4.3 Review

The Present State of Lithium for the Prevention of Dementia Related to Alzheimer's Dementia in Clinical and Epidemiological Studies: A Critical Review

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18157756

关键词

review; lithium; standard levels; trace levels; dementia; dementia prevention

资金

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [18K07605]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [18K07605] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review article hypothesized that lithium at trace to standard levels may be effective for dementia prevention, based on several clinical and epidemiological studies. However, there is a scarcity of studies on trace lithium levels, and the existing studies on standard lithium levels are insufficient to establish its efficacy for dementia prevention.
Despite the unavailability of essential anti-dementia drugs, lithium may inhibit glycogen synthase kinase-3 (GSK-3) and decrease beta-amyloid and hyper-phosphorylated tau. In this review, we hypothesized that trace to standard levels of lithium (i.e., corresponding to the therapeutic levels for bipolar disorder) may be effective for dementia prevention. Excluding three insufficient level studies, we obtained two and one excellent clinical studies on standard and trace lithium levels, respectively, all of which supported the effects of lithium for dementia prevention. In addition, we identified good clinical and epidemiological studies (four each) on standard lithium levels, of which six studies supported the effects of lithium. Moreover, of three good epidemiological studies on trace lithium levels, two supported the aforementioned effects of lithium. The number of studies were substantially small, particularly those on trace lithium levels. Moreover, studies on standard lithium levels were insufficient to establish the efficacy of lithium for dementia prevention. This necessitates accumulating good or excellent clinical evidence for the effects of trace to standard lithium levels on dementia prevention.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据