Home › Research › Drug development
Latest Advances on Interventions that May Prevent, Delay or Ameliorate Dementia
Wilson D, Peters R, Ritchie K, Ritchie CW.. Therapeutic advances in chronic disease, 2011-05-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Objectives IN THIS PAPER WE AIM TO: (1) identify and review midlife risk factors that may contribute to the development of dementia and that may be amenable to intervention; (2) review advances made in our understanding of the most common cause of dementia, Alzheimer's disease (AD), where current pharmacological studies have aimed to modify the disease course; and (3) explore other interventions that may slow cognitive decline in those with AD. Methods A review of the literature was conducted to look for interventions that may modify the risk of incident dementia or that may modify symptom progression in those with diagnosed dementia. Results (1) Midlife risks identified as amenable to intervention include blood pressure, diabetes, elevated cholesterol, poor psychosocial and lifestyle factors. (2) The leading drugs in development can be grouped by their principal target: anti-amyloid, anti-tau and mitochondrial stability. However to date, there have been no successes in late stage Phase III trials of putative disease-modifying drugs for AD. (3) Once the diagnosis of dementia has been made there is little that can slow the rate of decline. Possible exceptions include the use of exercise and antihypertensive medication with some nootropic medication showing promise in small trials. Conclusion (1) It is clear that there are several risk factors in midlife that may lead to a greater likelihood of developing dementia. However, there is no simple intervention to modify these risks. It seems sensible to conclude from the data that avoiding high blood pressure, controlling cholesterol and diabetes as well as maintaining a healthy diet and lifestyle may lower the risk of developing dementia. (2) The need for better outcome measures in clinical trials is evident and may, in part, explain the numerous failures in late-stage clinical trials of disease-modifying drugs. Improved diagnostic test batteries to reduce population heterogeneity in early intervention studies will be required for robust clinical trials in the future. (3) Current research indicates that there is little that can delay decline; however, future trials may wish to focus on nootropics.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Wilson, D., Peters, R., Ritchie, K., & Ritchie, C. W. (2011). Latest Advances on Interventions that May Prevent, Delay or Ameliorate Dementia. Therapeutic advances in chronic disease. https://doi.org/10.1177/2040622310397636
Vancouver
Wilson D, Peters R, Ritchie K, Ritchie CW. Latest Advances on Interventions that May Prevent, Delay or Ameliorate Dementia. Therapeutic advances in chronic disease. 2011. doi:10.1177/2040622310397636. PMID: 23251748.
BibTeX
@article{wilson2011-23251748,
author = {Wilson, D. and Peters, R. and Ritchie, K. and Ritchie, C. W.},
title = {{Latest Advances on Interventions that May Prevent, Delay or Ameliorate Dementia}},
journal = {Therapeutic advances in chronic disease},
year = {2011},
doi = {10.1177/2040622310397636},
pmid = {23251748},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/2040622310397636}
}
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
- Results (1) Midlife risks identified as amenable to intervention include blood pressure, diabetes, elevated cholesterol, poor psychosocial and lifestyle factors.
- It seems sensible to conclude from the data that avoiding high blood pressure, controlling cholesterol and diabetes as well as maintaining a healthy diet and lifestyle may lower the risk of developing dementia.
- (3) Current research indicates that there is little that can delay decline; however, future trials may wish to focus on nootropics.
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 (Therapeutic advances in chronic disease) |
| 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 | 2011 — 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 23251748) |
| 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 Drug development
Also tagged “delay”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “delay”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.