Home › Research › Biomarkers
Is high oral dose L-arginine intake effective in leukoaraiosis? Preliminary data, study protocol and expert's opinion
Calabro RS, Gervasi G, Baglieri A, Furnari A, Marino S, Bramanti P.. Current aging science, 2013-07-01
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Background Leukoraraiosis is worldwide considered as a part of the normal aging process, although it is strongly associated with dementia and other disabilities. The pathogenesis of leukoaraiosis still has not been thoroughly acknowledged, even though chronic ischemia with consequent arteriolosclerosis probably due to endothelial dysfunction has been suggested. Treatment focuses on prevention of lesion formation and progression by aggressive control of risk factors, which should begin at an early age and continue on regular basis. Aim of our protocol is to evaluate the effect of long-term oral administration of high-dose L-arginine (6 g/day at least for 24 months) on white matter lesions and neurological and cognitive functions. Materials and methods Patients affected by mild to moderate leukoaraiosis will be enrolled in the study. After a complete neurovascular assessment (i.e. accurate blood test examinations, Echocardiography, Doppler ultrasound of the neck and peripheral arteries), they will undergo MRI, specific neuropsychological tests and gait analysis. Patients will be evaluated at baseline, at 6, 12, 18 and 24 month-follow up. Statistical Analysis will be performed using the software R. A significant level of P<0.05 will be set for all the tests. PRELIMINARY DATA: Two of the 4 patients currently enrolled in the study presented a mild improvement in cognitive function. Discussion Because of its high prevalence in over-65-year-old subjects, we hypothesized that treatment with 6 gr of Larginine, as supplementary dietary option, could be helpful in patients affected by leukoaraiosis to improve the cognitive and gait impairment often observed in these subjects (as demonstrated by the LADIS study).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Calabro, R. S., Gervasi, G., Baglieri, A., Furnari, A., Marino, S., & Bramanti, P. (2013). Is high oral dose L-arginine intake effective in leukoaraiosis? Preliminary data, study protocol and expert's opinion. Current aging science. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874609811306020005
Vancouver
Calabro RS, Gervasi G, Baglieri A, Furnari A, Marino S, Bramanti P. Is high oral dose L-arginine intake effective in leukoaraiosis? Preliminary data, study protocol and expert's opinion. Current aging science. 2013. doi:10.2174/1874609811306020005. PMID: 23656351.
BibTeX
@article{calabro2013-23656351,
author = {Calabro, R. S. and Gervasi, G. and Baglieri, A. and Furnari, A. and Marino, S. and Bramanti, P.},
title = {{Is high oral dose L-arginine intake effective in leukoaraiosis? Preliminary data, study protocol and expert's opinion}},
journal = {Current aging science},
year = {2013},
doi = {10.2174/1874609811306020005},
pmid = {23656351},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2174/1874609811306020005}
}
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
- Background Leukoraraiosis is worldwide considered as a part of the normal aging process, although it is strongly associated with dementia and other disabilities.
- A significant level of P<0.05 will be set for all the tests.
- Discussion Because of its high prevalence in over-65-year-old subjects, we hypothesized that treatment with 6 gr of Larginine, as supplementary dietary option, could be helpful in patients affected by leukoaraiosis to improve the cognitive and gait impairment often observed in these subjects (as demonstrated by the LADIS study).
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
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 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 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 (Current aging science) |
| 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 | 2013 — 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) |
| 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 23656351) |
| 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.