global dynamics of the proposed piecewise system based on the relationships between the parameters mentioned earlier. Considering that there exists only one uninfected equilibrium E0 for both subsystem S1 and S2 when R0<1, we will not delve further into it. Here, we will focus on the following situations:
Case(a):R0>Rc1>Rc2>1,
Case(b):Rc1>Rc2>R0>1,
Case(c):Rc1>R0>Rc2>1.
4.1. The global dynamics for Case (a)
The global dynamics for Case (a) are the main focus of this section. Note that the analysis methods for the three cases are analogous, thus we have omitted detailed proofs for the other cases. According to the results in Section 2, it can be seen that the relationship between immune intensity c and parameters c2,c4,c∗,c∗∗,c†,c†† have a significant impact on the dynamics of the system (2.4). Through direct analysis, we will consider the under situations:
c4<c<c2;c2<c<c††;c††<c<c∗∗;c∗∗<c<c†;c†<c<c∗;c>c∗.
(4.1)
To understand the dynamics of the system (2.4) more comprehensively, we present the stabilities of various equilibriums completely in Table 3, considering that the dynamics of the system also depend on the relationship between threshold ET and z11,z12,z21, and z22. Thus, we have the following threshold levels:
ET>z21;z11<ET<z21;z12<ET<z11;z22<ET<z12;0<ET<z22.
(4.2)
Table 3.
The stability of equilibrium points for subsystem S1 and S2 when R0>Rc1>Rc2>1.
In such a case, if equilibriums E11,E12,E21, and E22 exist, it can be noted that E11 and E12 are virtual, whereas E21 and E22 are real, with E21 being LAS. We will examine the following six cases in the light of the connections between c and c4,c2,c††,c∗∗,c†,c∗.
Subcase (ⅰ): Assume c4<c<c2, here we know E1 is LAS. Note that equilibria E11 and E12 do not exist under this scenario. All the orbits in S1 will reach the switching line z=ET within a finite amount of time, then firstly enter S2 and ultimately approach either E21 or E1 [shown in Figure 2(a)], contingent upon their initial positions. Thus, the E21 and E1 are bistable in this particular scenario.
Figure 2.
Dynamical behavior of the system (2.4) for Case(a1).
Note: The purple and blue lines represent trajectories that finally tend to the equilibriums E21 and E1, respectively. Parameters are: r=6, K=6, p=1, q=1, b=1 and (a)η=0.55, a=3, ε=0.12, c=2.9, ET=2.5; (b)η=0.5, a=3, ε=0.12, c=2.92, ET=2.8; (c)η=0.57, a=3, ε=0.13, c=3.4, ET=2.8; (d)η=0.75, a=2.68, ε=0.1, c=4.55, ET=3.3; (e)η=0.75, a=2.67, ε=0.1, c=6.68, ET=4; (f)η=0.9, a=3, ε=0.1, c=6.97, ET=4.
Subcase (ⅱ): Assume c2<c<c††, we have immune-free equilibrium E1 is LAS in subsystem S2. According to Lemma 4.2, there exists dy/dt<0 on the Σis(i=1,2) when ET exceeds z21. Therefore, all the orbits of subsystem S1 will slide from right to left to the (y21,ET) or (y12,ET) when they reach the sliding segments, and finally tend to E21. Hence, E21 and E1 are bistable [illustrated in Figure 2(b)].
Subcase (ⅲ): Assume c††<c<c∗∗, here we have equilibrium E1, real equilibrium E21 are LAS. In this subcase, system (2.4) has the same bistable behavior as the previous case [shown in Figure 2(c)].
Subcase (ⅳ): Assume c∗∗<c<c†, we get that E1 is US, and there is only one stable equilibrium E21. Thus, any orbit starting from region S1 firstly crosses the switching line z=ET and enters S2, following the dynamics of S2 tends to E21. Additionally, Lemmas 4.1–4.3 confirms the absence of a limit cycle, implying that all trajectories ultimately converge to E21. Therefore, it can be concluded that the equilibrium E21 is GAS [shown in Figure 2(d)].
Subcase (ⅴ): Assume c†<c<c∗. In such a subcase, we know equilibrium E22 does not exist. In consideration of the nonexistence of the limit cycle, E21 becomes a glocally stable equilibrium [shown in Figure 2(e)].
Subcase (ⅵ): Assume c>c∗. Under this scenario, we know equilibria E12 and E22 do not exist. That is, there exists not any other stable equilibrium other than E21. Considering that the existence of the limit cycle is excluded, endemic equilibrium E21 is GAS [shown in Figure 2(f)]. The dynamics of the system (2.4) can be summarized below when ET>z21.
Theorem 4.1.Suppose ET>z21, it can be deduced that both E21 and E1 are bistable for c4<c<c2,c2<c<c††,c††<c<c∗∗; positive equilibrium E21 is GAS for c∗∗<c<c†, c†<c<c∗ and c>c∗.
4.1.2. Case(a2): z11<ET<z21
In such a case, if equilibriums E11,E12,E21, and E22 exist, we have E11, E12, E21 are virtual, while E22 is real but US. Meanwhile, our analysis reveals the occurrence of sliding mode and the emergence of pseudo-equilibrium within the sliding segment Σ1s={(y,z)|y21<y<y11,z=ET}. By Theorem 3.1, we know that the pseudo-equilibrium Ec is LAS when it exists. Likewise, we will analyze the following six scenarios.
Subcase (ⅰ): Assume c4<c<c2. We know equilibria E11 and E12 do not exist, then we have omitted the description for this case.
Subcase (ⅱ): Assume c2<c<c††. In such a subcase, E1 is LAS in the subsystem S2 and the pseudo-equilibrium will appear on the sliding segment Σ1s. Thus, the partial orbits starting from region S1 will follow the dynamics of S1 to the sliding segment {(y,z)|y21<y<yc,z=ET}, whereas partial trajectories starting from subsystem S2 will arrive at the segment {(y,z)|yc<y<y11,z=ET} along the S2, depending on the initial point, and both types of orbits will eventually converge toward pseudo-equilibrium Ec. Therefore, we conclude that Ec and E1 are bistable [shown in Figure 3(a)].
Figure 3.
Dynamical behavior of the system (2.4) for Case(a2).
Note: The purple and blue lines represent trajectories that finally tend to the equilibriums Ec and E1, respectively. Parameters are: r=6, K=6, p=1, q=1, b=1 and (a)η=0.5, a=3, ε=0.12, c=3, ET=2.1; (b)η=0.75, a=3, ε=0.32, c=3.9, ET=2.5; (c)η=0.75, a=2.78, ε=0.11, c=4.48, ET=2.8; (d)η=0.75, a=2.67, ε=0.1, c=6.7, ET=2.95; (e)η=0.85, a=3.02, ε=0.15, c=6.96, ET=2.8.
Subcase (ⅲ): Assume c††<c<c∗∗. In such a subcase, we get that both pseudo-equilibrium Ec on the sliding segment Σ1s and equilibrium E1 are LAS. Thus, we can obtain the coincident conclusion by using similar ways of discussion. That is, the orbits will either go to Ec or tend to E1 along the subsystem S1 and S2, respectively [shown in Figure 3(b)].
Subcase (ⅳ): Assume c∗∗<c<c†. In such a subcase, Ec is the only stable equilibrium for the system (2.4). Our findings reveal that all trajectories intersecting with the line z=ET and following the sliding segment Σ1s reach the pseudo-equilibrium Ec. Considering that a limit cycle does not exist for the entire system, we can conclude that Ec is GAS [illustrated in Figure 3(c)].
Subcase (ⅴ): Assume c†<c<c∗. In such a subcase, we know E22 does not exist and the pseudo-equilibrium Ec is LAS. Here, we have immune-free equilibrium E1 is US. Equally, system (2.4) does not exist any limit cycle. Then the equilibrium Ec is GAS [shown in Figure 3(d)].
Subcase (ⅵ): Assume c>c∗. Under this condition, equilibria E12 and E22 do not exist. There is only one stable equilibrium Ec in the switching system (2.4). Considering the exclusion of closed orbit, then Ec is GAS [illustrated in Figure 3(e)]. Hence, we summarize the aforementioned conclusion of system (2.4) to the following when z11<ET<z21.
Theorem 4.2.Suppose z11<ET<z21, we can conclude that system (2.4) has bistable behavior, i.e., immune-free equilibrium E1 and pseudo-equilibrium Ec are LAS for c2<c<c††,c††<c<c∗∗; equilibrium Ec is GAS for c∗∗<c<c†, c†<c<c∗ and c>c∗.
4.1.3. Case(a3): z12<ET<z11
In such a case, if equilibriums E11,E12,E21,E22 exist, we get E12 and E21 are virtual, but E11 and E22 are real, where E11 is LAS in the S1. We prove the existence of sliding mode but there is no pseudo-equilibrium. Next, we will analyze the stability of equilibria based on the connections between c and c4,c2,c††,c∗∗,c†,c∗.
Subcase (ⅰ): Assume c4<c<c2. Under this scenario, it follows from Section 2 that the two equilibria E11 and E12 are not feasible. So we can omit the description for this case.
Subcase (ⅱ): Assume c2<c<c††. In such a subcase, E1 is LAS and E11 is a real and stable equilibrium, since subsystem S1 has only one stable endemic state. Thus, trajectories initiating from S1 will intend to approach the equilibrium E11. In this scenario, the endemic equilibrium E11 can coexist with the immune-free equilibrium E1. That is, system (2.4) has bistable behavior [shown in Figure 4(a)].
Figure 4.
Dynamical behavior of the system (2.4) for Case(a3).
Note: The purple and blue lines represent trajectories that finally tend to the equilibriums E11 and E1, respectively. Parameters are: r=6, K=6, p=1, q=1, b=1 and (a)η=0.85, a=3.02, ε=0.15, c=3.96, ET=1.6; (b)η=0.65, a=3, ε=0.12, c=3.7, ET=1; (c)η=0.75, a=2.78, ε=0.13, c=4.48, ET=1.1; (d)η=0.75, a=2.67, ε=0.1, c=6.7, ET=2.
Subcase (ⅲ): Assume c††<c<c∗∗. Regarding the presence and stability of the equilibriums, the dynamics exhibited by subsystems S1 and S2 resemble those of the former scenario [shown in Figure 4(b)]. Thus, we get that E11 and E1 are bistable for the Filippov system (2.4).
Subcase (ⅳ): Assume c∗∗<c<c†. In this subcase, the equilibrium E21 is virtual and the system (2.4) only exhibits one stable endemic equilibrium E11. As there is no limit cycle, then E11 is GAS [shown in Figure 4(c)].
Subcase (ⅴ): Assume c†<c<c∗. Analogously, there exists only one stable equilibrium point E11 in subsystem S1. It should be noted that the endemic equilibrium E11 functions as an attractor. We have excluded the existence of limit cycles. Consequently, any orbit starting from region S1 or S2 will approach the equilibrium point E11 [shown in Figure 4(d)]. Thus, the equilibrium E11 is GAS.
Subcase (ⅵ): Assume c>c∗. In this scenario, since the equilibria E12 and E22 do not exist, we have omitted the description for this case and we get the following conclusion.
Theorem 4.3.Suppose z12<ET<z11, we can conclude that immune-free equilibrium E1 and endemic equilibrium E11 are bistable for c2<c<c†† and c††<c<c∗∗; equilibrium E11 is GAS for c∗∗<c<c† and c†<c<c∗.
4.1.4. Case(a4): z22<ET<z12
In such a case, if equilibriums E11,E12,E21, and E22 exist, we have E21 is virtual, while E11, E12, and E22 are real. Note that both equilibriums E12 and E22 are US. Furthermore, the sliding mode does exist, and the pseudo-equilibrium Ec is LAS on the Σ2s. A similar discussion works for z22<ET<z12.
Subcase (ⅰ): Assume c4<c<c2, we know equilibria E11 and E12 do not exist according to Section 2. Therefore, we can ignore the explanation of this situation.
Subcase (ⅱ): Assume c2<c<c††. In such a subcase, E1 is LAS and E11 is real and stable in S1. As mentioned above, the pseudo-equilibrium Ec is LAS. From the dynamics of subsystems S2 and S1, it can be deduced that the orbits will either directly reach the E11, E1 or firstly arrive at the line z=ET on the segment {(y,z)|y12<y<y22,z=ET}, then slide to the Ec along sliding segment Σ2s, depending on the initiating points. Hence, as is shown in Figure 5(a), the equilibriums E11, Ec, and E1 are tristable.
Figure 5.
Dynamical behavior of the system (2.4) for Case(a4).
Note: The trajectories represented by the purple, green, and blue lines finally tend to the equilibrium points E11, Ec, and E1, respectively. Parameters are: r=6, K=6, p=1, q=1, b=1, and (a)η=0.85, a=3.02, ε=0.15, c=3.96, ET=0.9; (b)η=0.75, a=3, ε=0.32, c=3.6, ET=1; (c)η=0.85, a=2.78, ε=0.12, c=4.9, ET=0.2.
Subcase (ⅲ): Assume c††<c<c∗∗. In such a subcase, we get that the equilibrium E1 is LAS, and there exist two equilibria E11 and Ec, which are locally stable in their respective regions. Thus, we can conclude that the dynamic behaviors in this scenario are consistent with the former subcase. That is, system (2.4) has tristable behavior in this case [shown in Figure 5(b)].
Subcase (ⅳ): Assume c∗∗<c<c†. Note that the locally stable equilibrium E21 is virtual, then cannot be attained. Part of the trajectories starting from subsystem S1 will approach the equilibrium E11, while certain trajectories will collide on the switching line at finite time, and the locally stable pseudo-equilibrium Ec appears ultimately on the segment Σ2s={(y,z)|y12<y<y22,z=ET}. Hence, they are bistable for the switching system (2.4) [shown in Figure 5(c)].
Subcase (ⅴ): Assume c†<c<c∗. We know equilibrium E22 does not exist, then we rule this out.
Subcase (ⅵ): Assume c>c∗. In such a subcase, we know equilibria E12 and E22 do not exist, so we have omitted the description in this case as well. To sum up, we can derive the conclusion as follows.
Theorem 4.4.Suppose z22<ET<z12, we can conclude that the real equilibrium E11, pseudo-equilibrium Ec, and the immune-free equilibrium E1 are tristable for c2<c<c†† and c††<c<c∗∗; immune-free equilibrium E11 and pseudo-equilibrium Ec are bistable for c∗∗<c<c†.
4.1.5. Case(a5): 0<ET<z22
In such a case, if equilibriums E11,E12,E21, and E22 exist, we have E21 and E22 are virtual, but E11, E12 are real, where E11 is LAS in the S1. Under this scenario, there is no pseudo-equilibrium for the Filippov system (2.3). Subsequently, we will analyze the following situations based on the relationships between immune intensity c and c4,c2,c††,c∗∗,c†,c∗.
Subcase (ⅰ): Assume c4<c<c2. In this condition, we get that equilibria E11 and E12 do not exist on the basis of the discussion of Section 2. Note that the locally stable equilibrium E21 is virtual. Thus, there is not any other stable equilibrium besides E1, as all the possible limit cycles have been excluded. Hence, we have E1 is GAS [shown in Figure 6(a)].
Figure 6.
Dynamical behavior of the system (2.4) for Case(a5).
Note: The purple and blue lines represent trajectories that finally tend to the equilibriums E11 and E1, respectively. Parameters are: r=6, K=6, p=1, q=1, b=1, and (a)η=0.65, a=3.02, ε=0.15, c=3.1, ET=0.6; (b)η=0.85, a=3.02, ε=0.15, c=3.7, ET=0.8; (c)η=0.65, a=3.02, ε=0.15, c=3.7, ET=0.08; (d)η=0.75, a=2.78, ε=0.13, c=4.5, ET=0.04.
Subcase (ⅱ): Assume c2<c<c††. In such a subcase, E1 is LAS and E11 is a real and stable equilibrium. However, E21 is virtual in S1. Thus, positive equilibrium E11 and immune-free equilibrium E1 are bistable for c2<c<c†† being satisfied [shown in Figure 6(b)].
Subcase (ⅲ): Assume c††<c<c∗∗. We know that equilibria E11 and E1 are LAS as well. Thus, the dynamics of this case are similar to the former, i.e., the bistable behavior occurs [shown in Figure 6(c)].
Subcase (ⅳ): Assume c∗∗<c<c†. In such a subcase, note that locally stable equilibrium E21 is virtual and then cannot be attained. There exists only one stable equilibrium point E11 in subsystem S1. As there is no limit cycle, we obtain that the equilibrium E11 is GAS [illustrated in Figure 6(d)].
Subcase (ⅴ): Assume c†<c<c∗. In such a subcase, we know that equilibrium E22 does not exist, so we have ignored the description of this situation.
Subcase (ⅵ): Assume c>c∗. In such a subcase, both E12 and E22 do not exist, therefore, the explanation for this case is omitted. Consequently, we arrive at the subsequent conclusion.
Theorem 4.5.Suppose 0<ET<z22, we can conclude that immune-free equilibrium E1 is GAS for c4<c<c2; the real equilibrium E11 and immune-free equilibrium E1 are bistable for c2<c<c†† and c††<c<c∗∗; the equilibrium E11 is GAS for c∗∗<c<c†.
In fact, extensive discussions have been conducted on the stability of various equilibriums for the switching system (2.4) under Case(a). Furthermore, Table 4 provides a comprehensive summary of the global dynamics associated with these specific cases.
Table 4.
Existence and stability of the equilibria for the Filippov system (2.4) when R0>Rc1>Rc2>1.
Notably, the collision of pseudo-equilibrium, tangent point, and regular equilibrium (or tangent point and regular equilibrium) in switching systems occurs when ET reaches a critical value, leading to boundary equilibrium bifurcations on the discontinuity surface [as shown in Figure 7]. The understanding and analysis of these boundary equilibrium bifurcations are crucial in studying the dynamical behavior of the Filippov system. To verify the boundary equilibrium bifurcation, we select ET as the bifurcation parameter while keeping all other parameters constant. Detailed explanations of the boundary equilibrium and the tangent point are shown in Definitions 2.3 and 2.5.
Figure 7.
Boundary equilibrium bifurcations for the switching system (2.4).
Note: Here, we choose ET as a bifurcation parameter and other parameter values are fixed as r=6, K=6, p=1, q=1, b=1, η=0.5, a=3, ε=0.12, c=2.92 and (a)ET=2.5; (b)ET=2.176; (c)ET=1.9; (d)ET=1.7081; (e)ET=1.55; (f)ET=1.4519; (g)ET=0.98; (h)ET=0.864; (i)ET=0.64.
which are the solutions of (5.4) corresponding to ϕ=0 and ϕ=1.
Figure 7 examines a series of boundary equilibrium bifurcations when c2<c<c††. In this case, both subsystems have two positive equilibria. The real and stable equilibrium E21 coexists simultaneously with the visible tangent point T21 when ET>z21 [shown in Figure 7(a)]. As ET decreases from ET>z21 to z21, E21 collides with T21 [shown in Figure 7(b)]. With the threshold ET decreasing further to z11<ET<z21, a stable pseudo-equilibrium Ec emerges and T21 transforms into an invisible tangent point [as depicted in Figure 7(c)]. This bifurcation exhibits the progress of the formation of Ec. Furthermore, boundary bifurcation takes place again when ET through the critical value z11. This case results in the collision of the tangent point T11, the equilibrium point E11 with the pseudo-equilibrium point Ec [as depicted in Figure 7(d)]. Subsequently, the Ec vanishes, and the stable point E11 transforms into the local attractor [as illustrated in Figure 7(e)]. When ET drops consistently until z12, the third boundary bifurcation takes place, leading to the collision of the visible tangent point T12 with the equilibriums E12 [as depicted in Figure 7(f)].
Provided ET continues to decrease until z22<ET<z12, a locally stable pseudo-equilibrium Ec appears [as shown in Figure 7(g)] and a tristable phenomenon (Ec, E11, and the immune-free equilibrium E1) occurs. When ET passes E22, the fourth boundary equilibrium bifurcation occurs. In this scenario, the pseudo-equilibrium Ec will collide with the equilibrium point E22 and tangent point T22 if ET=z22 [illustrated in Figure 7(h)]. However, as the threshold ET continues to decrease, the equilibrium Ec disappears, and the tangent point T22 becomes invisible [illustrated in Figure 7(i)]. Here, the equilibriums E1 and E11 exhibit bistability under this scenario.
6.
The influence of the pivotal parameters of the system (2.4)
In order to stabilize the HIV viral loads and effector cell counts within the required predetermined level, it is crucial to implement a control strategy for the switching system (2.4) by setting an appropriate threshold ET. The dynamics of the system are influenced by two key parameters: The immune intensity c and the inhibition of the virus on the proliferation of immune cells η. Therefore, it is important to study the impact of these parameters on the system's dynamics. Note that the parameters in this study are based on the findings of Komarova[33] and colleagues. A direct calculation reveals that the bistable interval is (2.7666, 3.2333) [shown in Figure 8(a)]. From this figure, it is evident that system (2.4) has the potential to have either one or two nontrivial LAS equilibria depending on the value of c. In detail, two stable equilibriums E21 and E21 coexist when c4<c<c††. As established in Section 2, there is a unique LAS equilibrium E21 if c>c††. It is important to note that a saddle-node bifurcation occurs at c=c4. Generally, a longer bistable interval implies a wider range of variation for the proliferation coefficient c of immune cells. In this context, a lower viral inhibition intensity η [shown in Figure 8(b)] is more advantageous for immune control. This indicates the necessity of developing medications aimed at diminishing the viral inhibitory effect on immune cells. The phase portrait of this system reveals that both variables y and z will gradually tend to a stable value over time t changed [shown in Figures 8(c) and (d)]. In subsystem S2, the combination of antiretroviral therapy and immunotherapy not only controlled the number of viruses better but also stabilized the immune cell count at a more reliable level than the free system, as can be seen in Figures 8(e) and (f).
Figure 8.
(a) Saddle–node bifurcation diagram and bistable of the subsystem S2, where r=6, K=6, p=1, q=1, b=1, η=0.5, a=3, ε=0.12 such that c2=2.7666, c††=3.2333, where the LAS equilibrium of viral load is depicted by the solid line, while the dashed line illustrates the US equilibrium; (b) The impact of the intensity of virus inhibition (η) on the duration of the bistable interval; (c) and (d) Parameters are η=0.55, a=3, ε=0.12, c=2.9, the other parameter values are the same to those of (a). At this point, the system will gradually tend to stabilize; (e) and (f) The dynamic behaviors of virus and immune cells in the system (2.4) within time.
Given the immunosuppressive HIV infection model[32,33,34], it is suggested that the threshold policy control (TPC) method for treating infected patients should be based on the number of immune cells. Thus, we propose a piecewise immunosuppressive infection system. We call model (2.4) a discontinuous right-hand side dynamical system under TPC, which consists of two subsystems. Specifically, it is recommended to initiate a combination of antiretroviral therapy and immune therapy when the value drops below a certain threshold ET, which includes the usage of antiretroviral medications and interleukin (IL)-2. This leads to the emergence of a nonsmooth system. Unlike [31], we consider the logical growth of HIV rather than linear growth in this paper. Some clinical facts indicate that the saturated growth of HIV is reasonable.
Initially, we provide a concise overview of the dynamics exhibited by the two subsystems. Through the subsystems Si(i=1,2), we derive the thresholds R0, Rc1, and Rc2. It becomes evident that R0 plays a pivotal part in determining the eradication of the virus. We also obtain the post-treatment control thresholds c2(c4) and the elite control threshold c∗∗(c††) for subsystems S1 (S2). According to [34], there exists a bistable behavior between these two threshold intervals. The sliding dynamics and sliding domain of the system (2.4) are studied in the subsequent analysis. Our purpose is to demonstrate the existence of two sliding segments Σis(i=1,2). By employing the Filippov convex approach, we investigate the possibility and local asymptotic stability of the pseudo-equilibrium Ec on the sliding segment Σ1s under the z11<ET<z21, or on the sliding segment Σ2s under the z22<ET<z12. Significantly, we have primarily focused on Case (a) and discussed the global dynamics of the system in this paper. To investigate the global dynamic behavior of the system, we have excluded the existence of three types of limit cycles. It is important to understand the relationship not only among R0,Rc1,Rc2, and 1 but also among immune intensity c and c4,c2,c††,c∗∗,c†,c∗. Subsequently, the bifurcation theories were utilized to address the dynamics of sliding mode and local sliding bifurcations.
The analysis reveals that the system can demonstrate diverse and complex dynamic behaviors: (ⅰ) One of the equilibria in the system is GAS, which can manifest as the immune-free equilibrium E1, pseudo-equilibrium Ec, or even as the positive equilibrium E11 or E21 within subsystems S1 or S2; (ⅱ) There are two possible equilibria in this system that exhibit bistability, namely the immune-free equilibrium E1 and equilibrium E21 (or Ec or E11), or the positive equilibrium E11, which is bistable alongside the pseudo-equilibrium Ec; (ⅳ) Three equilibria are tristable, i.e., immune-free equilibrium E1, positive equilibrium E11, and the pseudo-equilibrium Ec are stable for z22<ET<z12 and c2<c<c∗∗. Our work demonstrates that the utilization of effector cell-guided therapy leads to an expansion of the controllable area of initial values for patients, generating a more complex Filippov dynamics system when compared with [35]. Interestingly, we find that there exists an optimal threshold interval for immune intensity that can maximize the controllable area of initial values. This highlights the importance of considering the effects of effector cell-guided therapy and immune intensity when studying the dynamics of the switching system. It suggests that maximizing the controllable area of initial values can potentially improve the effectiveness of treatment strategies for patients.
In this paper, the existence of three types of equilibria including pseudo-equilibrium is explored. These equilibria can exhibit bistability or tristability, meaning that the HIV viral loads and effector cell counts can be stabilized at a preset level. Achieving these stable states depends on factors such as the threshold level, immune intensity, and the initial values of the system. Consequently, determining the optimal strategy for immune intensity and the threshold conditions should still take into account the individual characteristics of the patients. In the case of boundary H(X), the selection of parameter values is crucial in stabilizing different equilibria within the system. From a biological standpoint, employing rational control intensity and intervention is highly effective in ensuring the control and management of diseases.
Although our research has an impact on HIV disease control, it is still insufficient. We only consider the relationship between the number of effector cells and the threshold level to construct switching conditions. The actual disease control strategy should also take into account the change rate of effector cell count, which will be our next work. By considering these factors, we aim to further provide insights into the effectiveness and impact of this treatment approach on the virus-immune system dynamics. This mathematical model could potentially contribute to the improvement of treatment strategies for viral infections.
Use of AI tools declaration
The authors declare that no Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools were used in the creation of this article.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by The National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 12261033).
The authors would like to thank the editor and anonymous referees for their valuable comments and suggestions, which have led to an improvement of the paper.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Conflict of interest
The author declare no conflict of interest.
Author contributions
M.N. contributed to the conceptualization, design, and writing of the main manuscript.
References
[1]
Haarbauer-Krupa J, Pugh MJ, Prager EM, et al. (2021) Epidemiology of chronic effects of traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 38: 3235-3247. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2021.0062
[2]
Thurman DJ, Alverson C, Dunn KA, et al. (1999) Traumatic brain injury in the United States: a public health perspective. J Head Trauma Rehabil 14: 602-615. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001199-199912000-00009
Maas AIR, Menon DK, Manley GT, et al. (2022) Traumatic brain injury: progress and challenges in prevention, clinical care, and research. Lancet Neurol 21: 1004-1060. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(22)00309-X
[6]
Rauchman SH, Albert J, Pinkhasov A, et al. (2022) Mild-to-moderate traumatic brain injury: a review with focus on the visual system. Neurol Int 14: 453-470. https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint14020038
[7]
Theadom A, Parag V, Dowell T, et al. (2016) Persistent problems 1 year after mild traumatic brain injury: a longitudinal population study in New Zealand. Br J Gen Pract 66: e16-e23. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp16X683161
[8]
Silverberg ND, Iaccarino MA, Panenka WJ, et al. (2020) Management of concussion and mild traumatic brain injury: a synthesis of practice guidelines. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 101: 382-393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2019.10.179
[9]
Simon DW, McGeachy MJ, Bayir H, et al. (2017) The far-reaching scope of neuroinflammation after traumatic brain injury. Nat Rev Neurol 13: 572. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2017.116
[10]
Postolache TT, Wadhawan A, Can A, et al. (2020) Inflammation in traumatic brain injury. J Alzheimers Dis 74: 1-28. https://doi.org/10.3233/JAD-191150
Rauchman SH, Zubair A, Jacob B, et al. (2023) Traumatic brain injury: mechanisms, manifestations, and visual sequelae. Front Neurosci 17: 1090672. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2023.1090672
[13]
Freire MAM, Rocha GS, Bittencourt LO, et al. (2023) Cellular and molecular pathophysiology of traumatic brain injury: what have we learned so far?. Biology 12: 1139. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12081139
[14]
Ng SY, Lee AYW (2019) Traumatic brain injuries: pathophysiology and potential therapeutic targets. Front Cell Neurosci 13: 528. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2019.00528
[15]
Bramlett HM, Dietrich WD (2015) Long-term consequences of traumatic brain injury: current status of potential mechanisms of injury and neurological outcomes. J Neurotrauma 32: 1834-1848. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2014.3352
[16]
Andriessen TM, Jacobs B, Vos PE (2010) Clinical characteristics and pathophysiological mechanisms of focal and diffuse traumatic brain injury. J Cell Mol Med 14: 2381-2392. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1582-4934.2010.01164.x
[17]
Aghili-Mehrizi S, Williams E, Yan S, et al. (2022) Secondary mechanisms of neurotrauma: a closer look at the evidence. Diseases 10: 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/diseases10020030
[18]
Krishnamurthy K, Laskowitz DT (2016) Cellular and molecular mechanisms of secondary neuronal injury following traumatic brain injury. Translational Research in Traumatic Brain Injury. Boca Raton (FL): . https://doi.org/10.1201/b18959
[19]
Peggion C, Cali T, Brini M (2024) Mitochondria dysfunction and neuroinflammation in neurodegeneration: who comes first?. Antioxidants 13: 240. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox13020240
[20]
Bylicky MA, Mueller GP, Day RM (2018) Mechanisms of endogenous neuroprotective effects of astrocytes in brain injury. Oxid Med Cell Longev 2018: 6501031. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6501031
[21]
Khatri N, Sumadhura B, Kumar S, et al. (2021) The complexity of secondary cascade consequent to traumatic brain injury: pathobiology and potential treatments. Curr Neuropharmacol 19: 1984-2011. https://doi.org/10.2174/1570159X19666210215123914
[22]
Eyolfson E, Khan A, Mychasiuk R, et al. (2020) Microglia dynamics in adolescent traumatic brain injury. J Neuroinflammation 17: 326. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12974-020-01994-z
[23]
Bhatt M, Sharma M, Das B (2024) The role of inflammatory cascade and reactive astrogliosis in glial scar formation post-spinal cord injury. Cell Mol Neurobiol 44: 78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10571-024-01519-9
[24]
Cieri MB, Ramos AJ (2025) Astrocytes, reactive astrogliosis, and glial scar formation in traumatic brain injury. Neural Regen Res 20: 973-989. https://doi.org/10.4103/NRR.NRR-D-23-02091
Alhadidi QM, Bahader GA, Arvola O, et al. (2024) Astrocytes in functional recovery following central nervous system injuries. J Physiol 602: 3069-3096. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP284197
[27]
He L, Zhang R, Yang M, et al. (2024) The role of astrocyte in neuroinflammation in traumatic brain injury. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Basis Dis 1870: 166992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbadis.2023.166992
[28]
Becerra-Calixto A, Cardona-Gomez GP (2017) The role of astrocytes in neuroprotection after brain stroke: potential in cell therapy. Front Mol Neurosci 10: 88. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnmol.2017.00088
[29]
Liu X, Zhang L, Cao Y, et al. (2022) Neuroinflammation of traumatic brain injury: Roles of extracellular vesicles. Front Immunol 13: 1088827. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2022.1088827
[30]
Chen L, Deng H, Cui H, et al. (2018) Inflammatory responses and inflammation-associated diseases in organs. Oncotarget 9: 7204-7218. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.23208
[31]
Jassam YN, Izzy S, Whalen M, et al. (2017) Neuroimmunology of traumatic brain injury: time for a paradigm shift. Neuron 95: 1246-1265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2017.07.010
[32]
Balanca B, Desmurs L, Grelier J, et al. (2021) DAMPs and RAGE pathophysiology at the acute phase of brain injury: an overview. Int J Mol Sci 22: 2439. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22052439
[33]
Caceres E, Olivella JC, Di Napoli M, et al. (2024) Immune response in traumatic brain injury. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 24: 593-609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-024-01382-7
Donat CK, Scott G, Gentleman SM, et al. (2017) Microglial activation in traumatic brain injury. Front Aging Neurosci 9: 208. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2017.00208
[36]
Czyzewski W, Mazurek M, Sakwa L, et al. (2024) Astroglial cells: emerging therapeutic targets in the management of traumatic brain injury. Cells 13: 148. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells13020148
[37]
Karve IP, Taylor JM, Crack PJ (2016) The contribution of astrocytes and microglia to traumatic brain injury. Br J Pharmacol 173: 692-702. https://doi.org/10.1111/bph.13125
[38]
Chou A, Krukowski K, Morganti JM, et al. (2018) Persistent infiltration and impaired response of peripherally-derived monocytes after traumatic brain injury in the aged brain. Int J Mol Sci 19: 1616. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19061616
[39]
Webster KM, Sun M, Crack P, et al. (2017) Inflammation in epileptogenesis after traumatic brain injury. J Neuroinflammation 14: 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12974-016-0786-1
Delage C, Taib T, Mamma C, et al. (2021) Traumatic brain injury: an age-dependent view of post-traumatic neuroinflammation and its treatment. Pharmaceutics 13: 1624. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics13101624
Magid-Bernstein J, Girard R, Polster S, et al. (2022) Cerebral hemorrhage: pathophysiology, treatment, and future directions. Circ Res 130: 1204-1229. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.121.319949
[44]
Si Z, Wang X, Sun C, et al. (2019) Adipose-derived stem cells: sources, potency, and implications for regenerative therapies. Biomed Pharmacother 114: 108765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2019.108765
[45]
Li C, Zhao H, Cheng L, et al. (2021) Allogeneic vs. autologous mesenchymal stem/stromal cells in their medication practice. Cell Biosci 11: 187. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13578-021-00698-y
[46]
Yousefpour P, Ni K, Irvine DJ (2023) Targeted modulation of immune cells and tissues using engineered biomaterials. Nat Rev Bioeng 1: 107-124. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44222-022-00016-2
[47]
Proto JD, Doran AC, Gusarova G, et al. (2018) Regulatory T cells promote macrophage efferocytosis during inflammation resolution. Immunity 49: 666-677.E6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2018.07.015
[48]
Roszkowski S (2024) Therapeutic potential of mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes for regenerative medicine applications. Clin Exp Med 24: 46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10238-023-01282-z
[49]
Swindle MM, Makin A, Herron AJ, et al. (2012) Swine as models in biomedical research and toxicology testing. Vet Pathol 49: 344-356. https://doi.org/10.1177/0300985811402846
[50]
Bonsack B, Heyck M, Kingsbury C, et al. (2020) Fast-tracking regenerative medicine for traumatic brain injury. Neural Regen Res 15: 1179-1190. https://doi.org/10.4103/1673-5374.270294
[51]
Raspa A, Gelain F (2021) Mimicking extracellular matrix via engineered nanostructured biomaterials for neural repair. Curr Neuropharmacol 19: 2110-2124. https://doi.org/10.2174/1570159X18666201111111102
[52]
Smandri A, Al-Masawa ME, Hwei NM, et al. (2024) ECM-derived biomaterials for regulating tissue multicellularity and maturation. iScience 27: 109141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2024.109141
[53]
Zhao X, Hu DA, Wu D, et al. (2021) Applications of biocompatible scaffold materials in stem cell-based cartilage tissue engineering. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 9: 603444. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2021.603444
[54]
Zhao X, Li Q, Guo Z, et al. (2021) Constructing a cell microenvironment with biomaterial scaffolds for stem cell therapy. Stem Cell Res Ther 12: 583. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-021-02650-w
Lucke-Wold BP, Logsdon AF, Nguyen L, et al. (2018) Supplements, nutrition, and alternative therapies for the treatment of traumatic brain injury. Nutr Neurosci 21: 79-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/1028415X.2016.1236174
[57]
Scheff SW, Ansari MA (2017) Natural Compounds as a therapeutic intervention following traumatic brain injury: the role of phytochemicals. J Neurotrauma 34: 1491-1510. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2016.4718
Kim BS, Kim JU, Lee J, et al. (2024) Decellularized brain extracellular matrix based NGF-releasing cryogel for brain tissue engineering in traumatic brain injury. J Control Release 368: 140-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2024.02.017
[62]
Diaz MD, Kandell RM, Wu JR, et al. (2023) Infusible extracellular matrix biomaterial promotes vascular integrity and modulates the inflammatory response in acute traumatic brain injury. Adv Healthc Mater 12: e2300782. https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.202300782
[63]
Xiong Y, Mahmood A, Chopp M (2010) Angiogenesis, neurogenesis and brain recovery of function following injury. Curr Opin Investig Drugs 11: 298-308.
[64]
Ying C, Zhang J, Zhang H, et al. (2023) Stem cells in central nervous system diseases: Promising therapeutic strategies. Exp Neurol 369: 114543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2023.114543
[65]
Adugna DG, Aragie H, Kibret AA, et al. (2022) Therapeutic application of stem cells in the repair of traumatic brain injury. Stem Cells Cloning 15: 53-61. https://doi.org/10.2147/SCCAA.S369577
[66]
de Kanter AJ, Jongsma KR, Verhaar MC, et al. (2023) The ethical implications of tissue engineering for regenerative purposes: a systematic review. Tissue Eng Part B Rev 29: 167-187. https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.teb.2022.0033
Moghassemi S, Dadashzadeh A, Sousa MJ, et al. (2024) Extracellular vesicles in nanomedicine and regenerative medicine: a review over the last decade. Bioact Mater 36: 126-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2024.02.021
[70]
Zhong L, Wang J, Wang P, et al. (2023) Neural stem cell-derived exosomes and regeneration: cell-free therapeutic strategies for traumatic brain injury. Stem Cell Res Ther 14: 198. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-023-03409-1
[71]
Yang Z, Liang Z, Rao J, et al. (2023) Mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles therapy in traumatic central nervous system diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neural Regen Res 18: 2406-2412. https://doi.org/10.4103/1673-5374.371376
[72]
Cui L, Luo W, Jiang W, et al. (2022) Human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes promote neurological function recovery in rat after traumatic brain injury by inhibiting the activation of microglia and astrocyte. Regen Ther 21: 282-287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reth.2022.07.005
[73]
Li J, Li X, Li X, et al. (2024) Local delivery of dual stem cell-derived exosomes using an electrospun nanofibrous platform for the treatment of traumatic brain injury. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 16: 37497-37512. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.4c05004
[74]
Shen WB, Plachez C, Tsymbalyuk O, et al. (2016) Cell-based therapy in TBI: magnetic retention of neural stem cells in vivo. Cell Transplant 25: 1085-1099. https://doi.org/10.3727/096368915X689550
[75]
Syzdykbayev M, Kazymov M, Aubakirov M, et al. (2024) A modern approach to the treatment of traumatic brain injury. Medicines 11: 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicines11050010
[76]
Margulies S, Anderson G, Atif F, et al. (2016) Combination therapies for traumatic brain injury: retrospective considerations. J Neurotrauma 33: 101-112. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2014.3855
[77]
Hade MD, Suire CN, Suo Z (2021) Mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes: applications in regenerative medicine. Cells 10: 1959. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells10081959
[78]
Karnas E, Dudek P, Zuba-Surma EK (2023) Stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles as new tools in regenerative medicine-Immunomodulatory role and future perspectives. Front Immunol 14: 1120175. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1120175
[79]
Pan Y, Wu W, Jiang X, et al. (2023) Mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes in cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases: From mechanisms to therapy. Biomed Pharmacother 163: 114817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2023.114817
[80]
Huang D, Shen H, Xie F, et al. (2024) Role of mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes in the regeneration of different tissues. J Biol Eng 18: 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13036-024-00431-6
[81]
Zhu S, Liu X, Lu X, et al. (2024) Biomaterials and tissue engineering in traumatic brain injury: novel perspectives on promoting neural regeneration. Neural Regen Res 19: 2157-2174. https://doi.org/10.4103/1673-5374.391179
[82]
Hong IS (2022) Enhancing stem cell-based therapeutic potential by combining various bioengineering technologies. Front Cell Dev Biol 10: 901661. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2022.901661
[83]
Suzuki H, Imajo Y, Funaba M, et al. (2023) Current Concepts of Biomaterial Scaffolds and Regenerative Therapy for Spinal Cord Injury. Int J Mol Sci 24: 2528. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24032528
[84]
Rouleau N, Murugan NJ, Kaplan DL (2023) Functional bioengineered models of the central nervous system. Nat Rev Bioeng 1: 252-270. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44222-023-00027-7
[85]
Han F, Wang J, Ding L, et al. (2020) Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine: achievements, future, and sustainability in Asia. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 8: 83. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.00083
[86]
Tam RY, Fuehrmann T, Mitrousis N, et al. (2014) Regenerative therapies for central nervous system diseases: a biomaterials approach. Neuropsychopharmacology 39: 169-188. https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2013.237
[87]
Lu P, Ruan D, Huang M, et al. (2024) Harnessing the potential of hydrogels for advanced therapeutic applications: current achievements and future directions. Signal Transduct Target Ther 9: 166. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-024-01852-x
[88]
Grimaudo MA, Krishnakumar GS, Giusto E, et al. (2022) Bioactive injectable hydrogels for on demand molecule/cell delivery and for tissue regeneration in the central nervous system. Acta Biomater 140: 88-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2021.11.038
[89]
Kornev VA, Grebenik EA, Solovieva AB, et al. (2018) Hydrogel-assisted neuroregeneration approaches towards brain injury therapy: a state-of-the-art review. Comput Struct Biotechnol J 16: 488-502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csbj.2018.10.011
Wang R, Zhang X, Feng K, et al. (2023) Nanotechnologies meeting natural sources: engineered lipoproteins for precise brain disease theranostics. Asian J Pharm Sci 18: 100857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajps.2023.100857
[92]
Zhang Y, Zhang H, Zhao F, et al. (2023) Mitochondrial-targeted and ROS-responsive nanocarrier via nose-to-brain pathway for ischemic stroke treatment. Acta Pharm Sin B 13: 5107-5120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsb.2023.06.011
[93]
Kamath AP, Nayak PG, John J, et al. (2024) Revolutionizing neurotherapeutics: nanocarriers unveiling the potential of phytochemicals in Alzheimer's disease. Neuropharmacology 259: 110096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropharm.2024.110096
[94]
Wu D, Chen Q, Chen X, et al. (2023) The blood-brain barrier: structure, regulation, and drug delivery. Signal Transduct Target Ther 8: 217. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-023-01481-w
[95]
Pound P, Ritskes-Hoitinga M (2018) Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to fail. J Transl Med 16: 304. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-018-1678-1
[96]
Van Norman GA (2019) Limitations of animal studies for predicting toxicity in clinical trials: is it time to rethink our current approach?. JACC Basic Transl Sci 4: 845-854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacbts.2019.10.008
[97]
Sarma S, Deka DJ, Rajak P, et al. (2023) Potential injectable hydrogels as biomaterials for central nervous system injury: a narrative review. Ibrain 9: 402-420. https://doi.org/10.1002/ibra.12137
Ismail H, Shakkour Z, Tabet M, et al. (2020) Traumatic brain injury: oxidative stress and novel anti-oxidants such as mitoquinone and edaravone. Antioxidants 9: 943. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9100943
[101]
Thapak P, Gomez-Pinilla F (2024) The bioenergetics of traumatic brain injury and its long-term impact for brain plasticity and function. Pharmacol Res 208: 107389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phrs.2024.107389
[102]
Simpson DSA, Oliver PL (2020) ROS generation in microglia: understanding oxidative stress and inflammation in neurodegenerative disease. Antioxidants 9: 743. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9080743
[103]
Andres CMC, Perez de la Lastra JM, Juan CA, et al. (2022) The role of reactive species on innate immunity. Vaccines 10: 1735. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10101735
[104]
Dmytriv TR, Duve KV, Storey KB, et al. (2024) Vicious cycle of oxidative stress and neuroinflammation in pathophysiology of chronic vascular encephalopathy. Front Physiol 15: 1443604. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2024.1443604
[105]
Massaad CA, Klann E (2011) Reactive oxygen species in the regulation of synaptic plasticity and memory. Antioxid Redox Signal 14: 2013-2054. https://doi.org/10.1089/ars.2010.3208
[106]
Beckhauser TF, Francis-Oliveira J, De Pasquale R (2016) Reactive oxygen species: physiological and physiopathological effects on synaptic plasticity. J Exp Neurosci 10: 23-48. https://doi.org/10.4137/JEN.S39887
[107]
Polyak E, Ostrovsky J, Peng M, et al. (2018) N-acetylcysteine and vitamin E rescue animal longevity and cellular oxidative stress in pre-clinical models of mitochondrial complex I disease. Mol Genet Metab 123: 449-462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymgme.2018.02.013
[108]
Kurutas EB (2016) The importance of antioxidants which play the role in cellular response against oxidative/nitrosative stress: current state. Nutr J 15: 71. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12937-016-0186-5
[109]
Jomova K, Alomar SY, Alwasel SH, et al. (2024) Several lines of antioxidant defense against oxidative stress: antioxidant enzymes, nanomaterials with multiple enzyme-mimicking activities, and low-molecular-weight antioxidants. Arch Toxicol 98: 1323-1367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-024-03696-4
[110]
Pandey PK, Sharma AK, Gupta U (2016) Blood brain barrier: an overview on strategies in drug delivery, realistic in vitro modeling and in vivo live tracking. Tissue Barriers 4: e1129476. https://doi.org/10.1080/21688370.2015.1129476
[111]
Teleanu RI, Preda MD, Niculescu AG, et al. (2022) Current strategies to enhance delivery of drugs across the blood-brain barrier. Pharmaceutics 14: 987. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics14050987
[112]
Upadhyay RK (2014) Drug delivery systems, CNS protection, and the blood brain barrier. Biomed Res Int 2014: 869269. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/869269
[113]
Ji P, Xu Q, Li J, et al. (2024) Advances in nanoparticle-based therapeutics for ischemic stroke: Enhancing drug delivery and efficacy. Biomed Pharmacother 180: 117564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2024.117564
[114]
Song YH, De R, Lee KT (2023) Emerging strategies to fabricate polymeric nanocarriers for enhanced drug delivery across blood-brain barrier: an overview. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 320: 103008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2023.103008
[115]
Nguyen TT, Dung Nguyen TT, Vo TK, et al. (2021) Nanotechnology-based drug delivery for central nervous system disorders. Biomed Pharmacother 143: 112117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2021.112117
Zou T, Jiang S, Yi B, et al. (2022) Gelatin methacrylate hydrogel loaded with brain-derived neurotrophic factor enhances small molecule-induced neurogenic differentiation of stem cells from apical papilla. J Biomed Mater Res A 110: 623-634. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.37315
[118]
Cruz EM, Machado LS, Zamproni LN, et al. (2023) A gelatin methacrylate-based hydrogel as a potential bioink for 3D bioprinting and neuronal differentiation. Pharmaceutics 15: 627. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics15020627
[119]
Dai W, Wang H, Fang J, et al. (2018) Curcumin provides neuroprotection in model of traumatic brain injury via the Nrf2-ARE signaling pathway. Brain Res Bull 140: 65-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresbull.2018.03.020
[120]
Huang X, Ye Y, Zhang J, et al. (2022) Reactive oxygen species scavenging functional hydrogel delivers procyanidins for the treatment of traumatic brain injury in mice. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 14: 33756-33767. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.2c04930
[121]
Chen Y, Lin J, Yan W (2022) A prosperous application of hydrogels with extracellular vesicles release for traumatic brain injury. Front Neurol 13: 908468. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.908468
[122]
Aurand ER, Lampe KJ, Bjugstad KB (2012) Defining and designing polymers and hydrogels for neural tissue engineering. Neurosci Res 72: 199-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2011.12.005
[123]
Politron-Zepeda GA, Fletes-Vargas G, Rodriguez-Rodriguez R (2024) Injectable hydrogels for nervous tissue repair-a brief review. Gels 10: 190. https://doi.org/10.3390/gels10030190
[124]
Hasanzadeh E, Seifalian A, Mellati A, et al. (2023) Injectable hydrogels in central nervous system: Unique and novel platforms for promoting extracellular matrix remodeling and tissue engineering. Mater Today Bio 20: 100614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtbio.2023.100614
[125]
Li S, Xu J, Qian Y, et al. (2024) Hydrogel in the treatment of traumatic brain injury. Biomater Res 28: 0085. https://doi.org/10.34133/bmr.0085
[126]
Lou S, Gong D, Yang M, et al. (2024) Curcumin improves neurogenesis in Alzheimer's disease mice via the upregulation of wnt/beta-catenin and BDNF. Int J Mol Sci 25: 5123. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25105123
[127]
Qian F, Han Y, Han Z, et al. (2021) In situ implantable, post-trauma microenvironment-responsive, ROS depletion hydrogels for the treatment of traumatic brain injury. Biomaterials 270: 120675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2021.120675
[128]
Jiang Y, Kang Y, Liu J, et al. (2022) Nanomaterials alleviating redox stress in neurological diseases: mechanisms and applications. J Nanobiotechnology 20: 265. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12951-022-01434-5
[129]
Mu X, He H, Wang J, et al. (2019) Carbogenic nanozyme with ultrahigh reactive nitrogen species selectivity for traumatic brain injury. Nano Lett 19: 4527-4534. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b01333
[130]
Wu J, Wang X, Wang Q, et al. (2019) Nanomaterials with enzyme-like characteristics (nanozymes): next-generation artificial enzymes (II). Chem Soc Rev 48: 1004-1076. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8CS00457A
[131]
Yang J, Zhang R, Zhao H, et al. (2022) Bioinspired copper single-atom nanozyme as a superoxide dismutase-like antioxidant for sepsis treatment. Exploration 2: 20210267. https://doi.org/10.1002/EXP.20210267
[132]
Zhang Y, Zhang L, Wang M, et al. (2023) The applications of nanozymes in neurological diseases: from mechanism to design. Theranostics 13: 2492-2514. https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.83370
[133]
Rempe RG, Hartz AMS, Bauer B (2016) Matrix metalloproteinases in the brain and blood-brain barrier: versatile breakers and makers. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 36: 1481-1507. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271678X16655551
[134]
Lakhan SE, Kirchgessner A, Tepper D, et al. (2018) Corrigendum: matrix metalloproteinases and blood-brain barrier disruption in acute ischemic stroke. Front Neurol 9: 202. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2018.00202
[135]
Ji Y, Gao Q, Ma Y, et al. (2023) An MMP-9 exclusive neutralizing antibody attenuates blood-brain barrier breakdown in mice with stroke and reduces stroke patient-derived MMP-9 activity. Pharmacol Res 190: 106720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phrs.2023.106720
[136]
Zhu FD, Hu YJ, Yu L, et al. (2021) Nanoparticles: a hope for the treatment of inflammation in CNS. Front Pharmacol 12: 683935. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.683935
[137]
Zhang K, Tu M, Gao W, et al. (2019) Hollow prussian blue nanozymes drive neuroprotection against ischemic stroke via attenuating oxidative stress, counteracting inflammation, and suppressing cell apoptosis. Nano Lett 19: 2812-2823. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.8b04729
[138]
Zhao H, Zhang R, Yan X, et al. (2021) Superoxide dismutase nanozymes: an emerging star for anti-oxidation. J Mater Chem B 9: 6939-6957. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1TB00720C
[139]
Zheng G, Yu W, Xu Z, et al. (2024) Neuroimmune modulating and energy supporting nanozyme-mimic scaffold synergistically promotes axon regeneration after spinal cord injury. J Nanobiotechnology 22: 399. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12951-024-02594-2
[140]
Tian R, Xu J, Luo Q, et al. (2020) Rational design and biological application of antioxidant nanozymes. Front Chem 8: 831. https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2020.00831
[141]
Gao W, He J, Chen L, et al. (2023) Deciphering the catalytic mechanism of superoxide dismutase activity of carbon dot nanozyme. Nat Commun 14: 160. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-35828-2
[142]
Zhang W, Sigdel G, Mintz KJ, et al. (2021) Carbon dots: a future blood-brain barrier penetrating nanomedicine and drug nanocarrier. Int J Nanomedicine 16: 5003-5016. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S318732
[143]
Seven ES, Seven YB, Zhou Y, et al. (2021) Crossing the blood-brain barrier with carbon dots: uptake mechanism and in vivo cargo delivery. Nanoscale Adv 3: 3942-3953. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1NA00145K
Wu S, FitzGerald KT, Giordano J (2018) On the viability and potential value of stem cells for repair and treatment of central neurotrauma: overview and speculations. Front Neurol 9: 602. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2018.00602
[146]
Moeinabadi-Bidgoli K, Babajani A, Yazdanpanah G, et al. (2021) Translational insights into stem cell preconditioning: from molecular mechanisms to preclinical applications. Biomed Pharmacother 142: 112026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2021.112026
[147]
Mousaei Ghasroldasht M, Seok J, Park HS, et al. (2022) Stem cell therapy: from idea to clinical practice. Int J Mol Sci 23: 2850. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23052850
[148]
Aazmi A, Zhang D, Mazzaglia C, et al. (2024) Biofabrication methods for reconstructing extracellular matrix mimetics. Bioact Mater 31: 475-496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2023.08.018
[149]
Ansari MJ, Rajendran RR, Mohanto S, et al. (2022) Poly(N-isopropylacrylamide)-based hydrogels for biomedical applications: a review of the state-of-the-art. Gels 8: 454. https://doi.org/10.3390/gels8070454
[150]
Bashir MH, Korany NS, Farag DBE, et al. (2023) Polymeric nanocomposite hydrogel scaffolds in craniofacial bone regeneration: a comprehensive review. Biomolecules 13: 205. https://doi.org/10.3390/biom13020205
[151]
Omidian H, Chowdhury SD, Cubeddu LX (2024) Hydrogels for neural regeneration: exploring new horizons. Materials 17: 3472. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17143472
[152]
Wilson KL, Perez SCL, Naffaa MM, et al. (2022) Stoichiometric post-modification of hydrogel microparticles dictates neural stem cell fate in microporous annealed particle scaffolds. Adv Mater 34: e2201921. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202201921
[153]
Bellotti E, Schilling AL, Little SR, et al. (2021) Injectable thermoresponsive hydrogels as drug delivery system for the treatment of central nervous system disorders: a review. J Control Release 329: 16-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2020.11.049
[154]
Fan R, Cheng Y, Wang R, et al. (2022) Thermosensitive hydrogels and advances in their application in disease therapy. Polymers 14: 2379. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14122379
[155]
Zhang K, Xue K, Loh XJ (2021) Thermo-responsive hydrogels: from recent progress to biomedical applications. Gels 7: 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/gels7030077
[156]
Cao H, Duan L, Zhang Y, et al. (2021) Current hydrogel advances in physicochemical and biological response-driven biomedical application diversity. Signal Transduct Target Ther 6: 426. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-021-00830-x
[157]
Rana MM, De la Hoz Siegler H (2024) Evolution of hybrid hydrogels: next-generation biomaterials for drug delivery and tissue engineering. Gels 10: 216. https://doi.org/10.3390/gels10040216
[158]
Vasile C, Pamfil D, Stoleru E, et al. (2020) New developments in medical applications of hybrid hydrogels containing natural polymers. Molecules 25: 1539. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25071539
[159]
Tripathi AS, Zaki MEA, Al-Hussain SA, et al. (2023) Material matters: exploring the interplay between natural biomaterials and host immune system. Front Immunol 14: 1269960. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1269960
[160]
Brovold M, Almeida JI, Pla-Palacin I, et al. (2018) Naturally-derived biomaterials for tissue engineering applications. Adv Exp Med Biol 1077: 421-449. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0947-2_23
[161]
Liu S, Yu JM, Gan YC, et al. (2023) Biomimetic natural biomaterials for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine: new biosynthesis methods, recent advances, and emerging applications. Mil Med Res 10: 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40779-023-00448-w
[162]
Revete A, Aparicio A, Cisterna BA, et al. (2022) Advancements in the use of hydrogels for regenerative medicine: properties and biomedical applications. Int J Biomater 2022: 3606765. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3606765
[163]
Assuncao-Silva RC, Gomes ED, Sousa N, et al. (2015) Hydrogels and cell based therapies in spinal cord injury regeneration. Stem Cells Int 2015: 948040. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/948040
[164]
Li Z, Fan Z, Xu Y, et al. (2016) pH-sensitive and thermosensitive hydrogels as stem-cell carriers for cardiac therapy. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 8: 10752-10760. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.6b01374
[165]
Xu X, Liu Y, Fu W, et al. (2020) Poly(N-isopropylacrylamide)-based thermoresponsive composite hydrogels for biomedical applications. Polymers 12: 580. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12030580
[166]
Nagase K (2021) Thermoresponsive interfaces obtained using poly(N-isopropylacrylamide)-based copolymer for bioseparation and tissue engineering applications. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 295: 102487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2021.102487
[167]
Li Y, Yang L, Hu F, et al. (2022) Novel thermosensitive hydrogel promotes spinal cord repair by regulating mitochondrial function. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 14: 25155-25172. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.2c04341
[168]
Hu B, Gao J, Lu Y, et al. (2023) Applications of degradable hydrogels in novel approaches to disease treatment and new modes of drug delivery. Pharmaceutics 15: 2370. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics15102370
Huang X, He D, Pan Z, et al. (2021) Reactive-oxygen-species-scavenging nanomaterials for resolving inflammation. Mater Today Bio 11: 100124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtbio.2021.100124
[174]
Pai V, Singh BN, Singh AK (2024) Insights into advances and applications of biomaterials for nerve tissue injuries and neurodegenerative disorders. Macromol Biosci 24: e2400150. https://doi.org/10.1002/mabi.202400150
[175]
Zhang Y, Wu D, Zhou C, et al. (2024) Engineered extracellular vesicles for tissue repair and regeneration. Burns Trauma 12: tkae062. https://doi.org/10.1093/burnst/tkae062
[176]
Liu J, Han X, Zhang T, et al. (2023) Reactive oxygen species (ROS) scavenging biomaterials for anti-inflammatory diseases: from mechanism to therapy. J Hematol Oncol 16: 116. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13045-023-01512-7
[177]
Shafiq M, Chen Y, Hashim R, et al. (2021) Reactive oxygen species-based biomaterials for regenerative medicine and tissue engineering applications. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 9: 821288. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2021.821288
[178]
Krishani M, Shin WY, Suhaimi H, et al. (2023) Development of scaffolds from bio-based natural materials for tissue regeneration applications: a review. Gels 9: 100. https://doi.org/10.3390/gels9020100
[179]
Calderone A, Latella D, Cardile D, et al. (2024) The role of neuroinflammation in shaping neuroplasticity and recovery outcomes following traumatic brain injury: a systematic review. Int J Mol Sci 25: 11708. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms252111708
[180]
Wang J, Lv C, Wei X, et al. (2024) Molecular mechanisms and therapeutic strategies for ferroptosis and cuproptosis in ischemic stroke. Brain Behav Immun Health 40: 100837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbih.2024.100837
Chen X, Huang X, Liu C, et al. (2022) Surface-fill H(2)S-releasing silk fibroin hydrogel for brain repair through the repression of neuronal pyroptosis. Acta Biomater 154: 259-274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2022.11.021
[183]
Rodkin S, Nwosu C, Sannikov A, et al. (2023) The role of hydrogen sulfide in regulation of cell death following neurotrauma and related neurodegenerative and psychiatric diseases. Int J Mol Sci 24: 10742. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241310742
[184]
Sun D, Liu K, Li Y, et al. (2022) Intrinsically bioactive manganese-eumelanin nanocomposites mediated antioxidation and anti-neuroinflammation for targeted theranostics of traumatic brain injury. Adv Healthc Mater 11: e2200517. https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.202200517
[185]
Liu Y, Shang W, Liu H, et al. (2022) Biomimetic manganese-eumelanin nanocomposites for combined hyperthermia-immunotherapy against prostate cancer. J Nanobiotechnology 20: 48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12951-022-01248-5
[186]
Gao F, Liang W, Chen Q, et al. (2024) A curcumin-decorated nanozyme with ROS scavenging and anti-inflammatory properties for neuroprotection. Nanomaterials 14: 389. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano14050389
[187]
Bertossi R, Kurz JE, McGuire T, et al. (2024) Intravenous immunomodulatory nanoparticles prevent secondary damage after traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 42: 94-106. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2024.0218
[188]
Abou-El-Hassan H, Bernstock JD, Chalif JI, et al. (2023) Elucidating the neuroimmunology of traumatic brain injury: methodological approaches to unravel intercellular communication and function. Front Cell Neurosci 17: 1322325. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2023.1322325
[189]
Sun S, Shen J, Jiang J, et al. (2023) Targeting ferroptosis opens new avenues for the development of novel therapeutics. Signal Transduct Target Ther 8: 372. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-023-01606-1
[190]
Wei Z, Yu H, Zhao H, et al. (2024) Broadening horizons: ferroptosis as a new target for traumatic brain injury. Burns Trauma 12: tkad051. https://doi.org/10.1093/burnst/tkad051
[191]
Kumar J, Patel T, Sugandh F, et al. (2023) Innovative approaches and therapies to enhance neuroplasticity and promote recovery in patients with neurological disorders: a narrative review. Cureus 15: e41914. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.41914
[192]
Zhao LR, Willing A (2018) Enhancing endogenous capacity to repair a stroke-damaged brain: an evolving field for stroke research. Prog Neurobiol 163-164: 5-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2018.01.004
[193]
Rust R, Nih LR, Liberale L, et al. (2024) Brain repair mechanisms after cell therapy for stroke. Brain 147: 3286-3305. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awae204
[194]
Massa SM, Yang T, Xie Y, et al. (2010) Small molecule BDNF mimetics activate TrkB signaling and prevent neuronal degeneration in rodents. J Clin Invest 120: 1774-1785. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI41356
[195]
Wurzelmann M, Romeika J, Sun D (2017) Therapeutic potential of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and a small molecular mimics of BDNF for traumatic brain injury. Neural Regen Res 12: 7-12. https://doi.org/10.4103/1673-5374.198964
[196]
Atkinson E, Dickman R (2023) Growth factors and their peptide mimetics for treatment of traumatic brain injury. Bioorg Med Chem 90: 117368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bmc.2023.117368
[197]
Mishchenko TA, Klimenko MO, Kuznetsova AI, et al. (2022) 3D-printed hyaluronic acid hydrogel scaffolds impregnated with neurotrophic factors (BDNF, GDNF) for post-traumatic brain tissue reconstruction. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 10: 895406. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.895406
[198]
Huang WH, Ding SL, Zhao XY, et al. (2023) Collagen for neural tissue engineering: materials, strategies, and challenges. Mater Today Bio 20: 100639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtbio.2023.100639
[199]
Zhang J, Liu X, Ma K, et al. (2021) Collagen/heparin scaffold combined with vascular endothelial growth factor promotes the repair of neurological function in rats with traumatic brain injury. Biomater Sci 9: 745-764. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9BM01446B
Binetruy-Tournaire R, Demangel C, Malavaud B, et al. (2000) Identification of a peptide blocking vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-mediated angiogenesis. EMBO J 19: 1525-1533. https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/19.7.1525
[202]
Ma S, Zhou J, Huang T, et al. (2021) Sodium alginate/collagen/stromal cell-derived factor-1 neural scaffold loaded with BMSCs promotes neurological function recovery after traumatic brain injury. Acta Biomater 131: 185-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2021.06.038
[203]
Ling L, Hou J, Liu D, et al. (2022) Important role of the SDF-1/CXCR4 axis in the homing of systemically transplanted human amnion-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hAD-MSCs) to ovaries in rats with chemotherapy-induced premature ovarian insufficiency (POI). Stem Cell Res Ther 13: 79. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-022-02759-6
[204]
Zhang J, Cheng T, Chen Y, et al. (2020) A chitosan-based thermosensitive scaffold loaded with bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells promotes motor function recovery in spinal cord injured mice. Biomed Mater 15: 035020. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-605X/ab785f
[205]
Bjorklund GR, Anderson TR, Stabenfeldt SE (2021) Recent advances in stem cell therapies to address neuroinflammation, stem cell survival, and the need for rehabilitative therapies to treat traumatic brain injuries. Int J Mol Sci 22: 1978. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22041978
[206]
Liu X, Wu C, Zhang Y, et al. (2023) Hyaluronan-based hydrogel integrating exosomes for traumatic brain injury repair by promoting angiogenesis and neurogenesis. Carbohydr Polym 306: 120578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2023.120578
[207]
Li M, Jiang Y, Hou Q, et al. (2022) Potential pre-activation strategies for improving therapeutic efficacy of mesenchymal stem cells: current status and future prospects. Stem Cell Res Ther 13: 146. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-022-02822-2
[208]
Xiu G, Li X, Yin Y, et al. (2020) SDF-1/CXCR4 augments the therapeutic effect of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells in the treatment of lipopolysaccharide-induced liver injury by promoting their migration through PI3K/Akt signaling pathway. Cell Transplant 29: 0963689720929992. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963689720929992
[209]
Petit I, Jin D, Rafii S (2007) The SDF-1-CXCR4 signaling pathway: a molecular hub modulating neo-angiogenesis. Trends Immunol 28: 299-307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.it.2007.05.007
[210]
Cheng X, Wang H, Zhang X, et al. (2017) The role of SDF-1/CXCR4/CXCR7 in neuronal regeneration after cerebral ischemia. Front Neurosci 11: 590. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2017.00590
[211]
Li X, Duan L, Kong M, et al. (2022) Applications and mechanisms of stimuli-responsive hydrogels in traumatic brain injury. Gels 8: 482. https://doi.org/10.3390/gels8080482
[212]
Sun Z, Zhu D, Zhao H, et al. (2023) Recent advance in bioactive hydrogels for repairing spinal cord injury: material design, biofunctional regulation, and applications. J Nanobiotechnology 21: 238. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12951-023-01996-y
[213]
Deng H, Wang J, An R (2023) Hyaluronic acid-based hydrogels: as an exosome delivery system in bone regeneration. Front Pharmacol 14: 1131001. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2023.1131001
[214]
Hu JC, Zheng CX, Sui BD, et al. (2022) Mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes: a novel and potential remedy for cutaneous wound healing and regeneration. World J Stem Cells 14: 318-329. https://doi.org/10.4252/wjsc.v14.i5.318
[215]
Kou M, Huang L, Yang J, et al. (2022) Mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles for immunomodulation and regeneration: a next generation therapeutic tool?. Cell Death Dis 13: 580. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-022-05034-x
[216]
Essola JM, Zhang M, Yang H, et al. (2024) Exosome regulation of immune response mechanism: Pros and cons in immunotherapy. Bioact Mater 32: 124-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2023.09.018
[217]
Zou Y, Liao L, Dai J, et al. (2023) Mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles/exosome: a promising therapeutic strategy for intracerebral hemorrhage. Regen Ther 22: 181-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reth.2023.01.006
[218]
Fan MH, Pi JK, Zou CY, et al. (2024) Hydrogel-exosome system in tissue engineering: a promising therapeutic strategy. Bioact Mater 38: 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2024.04.007
[219]
Oyarce K, Cepeda MY, Lagos R, et al. (2022) Neuroprotective and neurotoxic effects of glial-derived exosomes. Front Cell Neurosci 16: 920686. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2022.920686
[220]
Zhao S, Sheng S, Wang Y, et al. (2021) Astrocyte-derived extracellular vesicles: a double-edged sword in central nervous system disorders. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 125: 148-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.02.027
[221]
Wan T, Huang Y, Gao X, et al. (2022) Microglia polarization: a novel target of exosome for stroke treatment. Front Cell Dev Biol 10: 842320. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2022.842320
[222]
Lee S, Choi E, Cha MJ, et al. (2015) Cell adhesion and long-term survival of transplanted mesenchymal stem cells: a prerequisite for cell therapy. Oxid Med Cell Longev 2015: 632902. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/632902
[223]
Alagesan S, Brady J, Byrnes D, et al. (2022) Enhancement strategies for mesenchymal stem cells and related therapies. Stem Cell Res Ther 13: 75. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-022-02747-w
[224]
Khan NA, Asim M, El-Menyar A, et al. (2022) The evolving role of extracellular vesicles (exosomes) as biomarkers in traumatic brain injury: clinical perspectives and therapeutic implications. Front Aging Neurosci 14: 933434. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2022.933434
[225]
Chen Y, Li J, Ma B, et al. (2020) MSC-derived exosomes promote recovery from traumatic brain injury via microglia/macrophages in rat. Aging 12: 18274-18296. https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.103692
[226]
Selvam S, Midhun BT, Bhowmick T, et al. (2023) Bioprinting of exosomes: prospects and challenges for clinical applications. Int J Bioprint 9: 690. https://doi.org/10.18063/ijb.690
[227]
Li Q, Yu H, Zhao F, et al. (2023) 3D printing of microenvironment-specific bioinspired and exosome-reinforced hydrogel scaffolds for efficient cartilage and subchondral bone regeneration. Adv Sci 10: e2303650. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202303650
[228]
Chen C, Chang ZH, Yao B, et al. (2024) 3D printing of interferon gamma-preconditioned NSC-derived exosomes/collagen/chitosan biological scaffolds for neurological recovery after TBI. Bioact Mater 39: 375-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2024.05.026
[229]
Xiong Y, Mahmood A, Chopp M (2013) Animal models of traumatic brain injury. Nat Rev Neurosci 14: 128-142. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3407
Fesharaki-Zadeh A, Datta D (2024) An overview of preclinical models of traumatic brain injury (TBI): relevance to pathophysiological mechanisms. Front Cell Neurosci 18: 1371213. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2024.1371213
[232]
Marklund N, Hillered L (2011) Animal modelling of traumatic brain injury in preclinical drug development: where do we go from here?. Br J Pharmacol 164: 1207-1229. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-5381.2010.01163.x
[233]
Kinder HA, Baker EW, West FD (2019) The pig as a preclinical traumatic brain injury model: current models, functional outcome measures, and translational detection strategies. Neural Regen Res 14: 413-424. https://doi.org/10.4103/1673-5374.245334
[234]
Netzley AH, Pelled G (2023) The pig as a translational animal model for biobehavioral and neurotrauma research. Biomedicines 11: 2165. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11082165
Xiong Y, Mahmood A, Chopp M (2018) Current understanding of neuroinflammation after traumatic brain injury and cell-based therapeutic opportunities. Chin J Traumatol 21: 137-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjtee.2018.02.003
[237]
El Baassiri MG, Raouf Z, Badin S, et al. (2024) Dysregulated brain-gut axis in the setting of traumatic brain injury: review of mechanisms and anti-inflammatory pharmacotherapies. J Neuroinflammation 21: 124. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12974-024-03118-3
[238]
Kapate N, Liao R, Sodemann RL, et al. (2024) Backpack-mediated anti-inflammatory macrophage cell therapy for the treatment of traumatic brain injury. PNAS Nexus 3: pgad434. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad434
Nong J, Glassman PM, Myerson JW, et al. (2023) Targeted nanocarriers Co-opting pulmonary intravascular leukocytes for drug delivery to the injured brain. ACS Nano 17: 13121-13136. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.2c08275
[241]
Qu Y, Chu B, Li J, et al. (2024) Macrophage-biomimetic nanoplatform-based therapy for inflammation-associated diseases. Small Methods 8: e2301178. https://doi.org/10.1002/smtd.202301178
[242]
Shields CWt, Evans MA, Wang LL, et al. (2020) Cellular backpacks for macrophage immunotherapy. Sci Adv 6: eaaz6579. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz6579
[243]
Su Y, Gao J, Kaur P, et al. (2020) Neutrophils and macrophages as targets for development of nanotherapeutics in inflammatory diseases. Pharmaceutics 12: 1222. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics12121222
[244]
Savchenko IV, Zlotnikov ID, Kudryashova EV (2023) Biomimetic systems involving macrophages and their potential for targeted drug delivery. Biomimetics 8: 543. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202308.0872.v1
[245]
Kapate N, Dunne M, Kumbhojkar N, et al. (2023) A backpack-based myeloid cell therapy for multiple sclerosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 120: e2221535120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2221535120
Sorby-Adams AJ, Vink R, Turner RJ (2018) Large animal models of stroke and traumatic brain injury as translational tools. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 315: R165-R190. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpregu.00163.2017
[248]
Smith DH, Kochanek PM, Rosi S, et al. (2021) Roadmap for advancing pre-clinical science in traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 38: 3204-3221. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2021.0094
[249]
Hamblin MR (2018) Photobiomodulation for traumatic brain injury and stroke. J Neurosci Res 96: 731-743. https://doi.org/10.1002/jnr.24190
[250]
Nairuz T, Sangwoo C, Lee JH (2024) Photobiomodulation therapy on brain: pioneering an innovative approach to revolutionize cognitive dynamics. Cells 13: 966. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells13110966
[251]
Hamblin MR (2018) Mechanisms and mitochondrial redox signaling in photobiomodulation. Photochem Photobiol 94: 199-212. https://doi.org/10.1111/php.12864
[252]
Cardoso FDS, Barrett DW, Wade Z, et al. (2022) Photobiomodulation of cytochrome c oxidase by chronic transcranial laser in young and aged brains. Front Neurosci 16: 818005. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2022.818005
[253]
Cheng G, Kong RH, Zhang LM, et al. (2012) Mitochondria in traumatic brain injury and mitochondrial-targeted multipotential therapeutic strategies. Br J Pharmacol 167: 699-719. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-5381.2012.02025.x
[254]
Lim L (2024) Traumatic brain injury recovery with photobiomodulation: cellular mechanisms, clinical evidence, and future potential. Cells 13: 385. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells13050385
[255]
Yang J, Jiang H, Fu Q, et al. (2023) Blue light photobiomodulation induced apoptosis by increasing ROS level and regulating SOCS3 and PTEN/PI3K/AKT pathway in osteosarcoma cells. J Photochem Photobiol B 249: 112814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2023.112814
[256]
Stevens AR, Hadis M, Milward M, et al. (2023) Photobiomodulation in acute traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurotrauma 40: 210-227. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2022.0140
[257]
Stevens AR, Hadis M, Phillips A, et al. (2024) Implantable and transcutaneous photobiomodulation promote neuroregeneration and recovery of lost function after spinal cord injury. Bioeng Transl Med 9: e10674. https://doi.org/10.1002/btm2.10674
[258]
Farazi N, Salehi-Pourmehr H, Farajdokht F, et al. (2024) Photobiomodulation combination therapy as a new insight in neurological disorders: a comprehensive systematic review. BMC Neurol 24: 101. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-024-03593-4
Cardoso FDS, Salehpour F, Coimbra NC, et al. (2022) Photobiomodulation for the treatment of neuroinflammation: a systematic review of controlled laboratory animal studies. Front Neurosci 16: 1006031. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2022.1006031
[261]
Rodriguez-Fernandez L, Zorzo C, Arias JL (2024) Photobiomodulation in the aging brain: a systematic review from animal models to humans. Geroscience 46: 6583-6623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11357-024-01231-y
[262]
Li S, Wong TWL, Ng SSM (2024) Potential and challenges of transcranial photobiomodulation for the treatment of stroke. CNS Neurosci Ther 30: e70142. https://doi.org/10.1111/cns.70142
[263]
Shen Q, Guo H, Yan Y (2024) Photobiomodulation for neurodegenerative diseases: a scoping review. Int J Mol Sci 25: 1625. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25031625
[264]
Morries LD, Cassano P, Henderson TA (2015) Treatments for traumatic brain injury with emphasis on transcranial near-infrared laser phototherapy. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat 11: 2159-2175. https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S65809
[265]
Chao LL, Barlow C, Karimpoor M, et al. (2020) Changes in brain function and structure after self-administered home photobiomodulation treatment in a concussion case. Front Neurol 11: 952. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.00952
[266]
Wu Q, Xuan W, Ando T, et al. (2012) Low-level laser therapy for closed-head traumatic brain injury in mice: effect of different wavelengths. Lasers Surg Med 44: 218-226. https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.22003
[267]
Huang YY, Gupta A, Vecchio D, et al. (2012) Transcranial low level laser (light) therapy for traumatic brain injury. J Biophotonics 5: 827-837. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbio.201200077
Lin H, Li D, Zhu J, et al. (2024) Transcranial photobiomodulation for brain diseases: review of animal and human studies including mechanisms and emerging trends. Neurophotonics 11: 010601. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.NPh.11.1.010601
[271]
Hassan MP, Abdollahifar MA, Aliaghaei A, et al. (2021) Photobiomodulation therapy improved functional recovery and overexpression of interleukins-10 after contusion spinal cord injury in rats. J Chem Neuroanat 117: 102010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchemneu.2021.102010
[272]
Davies DJ, Hadis M, Di Pietro V, et al. (2022) Photobiomodulation reduces hippocampal apoptotic cell death and produces a Raman spectroscopic “signature”. PLoS One 17: e0264533. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0264533
[273]
Serrage H, Heiskanen V, Palin WM, et al. (2019) Under the spotlight: mechanisms of photobiomodulation concentrating on blue and green light. Photochem Photobiol Sci 18: 1877-1909. https://doi.org/10.1039/c9pp00089e
[274]
Dompe C, Moncrieff L, Matys J, et al. (2020) Photobiomodulation-underlying mechanism and clinical applications. J Clin Med 9: 1724. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9061724
[275]
Blivet G, Meunier J, Roman FJ, et al. (2018) Neuroprotective effect of a new photobiomodulation technique against Abeta(25–35) peptide-induced toxicity in mice: novel hypothesis for therapeutic approach of Alzheimer's disease suggested. Alzheimers Dement 4: 54-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trci.2017.12.003
[276]
Deshetty UM, Periyasamy P (2023) Potential biomarkers in experimental animal models for traumatic brain injury. J Clin Med 12: 3923. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12123923
[277]
Peterson TC, Maass WR, Anderson JR, et al. (2015) A behavioral and histological comparison of fluid percussion injury and controlled cortical impact injury to the rat sensorimotor cortex. Behav Brain Res 294: 254-263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2015.08.007
[278]
Osier ND, Dixon CE (2016) The controlled cortical impact model: applications, considerations for researchers, and future directions. Front Neurol 7: 134. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2016.00134
[279]
Wahab RA, Neuberger EJ, Lyeth BG, et al. (2015) Fluid percussion injury device for the precise control of injury parameters. J Neurosci Methods 248: 16-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2015.03.010
[280]
Mesfin FB, Gupta N, Hays Shapshak A, et al. (2025) Diffuse Axonal Injury. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls.
[281]
Su E, Bell M (2016) Diffuse axonal injury. Translational Research in Traumatic Brain Injury. Boca Raton (FL): . https://doi.org/10.1201/b18959-4
[282]
Smith DH, Hicks R, Povlishock JT (2013) Therapy development for diffuse axonal injury. J Neurotrauma 30: 307-323. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2012.2825
[283]
Corrigan JD, Hammond FM, Sander AM, et al. (2025) Model of care for chronic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 106: 145-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2024.08.001
[284]
Albayram O, Albayram S, Mannix R (2020) Chronic traumatic encephalopathy-a blueprint for the bridge between neurological and psychiatric disorders. Transl Psychiatry 10: 424. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-020-01111-x
[285]
Turner RC, Lucke-Wold BP, Logsdon AF, et al. (2015) Modeling chronic traumatic encephalopathy: the way forward for future discovery. Front Neurol 6: 223. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2015.00223
[286]
Lucke-Wold BP, Turner RC, Logsdon AF, et al. (2014) Linking traumatic brain injury to chronic traumatic encephalopathy: identification of potential mechanisms leading to neurofibrillary tangle development. J Neurotrauma 31: 1129-1138. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2013.3303
[287]
Seplovich G, Bouchi Y, de Rivero Vaccari JP, et al. (2025) Inflammasome links traumatic brain injury, chronic traumatic encephalopathy, and Alzheimer's disease. Neural Regen Res 20: 1644-1664. https://doi.org/10.4103/NRR.NRR-D-24-00107
[288]
Jarrahi A, Braun M, Ahluwalia M, et al. (2020) Revisiting traumatic brain injury: from molecular mechanisms to therapeutic interventions. Biomedicines 8: 389. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines8100389
[289]
Failla MD, Wagner AK (2015) Models of posttraumatic brain injury neurorehabilitation. Brain Neurotrauma: Molecular, Neuropsychological, and Rehabilitation Aspects. Boca Raton (FL): .
[290]
Balakin E, Yurku K, Fomina T, et al. (2024) A systematic review of traumatic brain injury in modern rodent models: current status and future prospects. Biology 13: 813. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology13100813
Hacene S, Le Friec A, Desmoulin F, et al. (2022) Present and future avenues of cell-based therapy for brain injury: the enteric nervous system as a potential cell source. Brain Pathol 32: e13105. https://doi.org/10.1111/bpa.13105
[293]
Rahimi Darehbagh R, Seyedoshohadaei SA, Ramezani R, et al. (2024) Stem cell therapies for neurological disorders: current progress, challenges, and future perspectives. Eur J Med Res 29: 386. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-024-01987-1
[294]
Haus DL, Lopez-Velazquez L, Gold EM, et al. (2016) Transplantation of human neural stem cells restores cognition in an immunodeficient rodent model of traumatic brain injury. Exp Neurol 281: 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2016.04.008
[295]
Mattingly J, Li Y, Bihl JC, et al. (2021) The promise of exosome applications in treating central nervous system diseases. CNS Neurosci Ther 27: 1437-1445. https://doi.org/10.1111/cns.13743
[296]
Willing AE, Das M, Howell M, et al. (2020) Potential of mesenchymal stem cells alone, or in combination, to treat traumatic brain injury. CNS Neurosci Ther 26: 616-627. https://doi.org/10.1111/cns.13300
[297]
Ojeda-Hernandez DD, Hernandez-Sapiens MA, Reza-Zaldivar EE, et al. (2022) Exosomes and biomaterials: in search of a new therapeutic strategy for multiple sclerosis. Life 12: 1417. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12091417
[298]
Nelson DW, Gilbert RJ (2021) Extracellular matrix-mimetic hydrogels for treating neural tissue injury: a focus on fibrin, hyaluronic acid, and elastin-like polypeptide hydrogels. Adv Healthc Mater 10: e2101329. https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.202101329
[299]
Zheng Y, Wu G, Chen L, et al. (2021) Neuro-regenerative imidazole-functionalized GelMA hydrogel loaded with hAMSC and SDF-1alpha promote stem cell differentiation and repair focal brain injury. Bioact Mater 6: 627-637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.08.026
[300]
Da Silva K, Kumar P, van Vuuren SF, et al. (2021) Three-dimensional printability of an ECM-based gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) biomaterial for potential neuroregeneration. ACS Omega 6: 21368-21383. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.1c01903
[301]
Yan B, Zhou J, Yan F, et al. (2025) Unlocking the potential of photobiomodulation therapy for brain neurovascular coupling: The biological effects and medical applications. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2025: 0271678X241311695.
[302]
Wu H, Zheng J, Xu S, et al. (2021) Mer regulates microglial/macrophage M1/M2 polarization and alleviates neuroinflammation following traumatic brain injury. J Neuroinflammation 18: 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12974-020-02041-7