Cited by 311Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Calcium Hypothesis of Alzheimer’s disease and brain aging: a framework for integrating new evidence into a comprehensive theory of pathogenesis

Alzheimer's Association Calcium Hypothesis Workgroup, Khachaturian, Zaven S.·2017·Alzheimer's & Dementia

Abstract

This article updates the Calcium Hypothesis of Alzheimer's disease and brain aging on the basis of emerging evidence since 1994 (The present article, with the subtitle “New evidence for a central role of Ca 2+ in neurodegeneration,” includes three appendices that provide context and further explanations for the rationale for the revisions in the updated hypothesis—the three appendices are as follows: Appendix I “Emerging concepts on potential pathogenic roles of [Ca 2+],” Appendix II “Future studies to validate the central role of dysregulated [Ca 2+] in neurodegeneration,” and Appendix III “Epilogue: towards a comprehensive hypothesis.”) (Marx J. Fresh evidence points to an old suspect: calcium. Science 2007; 318:384–385). The aim is not only to re‐evaluate the original key claims of the hypothesis with a critical eye but also to identify gaps in knowledge required to validate relevant claims and delineate additional studies and/or data that are needed. Some of the key challenges for this effort included examination of questions regarding (1) the temporal and spatial relationships of molecular mechanisms that regulate neuronal calcium ion (Ca 2+), (2) the role of changes in concentration of calcium ion [Ca 2+] in various subcellular compartments of neurons, (3) how alterations in Ca 2+ signaling affect the performance of neurons under various conditions, ranging from optimal functioning in a healthy state to conditions of decline and deterioration in performance during aging and in disease, and (4) new ideas about the contributions of aging, genetic, and environmental factors to the causal relationships between dysregulation of [Ca 2+] and the functioning of neurons (see Appendices I and II). The updated Calcium Hypothesis also includes revised postulates that are intended to promote further crucial experiments to confirm or reject the various predictions of the hypothesis (see Appendix III).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jalz.2016.12.006

Cites

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 53 · Cited by 311

Authors
Alzheimer's Association Calcium Hypothesis Workgroup, & Khachaturian, Z. S.
Corresponding author
Khachaturian, Zaven S.
Venue
Alzheimer's & Dementia
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-01-03
Volume
13
Issue
2
Pages
178
ISSN
  • 1552-5260 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5279
OpenAlex
W2999063211
Cited by
311
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 9 · 2012: 1
FWCI
4.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Alzheimer s & Dementia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (R37AG004542)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, brain aging
MeSH terms
Aging, Alzheimer Disease, Animals, Brain, Calcium, Humans, Models, Neurological

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