SynthesisNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2023
Safety and efficacy of lithium in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Navigating the Autophagy Maze: ATG and Their Impact on Neurodegenerative Diseases.Molecular neurobiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study provides a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the safety and efficacy of lithium in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patients.
methodsPubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, and Your Journals@Ovid were searched up to 9 December 2022. RCTs investigating lithium, either alone or with any supplement, in ALS patients were included. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan and results are presented in forest plot.
resultsFour RCTs with 469 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in our study. Lithium doses varied among the included studies and one study used a combined therapy of lithium with valproate. Meta-analysis showed no difference between lithium and placebo regarding severe adverse events (odds ratio = 1.13, 95% confidence interval: 0.73 to 1.75, P = 0.58). No significant differences were observed with regard to survival rate between the two groups (hazard ratio = 0.95, 95% confidence interval: 0.65 to 1.37, P = 0.77). There were also no significant differences between the two groups with regard to average changes of revised amyotrophic lateral sclerosis functional rating scale (P = 0.35) and forced vital capacity percentage predicted (P = 0.73). Subgroup analysis showed no significant differences regarding all investigated outcomes either for lithium alone or lithium with valproate.
conclusionCurrent evidence suggests a safety profile with no benefit of lithium for ALS. However, given the limited number of RCTs and the safety findings, we recommend further well-designed RCTs to investigate lithium and valproate in ALS patients.
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.