Cited by 98Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchCholinesterase and Neurodegenerative Diseases

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) therapeutics – 1: Repeated clinical failures continue to question the amyloid hypothesis of AD and the current understanding of AD causality

Mullane, Kevin, Williams, Michael·2018·Biochemical Pharmacology

Abstract

Deposits of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles of aggregated tau in the brain represent key hallmarks of the neurodegenerative disorder, Alzheimer's Disease (AD) and form the basis of the major hypotheses of AD causality. To date, therapeutics that reduce brain amyloid in AD patients have demonstrated no effect in reversing the associated decline in cognition or function indicating that the amyloid hypothesis is either incorrect or that there is a point when the disease becomes independent of Aβ production or is refractory to any type of therapeutic intervention. The clinical failures of inhibitors of tau aggregation, neurotransmitter modulators and drugs repurposed from AD-associated disease indications tend to support this latter viewpoint. Current understanding of AD causality is thus incomplete, a situation that has been compounded by a debate on whether AD is a singularly distinct form of dementia and by the dogmatic promotion of hypotheses over actual clinical data. The latter has repeatedly led to compounds lacking efficacy in Phase II trials being advanced into Phase III where their lack of efficacy is routinely recapitulated. This Commentary, the first of two, discusses amyloid and tau as putative drug targets for AD in the context of the prevalence and economic and social impact of this insidious neurodegenerative disease.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bcp.2018.09.026

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Drugs that act to inhibit amyloid plaque formation show no effect in reversing or halting cognitive decline.

    “However, there has been a lot of controversy over this hypothesis and a recent report indicates that drugs that act to inhibit amyloid plaque formation show no effect in reversing or halting the cognitive decline.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mullane, K., & Williams, M.
Affiliations
  • Gladstone Institutes (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
Corresponding author
Williams, Michael
Venue
Biochemical Pharmacology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-12
Volume
158
Pages
359-375
ISSN
0006-2952 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2892490427
Cited by
98
References
45
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biochemical Pharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cholinesterase and Neurodegenerative Diseases
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, amyloid hypothesis, amyloid plaques, tau aggregation, neurofibrillary tangles, Alzheimer's disease therapeutics, clinical trial failure, drug repurposing, disease causality, therapeutic target
MeSH terms
Alzheimer Disease, Amyloidosis, Animals, Brain, Cholinesterase Inhibitors, Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, tau Proteins, Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonists, Plaque, Amyloid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review