Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28844070›Full record

ReviewJournal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry2017

The increasing impact of cerebral amyloid angiopathy: essential new insights for clinical practice.

Gargi Banerjee, Roxana Carare, Charlotte Cordonnier, Steven M Greenberg, Julie A Schneider, Eric E Smith, Mark van Buchem, Jeroen van der Grond, Marcel M Verbeek, David J Werring

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 125 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
125citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
16.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

125 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 228 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Influences of genetic variants on stroke recovery: a meta-analysis of the 31,895 cases.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Preclinical evaluation of [EJNMMI research · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

65 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

10 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.

Gargi BanerjeeStroke Research Centre, Department of Brain Repair and Rehabilitation, UCL Institute of Neurology and the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK.
Roxana CarareDivision of Clinical Neurosciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Charlotte CordonnierDepartment of Neurology, Université de Lille, Inserm U1171, Degenerative and Vascular Cognitive Disorders, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Lille, Lille, France.
Steven M GreenbergJ P Kistler Stroke Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Julie A SchneiderDepartments of Pathology and Neurological Sciences, Rush Alzheimer's Disease Center, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Eric E SmithHotchkiss Brain Institute, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Mark van BuchemDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Jeroen van der GrondDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Marcel M VerbeekRadboud University Medical Center, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
David J WerringStroke Research Centre, Department of Brain Repair and Rehabilitation, UCL Institute of Neurology and the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK.
Leiden University Medical Center · NLNational Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery · GBMassachusetts General Hospital · USRush University Medical Center · USUniversité de Lille · FRUniversity Medical Center · USUniversity of Calgary · CAUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) has never been more relevant. The last 5 years have seen a rapid increase in publications and research in the field, with the development of new biomarkers for the disease, thanks to advances in MRI, amyloid positron emission tomography and cerebrospinal fluid biomarker analysis. The inadvertent development of CAA-like pathology in patients treated with amyloid-beta immunotherapy for Alzheimer's disease has highlighted the importance of establishing how and why CAA develops; without this information, the use of these treatments may be unnecessarily restricted. Our understanding of the clinical and radiological spectrum of CAA has continued to evolve, and there are new insights into the independent impact that CAA has on cognition in the context of ageing and intracerebral haemorrhage, as well as in Alzheimer's and other dementias. While the association between CAA and lobar intracerebral haemorrhage (with its high recurrence risk) is now well recognised, a number of management dilemmas remain, particularly when considering the use of antithrombotics, anticoagulants and statins. The Boston criteria for CAA, in use in one form or another for the last 20 years, are now being reviewed to reflect these new wide-ranging clinical and radiological findings. This review aims to provide a 5-year update on these recent advances, as well as a look towards future directions for CAA research and clinical practice.

Indexed as

AgedAlzheimer DiseaseAmyloid beta-PeptidesBiomarkersBrainCerebral Amyloid AngiopathyCerebral Amyloid Angiopathy, FamilialHumansImmunotherapyNeuroimagingAmyloid beta-PeptidesBiomarkersamyloidcerebrovascular diseasestrokesuperficial siderosisvascular dementia

Identifiers

PMID28844070
PMCPMC5740546
OpenAlexW2746251217

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.