Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29387038›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2017

Systematic Review of Human and Animal Studies Examining the Efficacy and Safety of

Junaid Bhatti, Barto Nascimento, Umbreen Akhtar, Shawn G Rhind, Homer Tien, Avery Nathens, Luis Teodoro da Luz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Redefining the role of the thiol-based agentRSC medicinal chemistry · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Neuroprotective Pathway Modulation by a NovelInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. N-Acetylcysteine and Probenecid Adjuvant Therapy for Traumatic Brain Injury.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2023
    Review
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Junaid BhattiSunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Barto NascimentoSunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Umbreen AkhtarSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Shawn G RhindDefense Research and Development Canada (DRDC), Toronto Research Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Homer TienSunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Avery NathensSunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Luis Teodoro da LuzSunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Sunnybrook Health Science Centre · CADefence Research and Development Canada · CAHealth Sciences Centre · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNo new therapies for traumatic brain injury (TBI) have been officially translated into current practice. At the tissue and cellular level, both inflammatory and oxidative processes may be exacerbated post-injury and contribute to further brain damage.

methodsMedline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched up to July 2017. Studies that examined clinical and laboratory effects of NAC and NACA post-TBI in human and animal studies were included. Risk of bias was assessed in human and animal studies according to the design of each study (randomized or not). The primary outcome assessed was the effect of NAC/NACA treatment on functional outcome, while secondary outcomes included the impact on biomarkers of inflammation and oxidation. Due to the clinical and methodological heterogeneity observed across studies, no meta-analyses were conducted.

resultsOur analyses revealed only three human trials, including two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 20 animal studies conducted using standardized animal models of brain injury. The two RCTs reported improvement in the functional outcome post-NAC/NACA administration. Overall, the evidence from animal studies is more robust and demonstrated substantial improvement of cognition and psychomotor performance following NAC/NACA use. Animal studies also reported significantly more cortical sparing, reduced apoptosis, and lower levels of biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative stress. No safety concerns were reported in any of the studies included in this analysis.

conclusionEvidence from the animal literature demonstrates a robust association for the prophylactic application of NAC and NACA post-TBI with improved neurofunctional outcomes and downregulation of inflammatory and oxidative stress markers at the tissue level. While a growing body of scientific literature suggests putative beneficial effects of NAC/NACA treatment for TBI, the lack of well-designed and controlled clinical investigations, evaluating therapeutic outcomes, prognostic biomarkers, and safety profiles, limits definitive interpretation and recommendations for its application in humans at this time.

Indexed as

animal modelsinflammation modulationN-acetylcysteineN-acetylcysteine amideneurofunctional outcomeoxidative stresstraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID29387038
PMCPMC5776005
OpenAlexW2793372931

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.