Home › Research › Disease mechanisms
The Interplay of the Unfolded Protein Response in Neurodegenerative Diseases: A Therapeutic Role of Curcumin
Sitabja Mukherjee, Awdhesh Kumar Mishra, G D Ghouse Peer, Sali Abubaker Bagabir, Shafiul Haque, Ramendra Pati Pandey, V Samuel Raj, Neeraj Jain et al.. Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2021-11-19
Topic: Disease mechanisms in lab and animal studies
Abnormal accumulation of misfolded proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum and their aggregation causes inflammation and endoplasmic reticulum stress. This promotes accumulation of toxic proteins in the body tissues especially brain leading to manifestation of neurodegenerative diseases. The studies suggest that deregulation of proteostasis, particularly aberrant unfolded protein response (UPR) signaling, may be a common morbific process in the development of neurodegeneration. Curcumin, the mixture of low molecular weight polyphenolic compounds from turmeric, Curcuma longa has shown promising response to prevents many diseases including current global severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and neurodegenerative disorders. The UPR which correlates positively with neurodegenerative disorders were found affected by curcumin. In this review, we examine the evidence from many model systems illustrating how curcumin interacts with UPR and slows down the development of various neurodegenerative disorders (ND), e.g., Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. The recent global increase in ND patients indicates that researchers and practitioners will need to develop a new pharmacological drug or treatment to manage and cure these neurodegenerative diseases.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Mukherjee, S., Mishra, A. K., Peer, G. D. G., Bagabir, S. A., Haque, S., Pandey, R. P., et al. (2021). The Interplay of the Unfolded Protein Response in Neurodegenerative Diseases: A Therapeutic Role of Curcumin. Frontiers in aging neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2021.767493
Vancouver
Mukherjee S, Mishra AK, Peer GDG, Bagabir SA, Haque S, Pandey RP, et al. The Interplay of the Unfolded Protein Response in Neurodegenerative Diseases: A Therapeutic Role of Curcumin. Frontiers in aging neuroscience. 2021. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2021.767493. PMID: 34867295.
BibTeX
@article{mukherjee2021-34867295,
author = {Mukherjee, Sitabja and Mishra, Awdhesh Kumar and Peer, G D Ghouse and Bagabir, Sali Abubaker and Haque, Shafiul and Pandey, Ramendra Pati and Raj, V Samuel and Jain, Neeraj and others},
title = {{The Interplay of the Unfolded Protein Response in Neurodegenerative Diseases: A Therapeutic Role of Curcumin}},
journal = {Frontiers in aging neuroscience},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.3389/fnagi.2021.767493},
pmid = {34867295},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2021.767493}
}
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's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- The studies suggest that deregulation of proteostasis, particularly aberrant unfolded protein response (UPR) signaling, may be a common morbific process in the development of neurodegeneration.
- The recent global increase in ND patients indicates that researchers and practitioners will need to develop a new pharmacological drug or treatment to manage and cure these neurodegenerative diseases.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 41/100
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, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 23 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Frontiers in aging neuroscience) |
| 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 | 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 34867295) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 23 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100. |
| Total | 41 / 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 Disease mechanisms
Also tagged “plants”
117 studies in the library carry the topic tag “plants”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 117 tagged studies.