Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19305788›Full record

ArticleCurrent neuropharmacology2008

Pharmacodynamics of memantine: an update.

G Rammes, W Danysz, C G Parsons

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current neuropharmacology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

76 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 177 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Reduction of the CaFrontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2025
    Review

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

G RammesClinical Neuropharmacology, Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry, 80804 Munich, Germany.
W Danysz
C G Parsons
Max Planck Society · DEMerLion Pharma (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Memantine received marketing authorization from the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EMEA) for the treatment of moderately severe to severe Alzheimer s disease (AD) in Europe on 17(th) May 2002 and shortly thereafter was also approved by the FDA for use in the same indication in the USA. Memantine is a moderate affinity, uncompetitive N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist with strong voltage-dependency and fast kinetics. Due to this mechanism of action (MOA), there is a wealth of other possible therapeutic indications for memantine and numerous preclinical data in animal models support this assumption. This review is intended to provide an update on preclinical studies on the pharmacodynamics of memantine, with an additional focus on animal models of diseases aside from the approved indication. For most studies prior to 1999, the reader is referred to a previous review [196].In general, since 1999, considerable additional preclinical evidence has accumulated supporting the use of memantine in AD (both symptomatic and neuroprotective). In addition, there has been further confirmation of the MOA of memantine as an uncompetitive NMDA receptor antagonist and essentially no data contradicting our understanding of the benign side effect profile of memantine.

Identifiers

PMID19305788
PMCPMC2645549
OpenAlexW2138008971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.