4.5 Review

Unravelling the potential neuroprotective facets of erythropoietin for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease

期刊

METABOLIC BRAIN DISEASE
卷 37, 期 1, 页码 1-16

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s11011-021-00820-6

关键词

Neurodegeneration; Neuroprotection; Erythropoietin; Neuroinflammation; Oxidative stress

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recombinant DNA technology has produced erythropoietin (EPO), which has shown neuroprotective effects in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, particularly Alzheimer's disease (AD). AD is characterized by the accumulation of plaques and tangles, and currently lacks a successful treatment strategy. Various clinical studies have demonstrated the potential therapeutic benefits of EPO as a neuroprotective agent in the treatment of AD.
During the last three decades, recombinant DNA technology has produced a wide range of hematopoietic and neurotrophic growth factors, including erythropoietin (EPO), which has emerged as a promising protein drug in the treatment of several diseases. Cumulative studies have recently indicated the neuroprotective role of EPO in preclinical models of acute and chronic neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer's disease (AD). AD is one of the most prevalent neurodegenerative illnesses in the elderly, characterized by the accumulation of extracellular amyloid-ss (Ass) plaques and intracellular neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs), which serve as the disease's two hallmarks. Unfortunately, AD lacks a successful treatment strategy due to its multifaceted and complex pathology. Various clinical studies, both in vitro and in vivo, have been conducted to identify the various mechanisms by which erythropoietin exerts its neuroprotective effects. The results of clinical trials in patients with AD are also promising. Herein, it is summarized and reviews all such studies demonstrating erythropoietin's potential therapeutic benefits as a pleiotropic neuroprotective agent in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease.

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

4.5
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