4.2 Review

Erythropoietin as neuroprotective and neuroregenerative treatment strategy: Comprehensive overview of 12 years of preclinical and clinical research

Journal

BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH-CLINICAL ANAESTHESIOLOGY
Volume 24, Issue 4, Pages 573-594

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.bpa.2010.10.005

Keywords

erythropoietin receptor; EPO variants; stroke; traumatic brain injury; traumatic spinal cord injury; neurodegeneration; multiple sclerosis; schizophrenia

Categories

Funding

  1. Max Planck Society
  2. DFG Center for Molecular Physiology of the Brain (CMPB)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Erythropoietin (EPO), originally discovered as hematopoietic growth factor, has direct effects on cells of the nervous system that make it a highly attractive candidate drug for neuroprotection/ neuroregeneration. Hardly any other compound has led to so much preclinical work in the field of translational neuroscience than EPO. Almost all of the > 180 preclinical studies performed by many independent research groups from all over the world in the last 12 years have yielded positive results on EPO as a neuroprotective drug. The fact that EPO was approved for the treatment of anemia > 20 years ago and found to be well tolerated and safe, facilitated the first steps of translation from preclinical findings to the clinic. On the other hand, the same fact, naturally associated with loss of patent protection, hindered to develop EPO as a highly promising therapeutic strategy for application in human brain disease. Therefore, only few clinical neuroprotection studies have been concluded, all with essentially positive and stimulating results, but no further development towards the clinic has occurred thus far. This article reviews the preclinical and clinical work on EPO for the indications neuroprotection/ neuroregeneration and cognition, and hopefully will stimulate new endeavours promoting development of EPO for the treatment of human brain diseases. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available