Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Treatments

Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is considered to be the most common cause of dementia and is an incurable, progressive neurodegenerative disorder. Current treatment of the disease, essentially symptomatic, is based on three cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine, affecting the glutamatergic system. Since 2003, no new drugs have been approved for treatment of AD. This article presents current directions in the search for novel, potentially effective agents for the treatment of AD, as well as selected promising treatment strategies. These include agents acting upon the beta-amyloid, such as vaccines, antibodies and inhibitors or modulators of γ- and β-secretase; agents directed against the tau protein as well as compounds acting as antagonists of neurotransmitter systems (serotoninergic 5-HT6 and histaminergic H3). Ongoing clinical trials with Aβ antibodies (solanezumab, gantenerumab, crenezumab) seem to be promising, while vaccines against the tau protein (AADvac1 and ACI-35) are now in early-stage trials. Interesting results have also been achieved in trials involving small molecules such as inhibitors of β-secretase (MK-8931, E2609), a combination of 5-HT6 antagonist (idalopirdine) with donepezil, inhibition of advanced glycation end product receptors by azeliragon or modulation of the acetylcholine response of α-7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors by encenicline. Development of new effective drugs acting upon the central nervous system is usually a difficult and time-consuming process, and in the case of AD to-date clinical trials have had a very high failure rate. Most phase II clinical trials ending with a positive outcome do not succeed in phase III, often due to serious adverse effects or lack of therapeutic efficacy.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 36/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 21 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 36 of 100. Total 36 of 100.21 of the 58 points we could judge = 36 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, 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 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Pharmacological reports : PR)
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 2016 — within 20 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)
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 26721364)
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.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

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.

APA 7th

Godyń, J., Jończyk, J., Panek, D., & Malawska, B. (2016). Therapeutic strategies for Alzheimer's disease in clinical trials. Pharmacological reports : PR. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pharep.2015.07.006

Vancouver

Godyń J, Jończyk J, Panek D, Malawska B. Therapeutic strategies for Alzheimer's disease in clinical trials. Pharmacological reports : PR. 2016. doi:10.1016/j.pharep.2015.07.006. PMID: 26721364.

BibTeX

@article{godyn2016-26721364,
  author  = {Godyń, J. and Jończyk, J. and Panek, D. and Malawska, B.},
  title   = {{Therapeutic strategies for Alzheimer's disease in clinical trials}},
  journal = {Pharmacological reports : PR},
  year    = {2016},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.pharep.2015.07.006},
  pmid    = {26721364},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pharep.2015.07.006}
}

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.

Similar studies

More on Treatments

See all studies in Treatments →