Home › Research › Drug development
Diabetes Therapies for Dementia
Moran C, Callisaya ML, Srikanth V, Arvanitakis Z.. Current neurology and neuroscience reports, 2019-07-12
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Purpose of review Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a well-established risk factor for the development of dementia. Dementia and T2D share some underlying pathophysiology that has led to interest in the potential to repurpose drugs used in the management of T2D to benefit brain health. This review describes the scientific data available on the use of T2D medications for the risk reduction or management of dementia, in people with and without T2D. Recent findings Results from basic laboratory research support the potential for commonly-used medications for T2D, including those with direct glucose-lowering properties, to have a beneficial effect on brain health. However, human studies have been mostly observational in nature and report conflicting results. Preliminary data suggest that intranasal insulin, metformin, and GLP-1 agonists show promise for dementia, but confirmatory evidence for their benefit in dementia is still lacking. Current evidence does not support the repurposing of T2D medications for dementia risk reduction or management. Research in the field of T2D and dementia is active, and further data are required before definitive conclusions can be drawn.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Moran, C., Callisaya, M. L., Srikanth, V., & Arvanitakis, Z. (2019). Diabetes Therapies for Dementia. Current neurology and neuroscience reports. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-019-0973-4
Vancouver
Moran C, Callisaya ML, Srikanth V, Arvanitakis Z. Diabetes Therapies for Dementia. Current neurology and neuroscience reports. 2019. doi:10.1007/s11910-019-0973-4. PMID: 31300920.
BibTeX
@article{moran2019-31300920,
author = {Moran, C. and Callisaya, M. L. and Srikanth, V. and Arvanitakis, Z.},
title = {{Diabetes Therapies for Dementia}},
journal = {Current neurology and neuroscience reports},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1007/s11910-019-0973-4},
pmid = {31300920},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-019-0973-4}
}
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
- Recent findings Results from basic laboratory research support the potential for commonly-used medications for T2D, including those with direct glucose-lowering properties, to have a beneficial effect on brain health.
- However, human studies have been mostly observational in nature and report conflicting results.
- Preliminary data suggest that intranasal insulin, metformin, and GLP-1 agonists show promise for dementia, but confirmatory evidence for their benefit in dementia is still lacking.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 38/100
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 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 38 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Current neurology and neuroscience reports) |
| 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 31300920) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 22 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 38 out of 100. |
| Total | 38 / 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
Also tagged “therapies”
6 studies in the library carry the topic tag “therapies”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 6 tagged studies.