Home › Research › Biomarkers
Lithium as a Treatment for Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Matsunaga S, Kishi T, Annas P, Basun H, Hampel H, Iwata N.. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2015-01-01
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
Background This is the first meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials testing lithium as a treatment for patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Methods The primary outcome measure was efficacy on cognitive performance as measured through the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale cognitive subscale or the Mini-Mental State Examination. Other outcome measures were drug discontinuation rate, individual side effects, and biological markers (phosphorylated tau 181, total tau, and amyloid-β42) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Results Three clinical trials including 232 participants that met the study's inclusion criteria were identified. Lithium significantly decreased cognitive decline as compared to placebo (standardized mean difference = -0.41, 95% confidence interval = -0.81 to -0.02, p = 0.04, I2 = 47% , 3 studies, n = 199). There were no significant differences in the rate of attrition, discontinuation due to all causes or adverse events, or CSF biomarkers between treatment groups. Conclusions The results indicate that lithium treatment may have beneficial effects on cognitive performance in subjects with MCI and AD dementia.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Matsunaga, S., Kishi, T., Annas, P., Basun, H., Hampel, H., & Iwata, N. (2015). Lithium as a Treatment for Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-150437
Vancouver
Matsunaga S, Kishi T, Annas P, Basun H, Hampel H, Iwata N. Lithium as a Treatment for Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. 2015. doi:10.3233/jad-150437. PMID: 26402004.
BibTeX
@article{matsunaga2015-26402004,
author = {Matsunaga, S. and Kishi, T. and Annas, P. and Basun, H. and Hampel, H. and Iwata, N.},
title = {{Lithium as a Treatment for Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis}},
journal = {Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD},
year = {2015},
doi = {10.3233/jad-150437},
pmid = {26402004},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-150437}
}
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 Three clinical trials including 232 participants that met the study's inclusion criteria were identified.
- Lithium significantly decreased cognitive decline as compared to placebo (standardized mean difference = -0.41, 95% confidence interval = -0.81 to -0.02, p = 0.04, I2 = 47% , 3 studies, n = 199).
- There were no significant differences in the rate of attrition, discontinuation due to all causes or adverse events, or CSF biomarkers between treatment groups.
- Conclusions The results indicate that lithium treatment may have beneficial effects on cognitive performance in subjects with MCI and AD dementia.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Study designmeta-analysis
- Participants199
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 72/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for effect reported 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 42 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 72 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A meta-analysis pooling many studies |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2015 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 199 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomization is not credited here |
| 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 26402004) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 42 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 42 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 72 out of 100. |
| Total | 72 / 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 Biomarkers
Also tagged “late-life-depression”
139 studies in the library carry the topic tag “late-life-depression”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 139 tagged studies.