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.

53/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Drug development

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Plain-language summary

Neither losartan nor divalinal affected arterial blood pressure or significantly altered the amyloid pathology in APP mice. Our findings identify activation of the AngIV/AT4R cascade as the underlying mechanism in losartan's benefits and a target that could restore Aβ-related cognitive and cerebrovascular deficits in AD. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Antihypertensive medications that target the renin angiotensin system, such as angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), have been associated with lower incidence and progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in cohort studies. Overall, our results implicate the angiotensin IV/AT4R cascade as a promising candidate for AD intervention.

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

APA 7th

Royea, J., Zhang, L., Tong, X. K., & Hamel, E. (2017). Angiotensin IV Receptors Mediate the Cognitive and Cerebrovascular Benefits of Losartan in a Mouse Model of Alzheimer's Disease. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0329-17.2017

Vancouver

Royea J, Zhang L, Tong XK, Hamel E. Angiotensin IV Receptors Mediate the Cognitive and Cerebrovascular Benefits of Losartan in a Mouse Model of Alzheimer's Disease. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. 2017. doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0329-17.2017. PMID: 28476949.

BibTeX

@article{royea2017-28476949,
  author  = {Royea, J. and Zhang, L. and Tong, X. K. and Hamel, E.},
  title   = {{Angiotensin IV Receptors Mediate the Cognitive and Cerebrovascular Benefits of Losartan in a Mouse Model of Alzheimer's Disease}},
  journal = {The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience},
  year    = {2017},
  doi     = {10.1523/jneurosci.0329-17.2017},
  pmid    = {28476949},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0329-17.2017}
}

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 follow-up (cohort) study. People are observed over time and not assigned to anything, so an association can reflect other differences between groups. Look at how long follow-up lasted, how many dropped out, and whether the authors adjusted for age, education and other health conditions.
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 moderate. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Moderate means the abstract mentions a cohort, case-control or longitudinal design. 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

Neither losartan nor divalinal affected arterial blood pressure or significantly altered the amyloid pathology in APP mice.
Our findings identify activation of the AngIV/AT4R cascade as the underlying mechanism in losartan's benefits and a target that could restore Aβ-related cognitive and cerebrovascular deficits in AD.
SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Antihypertensive medications that target the renin angiotensin system, such as angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), have been associated with lower incidence and progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in cohort studies.
Overall, our results implicate the angiotensin IV/AT4R cascade as a promising candidate for AD intervention.

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

Study details

Study designcohort study
Evidence strengthModerate

How this study scored 53/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported 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 31 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 53 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience)
Journal's citation record	— / 4	No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design	7 / 12	A cohort study following people over time
Strength of evidence	3 / 5	Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	2 / 5	2017 — 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	Laboratory or animal study (title names “mouse”) — scores zero
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 28476949)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	31 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 31 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 53 out of 100.
Total	53 / 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 “losartan”

2 studies in the library carry the topic tag “losartan”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 2 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Drug development

See all studies in Drug development →