SynthesisBMC neurology2026
Therapeutic and biomarker potential of erythropoietin in neurodegenerative diseases: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeurodegenerative diseases present an escalating global health burden with limited disease-modifying therapies. Erythropoietin (EPO), well-known for its hematological effects, has demonstrated neuroprotective properties in preclinical studies, but its clinical utility in neurodegeneration remains unclear. Therefore, this study aims to systematically appraise clinical and translational evidence on the efficacy and safety of EPO and its analogues in AD, PD, and dementia syndromes.
methodsA systematic review was conducted following JBI and PRISMA guidelines. PubMed and Scopus were searched up to October 2024, for original studies evaluating EPO interventions in neurodegenerative diseases. Eligibility, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers using standardized criteria.
resultsEleven studies were included, covering randomized controlled trials, cohort, cross-sectional, and clinical studies across diverse populations. In AD, randomized trials of intranasal NeuroEPO reported significant cognitive improvement versus placebo, supported by mechanistic evidence of EPO receptor upregulation in affected brain regions. In PD, Cuban clinical trials found cognitive and motor benefits with EPO-based therapies and favorable safety profiles. Observational data suggested EPO may reduce risk for vascular and unspecified dementia, particularly in high-risk cohorts. However, substantial heterogeneity and small sample sizes limit the generalizability of findings.
conclusionsEPO and its analogues appear safe and may offer symptomatic and neuroprotective benefits in AD and PD. Larger, multicenter trials are required to clarify clinical efficacy, biomarker utility, and long-term safety in neurodegenerative disease management.
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.