Home › Research › Treatments
Therapeutic Potential of Multifunctional Derivatives of Cholinesterase Inhibitors
Maja Przybyłowska, Krystyna Dzierzbicka, Szymon Kowalski, Klaudia Chmielewska, Iwona Inkielewicz-Stepniak. Current neuropharmacology, 2021
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
The aim of this work is to review tacrine analogues from the last three years, which were not included in the latest review work, donepezil and galantamine hybrids from 2015 and rivastigmine derivatives from 2014. In this account, we summarize the efforts toward the development and characterization of non-toxic inhibitors of cholinesterases based on mentioned drugs with various interesting additional properties such as antioxidant, decreasing β-amyloid plaque aggregation, nitric oxide production, pro-inflammatory cytokines release, monoamine oxidase-B activity, cytotoxicity and oxidative stress in vitro and in animal model that classify these hybrids as potential multifunctional therapeutic agents for Alzheimer's disease. Moreover, herein, we have described the cholinergic hypothesis, mechanisms of neurodegeneration and current pharmacotherapy of Alzheimer's disease based on the restoration of cholinergic function through blocking enzymes that break down acetylcholine.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Przybyłowska, M., Dzierzbicka, K., Kowalski, S., Chmielewska, K., & Inkielewicz-Stepniak, I. (2021). Therapeutic Potential of Multifunctional Derivatives of Cholinesterase Inhibitors. Current neuropharmacology. https://doi.org/10.2174/1570159x19666201218103434
Vancouver
Przybyłowska M, Dzierzbicka K, Kowalski S, Chmielewska K, Inkielewicz-Stepniak I. Therapeutic Potential of Multifunctional Derivatives of Cholinesterase Inhibitors. Current neuropharmacology. 2021. doi:10.2174/1570159x19666201218103434. PMID: 33342413.
BibTeX
@article{przybylowska2021-33342413,
author = {Przybyłowska, Maja and Dzierzbicka, Krystyna and Kowalski, Szymon and Chmielewska, Klaudia and Inkielewicz-Stepniak, Iwona},
title = {{Therapeutic Potential of Multifunctional Derivatives of Cholinesterase Inhibitors}},
journal = {Current neuropharmacology},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.2174/1570159x19666201218103434},
pmid = {33342413},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2174/1570159x19666201218103434}
}
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
- The aim of this work is to review tacrine analogues from the last three years, which were not included in the latest review work, donepezil and galantamine hybrids from 2015 and rivastigmine derivatives from 2014.
- In this account, we summarize the efforts toward the development and characterization of non-toxic inhibitors of cholinesterases based on mentioned drugs with various interesting additional properties such as antioxidant, decreasing β-amyloid plaque aggregation, nitric oxide production, pro-inflammatory cytokines release, monoamine oxidase-B activity, cytotoxicity and oxidative stress in vitro and in animal model that classify these hybrids as potential multifunctional therapeutic agents for Alzheimer's disease.
- Moreover, herein, we have described the cholinergic hypothesis, mechanisms of neurodegeneration and current pharmacotherapy of Alzheimer's disease based on the restoration of cholinergic function through blocking enzymes that break down acetylcholine.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
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 (Current neuropharmacology) |
| 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 33342413) |
| 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 Treatments
Also tagged “acetylcholinesterase”
234 studies in the library carry the topic tag “acetylcholinesterase”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 234 tagged studies.