Home › Research › Treatments
The Alzheimer's disease drug development landscape
van Bokhoven P, de Wilde A, Vermunt L, Leferink PS, Heetveld S, Cummings J, Scheltens P, Vijverberg EGB.. Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2021-11-11
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
The field has made significant progress over the last 15 years. Results We found a higher proportion of preclinical interventions targeting molecular pathways associated with sporadic AD genetic risk variants, compared to clinical stage interventions. Further, we observed a trend suggesting that more traditional therapeutic modalities are developed for these novel targets, while more novel treatment modalities such as gene therapies and enzyme treatments are in development for more traditional targets such as amyloid β and tau.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
van Bokhoven, P., de Wilde, A., Vermunt, L., Leferink, P. S., Heetveld, S., Cummings, J., et al. (2021). The Alzheimer's disease drug development landscape. Alzheimer's research & therapy. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-021-00927-z
Vancouver
van Bokhoven P, de Wilde A, Vermunt L, Leferink PS, Heetveld S, Cummings J, et al. The Alzheimer's disease drug development landscape. Alzheimer's research & therapy. 2021. doi:10.1186/s13195-021-00927-z. PMID: 34763720.
BibTeX
@article{vanbokhoven2021-34763720,
author = {van Bokhoven, P. and de Wilde, A. and Vermunt, L. and Leferink, P. S. and Heetveld, S. and Cummings, J. and Scheltens, P. and Vijverberg, E. G. B.},
title = {{The Alzheimer's disease drug development landscape}},
journal = {Alzheimer's research \& therapy},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1186/s13195-021-00927-z},
pmid = {34763720},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-021-00927-z}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- The field has made significant progress over the last 15 years.
- Results We found a higher proportion of preclinical interventions targeting molecular pathways associated with sporadic AD genetic risk variants, compared to clinical stage interventions.
- Further, we observed a trend suggesting that more traditional therapeutic modalities are developed for these novel targets, while more novel treatment modalities such as gene therapies and enzyme treatments are in development for more traditional targets such as amyloid β and tau.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Effect size19.2%; 10.7%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 47/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, 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 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer's research & therapy) |
| 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 | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 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 | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| 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 34763720) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 27 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100. |
| Total | 47 / 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 “drug-development”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “drug-development”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.