Home › Research › Drug development
A new avenue for lithium: intervention in traumatic brain injury
Leeds PR, Yu F, Wang Z, Chiu CT, Zhang Y, Leng Y, Linares GR, Chuang DM.. ACS chemical neuroscience, 2014-04-11
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Plain-language summary
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of disability and death from trauma to central nervous system (CNS) tissues. For patients who survive the initial injury, TBI can lead to neurodegeneration as well as cognitive and motor deficits, and is even a risk factor for the future development of neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer's disease. Preclinical studies of multiple neuropathological and neurodegenerative disorders have shown that lithium, which is primarily used to treat bipolar disorder, has considerable neuroprotective effects. Indeed, emerging evidence now suggests that lithium can also mitigate neurological deficits incurred from TBI. Lithium exerts neuroprotective effects and stimulates neurogenesis via multiple signaling pathways; it inhibits glycogen synthase kinase-3 (GSK-3), upregulates neurotrophins and growth factors (e.g., brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF)), modulates inflammatory molecules, upregulates neuroprotective factors (e.g., B-cell lymphoma-2 (Bcl-2), heat shock protein 70 (HSP-70)), and concomitantly downregulates pro-apoptotic factors. In various experimental TBI paradigms, lithium has been shown to reduce neuronal death, microglial activation, cyclooxygenase-2 induction, amyloid-β (Aβ), and hyperphosphorylated tau levels, to preserve blood-brain barrier integrity, to mitigate neurological deficits and psychiatric disturbance, and to improve learning and memory outcome. Given that lithium exerts multiple therapeutic effects across an array of CNS disorders, including promising results in preclinical models of TBI, additional clinical research is clearly warranted to determine its therapeutic attributes for combating TBI. Here, we review lithium's exciting potential in ameliorating physiological as well as cognitive deficits induced by TBI.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Leeds, P. R., Yu, F., Wang, Z., Chiu, C. T., Zhang, Y., Leng, Y., et al. (2014). A new avenue for lithium: intervention in traumatic brain injury. ACS chemical neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1021/cn500040g
Vancouver
Leeds PR, Yu F, Wang Z, Chiu CT, Zhang Y, Leng Y, et al. A new avenue for lithium: intervention in traumatic brain injury. ACS chemical neuroscience. 2014. doi:10.1021/cn500040g. PMID: 24697257.
BibTeX
@article{leeds2014-24697257,
author = {Leeds, P. R. and Yu, F. and Wang, Z. and Chiu, C. T. and Zhang, Y. and Leng, Y. and Linares, G. R. and Chuang, D. M.},
title = {{A new avenue for lithium: intervention in traumatic brain injury}},
journal = {ACS chemical neuroscience},
year = {2014},
doi = {10.1021/cn500040g},
pmid = {24697257},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1021/cn500040g}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Preclinical studies of multiple neuropathological and neurodegenerative disorders have shown that lithium, which is primarily used to treat bipolar disorder, has considerable neuroprotective effects.
- Indeed, emerging evidence now suggests that lithium can also mitigate neurological deficits incurred from TBI.
- Given that lithium exerts multiple therapeutic effects across an array of CNS disorders, including promising results in preclinical models of TBI, additional clinical research is clearly warranted to determine its therapeutic attributes for combating TBI.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (ACS chemical neuroscience) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2014 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 24697257) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Drug development from nearby years
Also tagged “intervention”
2 studies in the library carry the topic tag “intervention”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 2 tagged studies.