Home › Research › Treatments
Prospects for pharmacological intervention in Alzheimer disease
Emilien G, Beyreuther K, Masters CL, Maloteaux JM.. Archives of neurology, 2000-04-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Plain-language summary
Alzheimer disease (AD) involves neuronal degeneration with impaired cholinergic transmission in the cerebral cortex and hippocampus in areas of the brain particularly associated with memory and higher intellectual functioning. Other neurotransmitter deficits also occur, but the mechanisms underlying the widespread impairment of synaptic functions remain uncertain. Research on the molecular basis of AD has elucidated a pathogenic pathway from which a range of rational pharmacological interventions has emerged. Although at least 3 cholinesterase inhibitors (tacrine hydrochloride, donepezil, and rivastigmine tartrate) are now available and provide patients with modest relief, the most promising strategy involves approaches to retarding, halting, or preventing the formation or accumulation of beta-amyloid (Abeta) plaques. Estrogen is believed to have antioxidant or other anti-Abeta effects, as hormonal replacement therapy in women with menopause is associated with a reduced risk or delayed onset of AD. The association between nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and a reduced risk of AD has not yet been confirmed, but these agents may protect the brain from the reactive glial and microglial responses associated with Abeta deposition. Also, recent studies suggested that antioxidants, such as vitamin E taken alone or in combination with selegiline hydrochloride, can delay the progression of AD. Despite these encouraging results, no current therapy has been shown to halt or reverse the underlying disease process. The proof of the principle that anti-Abeta drugs will work in the transgenic models of AD is eagerly awaited with the expectation that they will eventually prove successful in humans.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Emilien, G., Beyreuther, K., Masters, C. L., & Maloteaux, J. M. (2000). Prospects for pharmacological intervention in Alzheimer disease. Archives of neurology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.57.4.454
Vancouver
Emilien G, Beyreuther K, Masters CL, Maloteaux JM. Prospects for pharmacological intervention in Alzheimer disease. Archives of neurology. 2000. doi:10.1001/archneur.57.4.454. PMID: 10768617.
BibTeX
@article{emilien2000-10768617,
author = {Emilien, G. and Beyreuther, K. and Masters, C. L. and Maloteaux, J. M.},
title = {{Prospects for pharmacological intervention in Alzheimer disease}},
journal = {Archives of neurology},
year = {2000},
doi = {10.1001/archneur.57.4.454},
pmid = {10768617},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.57.4.454}
}
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
- Alzheimer disease (AD) involves neuronal degeneration with impaired cholinergic transmission in the cerebral cortex and hippocampus in areas of the brain particularly associated with memory and higher intellectual functioning.
- Estrogen is believed to have antioxidant or other anti-Abeta effects, as hormonal replacement therapy in women with menopause is associated with a reduced risk or delayed onset of AD.
- The association between nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and a reduced risk of AD has not yet been confirmed, but these agents may protect the brain from the reactive glial and microglial responses associated with Abeta deposition.
- Also, recent studies suggested that antioxidants, such as vitamin E taken alone or in combination with selegiline hydrochloride, can delay the progression of AD.
- Despite these encouraging results, no current therapy has been shown to halt or reverse the underlying disease process.
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 (Archives of neurology) |
| 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 10768617) |
| 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.