This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

39/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Drug development

Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety

Plain-language summary

Lithium as a mood stabilizer has been used as the standard pharmacological treatment for Bipolar Disorder (BD) for more than 60 years. Recent studies have also shown that it has the potential for the treatment of many other neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and Huntington's disease, through its neurotrophic, neuroprotective, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory actions. Therefore, exploring its pharmacokinetic features and designing better lithium preparations are becoming important research topics. We reviewed many studies on the pharmacokinetics, drug design and toxicity of lithium based on recent relevant research from PubMed, Web of Science, Elsevier and Springer databases. Keywords used for searching references were lithium, pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, drug design and toxicity. Lithium is rapidly and completely absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract after oral administration. Its level is initially highest in serum and then is evidently redistributed to various tissue compartments. It is not metabolized and over 95% of lithium is excreted unchanged through the kidney, but different lithium preparations may have different pharmacokinetic features. Lithium has a narrow therapeutic window limited by various adverse effects, but some novel drugs of lithium may overcome these problems. Various formulations of lithium have the potential for treating neurodegenerative brain diseases but further study on their pharmacokinetics will be required in order to determine the optimal formulation, dosage and route of administration.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Wen, J., Sawmiller, D., Wheeldon, B., & Tan, J. (2019). A Review for Lithium: Pharmacokinetics, Drug Design, and Toxicity. CNS & neurological disorders drug targets. https://doi.org/10.2174/1871527318666191114095249

Vancouver

Wen J, Sawmiller D, Wheeldon B, Tan J. A Review for Lithium: Pharmacokinetics, Drug Design, and Toxicity. CNS & neurological disorders drug targets. 2019. doi:10.2174/1871527318666191114095249. PMID: 31724518.

BibTeX

@article{wen2019-31724518,
  author  = {Wen, Jinhua and Sawmiller, Darrell and Wheeldon, Brendan and Tan, Jun},
  title   = {{A Review for Lithium: Pharmacokinetics, Drug Design, and Toxicity}},
  journal = {CNS \& neurological disorders drug targets},
  year    = {2019},
  doi     = {10.2174/1871527318666191114095249},
  pmid    = {31724518},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.2174/1871527318666191114095249}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: this is a narrative review. It summarises a field without a fixed search method, so it shows how authors read the evidence rather than measuring it. Use it to find the primary studies, not as a result in itself.
Size: the record gives no participant count. Look for one in the original before trusting a pattern.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Recent studies have also shown that it has the potential for the treatment of many other neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and Huntington's disease, through its neurotrophic, neuroprotective, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory actions.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 39/100

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, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 39 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (CNS & neurological disorders drug targets)
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	2 / 5	2019 — within 10 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 31724518)
Free to read	— / 2	Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points	22 / 56	Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 39 out of 100.
Total	39 / 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.

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 “late-life-depression”

139 studies in the library carry the topic tag “late-life-depression”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 139 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Drug development

See all studies in Drug development →