Home › Research › Treatments
Anti-inflammatory and immune therapy for Alzheimer's disease: current status and future directions
Walker D, Lue LF.. Current neuropharmacology, 2007-12-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
From the initial characterizations of inflammatory responses in Alzheimer's disease (AD) affected brains, namely the demonstration of activated microglia and reactive astrocytes, complement system activation, increased production of proinflammatory cytokines, and evidence for microglial-produced neurotoxins, there was hope that reducing inflammation might be a feasible treatment for this memory-robbing disease. This hope was supported by a number of epidemiology studies demonstrating that patients who took non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs had significantly lower risk of developing AD. However, clinical trials of anti-inflammatories have not shown effectiveness, and in recent years, the concept of immune therapy has become a treatment option as animal studies and clinical trials with Abeta vaccines have demonstrated enhanced amyloid removal through stimulation of microglial phagocytosis.This review will examine the current status of whether inhibiting inflammation is a valid therapeutic target for treating AD; what lessons have come from the clinical trials; what new pathways and classes of agents are being considered; and how this field of research can progress towards new therapeutics. We will examine a number of agents that have shown effectiveness in reducing inflammation amongst other demonstrated mechanisms of action. The major focus of much AD drug discovery has been in identifying agents that have anti-amyloid properties; however, a number of these agents were first identified for their anti-inflammatory properties. As drug development and clinical testing is a costly and lengthy endeavor, sound justification of new therapeutic targets is required. Possible future directions for AD anti-inflammatory or immune clearance therapy will be discussed based on recent experimental data.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Walker, D., & Lue, L. F. (2007). Anti-inflammatory and immune therapy for Alzheimer's disease: current status and future directions. Current neuropharmacology. https://doi.org/10.2174/157015907782793667
Vancouver
Walker D, Lue LF. Anti-inflammatory and immune therapy for Alzheimer's disease: current status and future directions. Current neuropharmacology. 2007. doi:10.2174/157015907782793667. PMID: 19305740.
BibTeX
@article{walker2007-19305740,
author = {Walker, D. and Lue, L. F.},
title = {{Anti-inflammatory and immune therapy for Alzheimer's disease: current status and future directions}},
journal = {Current neuropharmacology},
year = {2007},
doi = {10.2174/157015907782793667},
pmid = {19305740},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2174/157015907782793667}
}
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
- This hope was supported by a number of epidemiology studies demonstrating that patients who took non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs had significantly lower risk of developing AD.
- However, clinical trials of anti-inflammatories have not shown effectiveness, and in recent years, the concept of immune therapy has become a treatment option as animal studies and clinical trials with Abeta vaccines have demonstrated enhanced amyloid removal through stimulation of microglial phagocytosis.This review will examine the current status of whether inhibiting inflammation is a valid therapeutic target for treating AD; what lessons have come from the clinical trials; what new pathways and classes of agents are being considered; and how this field of research can progress towards new therapeutics.
- We will examine a number of agents that have shown effectiveness in reducing inflammation amongst other demonstrated mechanisms of action.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
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 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Current neuropharmacology) |
| 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 | 2007 — 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) |
| 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 19305740) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 23 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100. |
| Total | 40 / 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 “directions”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “directions”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.