Home › Research › Treatments
Neuroprotective and symptomatological action of memantine relevant for Alzheimer's disease--a unified glutamatergic hypothesis on the mechanism of action
Danysz W, Parsons CG, Mobius HJ, Stoffler A, Quack G.. Neurotoxicity research, 2000-01-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
The involvement of glutamate mediated neurotoxicity in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease is finding increasingly more acceptance in the scientific community. Central to this hypothesis is the assumption that in particular glutamate receptors of the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) type are overactivated in a tonic rather than a phasic manner. Such continuous mild activation leads under chronic conditions to neuronal damage. Moreover, one should consider that impairment of plasticity (learning) may result not only from neuronal damage per se but also from continuous activation of NMDA receptors. To investigate this possibility we tested whether overactivation of NMDA receptors using either non-toxic doses/concentrations of a direct NMDA agonist or through an indirect approach--decrease in magnesium concentration--produces deficits in plasticity. In fact NMDA both in vivo (passive avoidance test) and in vitro (LTP in CA1 region) impaired learning and synaptic plasticity. Under these conditions memantine which is an uncompetitive NMDA receptor antagonist with features of "improved magnesium" (voltage dependence, affinity) attenuated the deficit. The more direct proof that memantine can act as a surrogate for magnesium was obtained in LTP experiments under low magnesium conditions. In this case as well, impaired LTP was restored in the presence of therapeutically relevant concentrations of memantine (1 microM). In vivo, doses leading to similar brain/serum levels produce neuroprotection in animal models relevant for neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's disease such as neurotoxicity produced by inflammation in the NBM or beta-amyloid injection to the hippocampus. Hence, we postulate that if in Alzheimer's disease overactivation of NMDA receptors occurs indeed, memantine would be expected to improve both symptoms (cognition) and slow down disease progression because it takes over the physiological function of magnesium.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Danysz, W., Parsons, C. G., Mobius, H. J., Stoffler, A., & Quack, G. (2000). Neuroprotective and symptomatological action of memantine relevant for Alzheimer's disease--a unified glutamatergic hypothesis on the mechanism of action. Neurotoxicity research. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03033787
Vancouver
Danysz W, Parsons CG, Mobius HJ, Stoffler A, Quack G. Neuroprotective and symptomatological action of memantine relevant for Alzheimer's disease--a unified glutamatergic hypothesis on the mechanism of action. Neurotoxicity research. 2000. doi:10.1007/bf03033787. PMID: 16787834.
BibTeX
@article{danysz2000-16787834,
author = {Danysz, W. and Parsons, C. G. and Mobius, H. J. and Stoffler, A. and Quack, G.},
title = {{Neuroprotective and symptomatological action of memantine relevant for Alzheimer's disease--a unified glutamatergic hypothesis on the mechanism of action}},
journal = {Neurotoxicity research},
year = {2000},
doi = {10.1007/bf03033787},
pmid = {16787834},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03033787}
}
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
- Moreover, one should consider that impairment of plasticity (learning) may result not only from neuronal damage per se but also from continuous activation of NMDA receptors.
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 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 (Neurotoxicity research) |
| 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 | 2000 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| 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 16787834) |
| 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 Treatments
Also tagged “hypothesis”
5 studies in the library carry the topic tag “hypothesis”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 5 tagged studies.