ArticleFluids and barriers of the CNS2024
[1-
Article in Fluids and barriers of the CNS, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The glymphatic-lymphatic axis: known pathways, open questions, and emerging roles in neurodegeneration.Translational neurodegeneration · 2026Review
- Central nervous system lymphatic network: from the maintenance of brain homeostasis to emerging therapeutic perspectives in neurodegenerative diseases.Translational neurodegeneration · 2026Review
- PET Imaging of Neurofluids.Neuroimaging clinics of North America · 2025Review
- Assessing glymphatic-associated fluid dynamics in psychiatric disorders: evidence from neuroimaging - a review.Psychoradiology · 2025Review
- Brain glymphatic fluid mapping in Alzheimer's disease: a human MRI and PET study.Brain communications · 2025Article
- First-in-human positron emission tomography study of intranasal insulin in aging and MCI.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundReduced clearance of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) has been suggested as a pathological feature of Alzheimer's disease (AD). With extensive documentation in non-human mammals and contradictory human neuroimaging data it remains unknown whether the nasal mucosa is a CSF drainage site in humans. Here, we used dynamic PET with [1-
methods24 cognitively normal subjects (≥ 65 years) were dynamically PET imaged for 60 min. using [1-
resultsLOF and All-turbinate 60 min AUC were positively associated, thus suggesting a connection between the brain and the nose. Further, the Aβ+ subgroup demonstrated impaired tracer kinetics, marked by reduced tracer influx and slower egress.
conclusionThe data show that tracer kinetics for brain and nasal turbinates are related to each other and both reflect the amyloid status of the brain. As such, these data add to evidence that the nasal pathway is a potential CSF drainage site in humans. These data warrant further investigation of brain and nasal contributions to protein clearance in neurodegenerative disease.
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.