Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40566537›Full record

ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2025

How to Pick a Neuroprotective Drug in Stroke Without Losing Your Mind?

Joseph S Tauskela, Nicolas Blondeau

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

2 authors.

Joseph S TauskelaHuman Health Therapeutics, National Research Council of Canada, 1200 Montreal Road, Ottawa, ON K1A 0R6, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4802-0487
Nicolas BlondeauCNRS, IPMC, Université Côte d'Azur, Sophia Antipolis, F-06560 Valbonne, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5954-4094

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

All human clinical trials evaluating neuroprotective therapeutics in cerebral ischemia have failed, casting a pall over the field which has not recovered. Numerous methodological issues in the performance of these trials were identified, with the result that current trials are now subject to higher degrees of rigor and transparency. Advances in re-canalization technologies now offer the hope that adjunctive neuroprotection can improve patient outcome. The evaluation of neuroprotection in preclinical animal models has also suffered from methodological issues, which has also been addressed, resulting in an improved performance of studies. This leaves the question of how to actually pick the most appropriate neuroprotective therapy for translation. Given the current limitations in resources, and the numerous strategies that have been proposed to take advantage of clinical and preclinical methodological improvements, we suggest that in vitro studies involving subjecting the most sensitive cells-neurons-to oxygen-glucose deprivation (OGD) can be used to resolve among the many possibilities. Specifically, a large body of evidence shows that successive increases in OGD durations (spanning the lethal/supra-lethal continuum) require increasingly 'strong' drugs and combinations to adequately protect neurons (criteria not met in clinical trials). Notably, as the OGD duration is lengthened, NMDA receptor (NMDAR) antagonists of increasing potency and dose are required to match this increasing severity. Under supra-lethal OGD conditions, cocktails composed of anti-excitotoxic antagonists with maximal potency and dose are required to achieve neuroprotection. We propose that this approach can serve as a strategy-a neuroprotective framework-to prioritize among the many possibilities that exist for neuroprotective therapeutics for translation. Specifically, utilize the OGD continuum to compare within-, between- and outside-classes of drugs, first alone and then in combinations, to identify the most efficacious drugs ('head-to-head' competitions to identify the 'last man standing'). While the current state of knowledge strongly suggests that anti-excitotoxic approaches are required, this framework allows the integration of testing established and new therapeutics alike. This framework should include new technologies such as multi-electrode arrays (MEAs), which allow the evaluation of adverse effects of drugs alone, as well as if a drug truly provides functional neuroprotection, and not just survival. The neuroprotective framework provides a comprehensive strategy to eliminate ineffectual treatments, leaving only those modalities with the highest therapeutic index to be prioritized for translation.

Indexed as

cerebral ischemiaexcitotoxicitymult-electrode arraysneuroprotectionneurotoxicity

Identifiers

PMID40566537
PMCPMC12194307

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.