ArticleExpert opinion on drug discovery2012
Increasing the success rate for Alzheimer's disease drug discovery and development.
Article in Expert opinion on drug discovery, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Latent brain state dynamics predict early amyloid accumulation and cognitive impairment.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Emerging Nanotechnology for the Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease.CNS & neurological disorders drug targets · 2024Review
- AI-DrugNet: A network-based deep learning model for drug repurposing and combination therapy in neurological disorders.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2023Article
- HGF Mediates Clinical-Grade Human Umbilical Cord-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells Improved Functional Recovery in a Senescence-Accelerated Mouse Model of Alzheimer's Disease.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2020Article
- The "rights" of precision drug development for Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2019Review
- Re-Engineering Alzheimer Clinical Trials: Global Alzheimer's Platform Network.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2016Article
- Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells Derived from Alzheimer's Disease Patients: The Promise, the Hope and the Path Ahead.Journal of clinical medicine · 2014Review
- Alzheimer's disease drug-development pipeline: few candidates, frequent failures.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2014Article
- Alzheimer disease therapy--moving from amyloid-β to tau.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2013Review
- J-147 a Novel Hydrazide Lead Compound to Treat Neurodegeneration: CeeToxJournal of neurology & neurophysiology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This paper responds to the fact that over 200 Alzheimer's disease (AD) drug candidates have failed to date and draws on searches of the literature for studies of error effects in drug developments and the authors' published works. In the same period, basic knowledge of AD pathology has greatly expanded providing both potential therapeutic targets and rationales for modifications in strategies for testing AD drug candidates. Current opinion generally holds that AD drug candidates have failed because they address pathology that is already too advanced. Less attention is paid to numerous reported methodological weaknesses capable of biasing AD clinical trials and drug developments and thus invalidating conclusions to be reached about the drugs being tested. The costs of quality controls possibly needed to better insure validity in AD drug developments raises concerns that progress toward success in AD drug development may be hindered by the costs of intervening against current methodological barriers to the successful completions of AD drug developments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.