Home › Research › Prevention trials
Phospholipase A2 activation as a therapeutic approach for cognitive enhancement in early-stage Alzheimer disease
Schaeffer EL, Forlenza OV, Gattaz WF.. Psychopharmacology, 2008-10-14
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Rationale Alzheimer disease (AD) is the leading cause of dementia in the elderly and has no known cure. Evidence suggests that reduced activity of specific subtypes of intracellular phospholipases A2 (cPLA2 and iPLA2) is an early event in AD and may contribute to memory impairment and neuropathology in the disease. Objective The objective of this study was to review the literature focusing on the therapeutic role of PLA2 stimulation by cognitive training and positive modulators, or of supplementation with arachidonic acid (PLA2 product) in facilitating memory function and synaptic transmission and plasticity in either research animals or human subjects. Methods MEDLINE database was searched (no date restrictions) for published articles using the keywords Alzheimer disease (mild, moderate, severe), mild cognitive impairment, healthy elderly, rats, mice, phospholipase A(2), phospholipid metabolism, phosphatidylcholine, arachidonic acid, cognitive training, learning, memory, long-term potentiation, protein kinases, dietary lipid compounds, cell proliferation, neurogenesis, and neuritogenesis. Reference lists of the identified articles were checked to select additional studies of interest. Results Overall, the data suggest that PLA2 activation is induced in the healthy brain during learning and memory. Furthermore, learning seems to regulate endogenous neurogenesis, which has been observed in AD brains. Finally, PLA2 appears to be implicated in homeostatic processes related to neurite outgrowth and differentiation in both neurodevelopmental processes and response to neuronal injury. Conclusion The use of positive modulators of PLA2 (especially of cPLA2 and iPLA2) or supplementation with dietary lipid compounds (e.g., arachidonic acid) in combination with cognitive training could be a valuable therapeutic strategy for cognitive enhancement in early-stage AD.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Schaeffer, E. L., Forlenza, O. V., & Gattaz, W. F. (2009). Phospholipase A2 activation as a therapeutic approach for cognitive enhancement in early-stage Alzheimer disease. Psychopharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-008-1351-0
Vancouver
Schaeffer EL, Forlenza OV, Gattaz WF. Phospholipase A2 activation as a therapeutic approach for cognitive enhancement in early-stage Alzheimer disease. Psychopharmacology. 2009. doi:10.1007/s00213-008-1351-0. PMID: 18853146.
BibTeX
@article{schaeffer2009-18853146,
author = {Schaeffer, E. L. and Forlenza, O. V. and Gattaz, W. F.},
title = {{Phospholipase A2 activation as a therapeutic approach for cognitive enhancement in early-stage Alzheimer disease}},
journal = {Psychopharmacology},
year = {2009},
doi = {10.1007/s00213-008-1351-0},
pmid = {18853146},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-008-1351-0}
}
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
- Evidence suggests that reduced activity of specific subtypes of intracellular phospholipases A2 (cPLA2 and iPLA2) is an early event in AD and may contribute to memory impairment and neuropathology in the disease.
- Results Overall, the data suggest that PLA2 activation is induced in the healthy brain during learning and memory.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
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 (Psychopharmacology) |
| 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 | 2009 — 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 18853146) |
| 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 Prevention trials
Also tagged “double-blind”
783 studies in the library carry the topic tag “double-blind”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 783 tagged studies.