Home › Research › Treatments
Alzheimer's disease: the pharmacological pathway
Allain H, Bentué-Ferrer D, Tribut O, Gauthier S, Michel BF, Drieu-La Rochelle C.. Fundamental & clinical pharmacology, 2003-08-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
The current pharmacological treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD) comes down to four marketed drugs (tacrine, donepezil, rivastigmine and galantamine) all of which are cholinesterase inhibitors, conforming to the cholinergic hypothesis. The future is clearly directed at new biological targets closely linked to the pathophysiology of the disease and more precisely, the pathological hallmark of AD which includes widespread neuronal degeneration, neuritic plaques containing beta-amyloid and tau-rich neurofibrillary tangles. For clinicians, this means that new curative drugs will have to be prescribed early in the course of the disease. This review describes the main entry pathways for drug discovery in AD: (1) supplementation therapy, (2) anti-apoptotic compounds, (3) substances with a mitochondrial impact, (4) anti-amyloid substances, (5) anti-protein aggregation and (6) lipid-lowering drugs. The rapidity at which these compounds will be at our disposal is highly dependent on the policy of the pharmaceutical companies.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Allain, H., Bentué-Ferrer, D., Tribut, O., Gauthier, S., Michel, B. F., & Drieu-La Rochelle, C. (2003). Alzheimer's disease: the pharmacological pathway. Fundamental & clinical pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1472-8206.2003.00153.x
Vancouver
Allain H, Bentué-Ferrer D, Tribut O, Gauthier S, Michel BF, Drieu-La Rochelle C. Alzheimer's disease: the pharmacological pathway. Fundamental & clinical pharmacology. 2003. doi:10.1046/j.1472-8206.2003.00153.x. PMID: 12914543.
BibTeX
@article{allain2003-12914543,
author = {Allain, H. and Bentué-Ferrer, D. and Tribut, O. and Gauthier, S. and Michel, B. F. and Drieu-La Rochelle, C.},
title = {{Alzheimer's disease: the pharmacological pathway}},
journal = {Fundamental \& clinical pharmacology},
year = {2003},
doi = {10.1046/j.1472-8206.2003.00153.x},
pmid = {12914543},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1472-8206.2003.00153.x}
}
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.
Key findings
- The current pharmacological treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD) comes down to four marketed drugs (tacrine, donepezil, rivastigmine and galantamine) all of which are cholinesterase inhibitors, conforming to the cholinergic hypothesis.
- The future is clearly directed at new biological targets closely linked to the pathophysiology of the disease and more precisely, the pathological hallmark of AD which includes widespread neuronal degeneration, neuritic plaques containing beta-amyloid and tau-rich neurofibrillary tangles.
- For clinicians, this means that new curative drugs will have to be prescribed early in the course of the disease.
- This review describes the main entry pathways for drug discovery in AD: (1) supplementation therapy, (2) anti-apoptotic compounds, (3) substances with a mitochondrial impact, (4) anti-amyloid substances, (5) anti-protein aggregation and (6) lipid-lowering drugs.
- The rapidity at which these compounds will be at our disposal is highly dependent on the policy of the pharmaceutical companies.
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 randomised / 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 multi-centre 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 (Fundamental & clinical pharmacology) |
| 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 | 2003 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| 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) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation 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 |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 12914543) |
| 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 Treatments
Also tagged “pathway”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “pathway”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.