Home › Research › Treatments
Selective inhibitors of butyrylcholinesterase: a valid alternative for therapy of Alzheimer's disease?
Giacobini E.. Drugs & aging, 2001-01-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Plain-language summary
The brain of mammals contains two major forms of cholinesterases (ChEs): acetylcholinesterase (AChE) and butyrylcholinesterase (BuChE). The two forms differ genetically, structurally and in their kinetics. Butyrylcholine is not a physiological substrate in mammalian brains which makes the function of BuChE difficult to interpret. In human brains, BuChE is found in neurons and glial cells as well as in neuritic plaques and tangles in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). While AChE activity decreases progressively in the brain of patients with AD, BuChE activity shows some increase. In order to study the function of BuChE, we perfused intracortically the rat brain with a selective BuChE inhibitor. We found that extracellular acetylcholine levels increased 15-fold from 5 nmol/L to 75 nmol/L concentrations, with little cholinergic adverse effect in the animal. Based on these data, we postulated that two pools of ChEs may be present in the brain: one mainly neuronal and AChE dependent; and one mainly glial and BuChE dependent. The two pools show different kinetic properties with regard to regulation of acetylcholine concentration in the brain and can be separated with selective inhibitors. The recent development of highly selective BuChE inhibitors will allow us to test these new agents in patients with AD in order to find out whether or not they represent an advantage for the treatment of patients with AD as compared with selective (donepezil) or relatively non-selective (rivastigmine, galantamine) ChE inhibitors presently in use. The association between a BuChE-K variant and AD has not been confirmed in several studies. In conclusion, additional experimental and clinical work is necessary in order to elucidate the role of BuChE in normal brain function and in the brains of patients with AD. In the future, it may be possible that selective BuChE inhibitors will have a role in treatment of patients with advanced AD.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Giacobini, E. (2001). Selective inhibitors of butyrylcholinesterase: a valid alternative for therapy of Alzheimer's disease? Drugs & aging. https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200118120-00001
Vancouver
Giacobini E. Selective inhibitors of butyrylcholinesterase: a valid alternative for therapy of Alzheimer's disease? Drugs & aging. 2001. doi:10.2165/00002512-200118120-00001. PMID: 11888344.
BibTeX
@article{giacobini2001-11888344,
author = {Giacobini, E.},
title = {{Selective inhibitors of butyrylcholinesterase: a valid alternative for therapy of Alzheimer's disease?}},
journal = {Drugs \& aging},
year = {2001},
doi = {10.2165/00002512-200118120-00001},
pmid = {11888344},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200118120-00001}
}
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
- We found that extracellular acetylcholine levels increased 15-fold from 5 nmol/L to 75 nmol/L concentrations, with little cholinergic adverse effect in the animal.
- The recent development of highly selective BuChE inhibitors will allow us to test these new agents in patients with AD in order to find out whether or not they represent an advantage for the treatment of patients with AD as compared with selective (donepezil) or relatively non-selective (rivastigmine, galantamine) ChE inhibitors presently in use.
- In conclusion, additional experimental and clinical work is necessary in order to elucidate the role of BuChE in normal brain function and in the brains of patients with AD.
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 (Drugs & aging) |
| 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 | 2001 — 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 11888344) |
| 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.