MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036343301 · doi:10.2174/138945011794182764

Lithium and its Neuroprotective and Neurotrophic Effects: Potential Treatment for Post-Ischemic Stroke Sequelae

2011· article· en· W2036343301 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea Gold, Nathan Herrmann, Krista L. Lanctôt

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Drug Targets · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroprotectionNeurochemicalNeurotrophic factorsMedicineStroke (engine)NeuroscienceIschemiaExcitotoxicityAtrophyLithium (medication)PopulationNeurotrophinNeuroinflammationInternal medicineInflammationPsychologyNMDA receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Post-stroke cognitive impairment has a high prevalence in stroke patients and is associated with poor short and long term outcomes, including a negative impact on functional recovery. There is evidence that post-stroke impairment is the direct result of stroke induced neurological injury. Gray matter atrophy has been implicated in the development of post-stroke cognitive impairment and is the result of a series of neurochemical processes that are activated by ischemia. Lithium, traditionally used as a mood stabilizer, has been recognized in the last 10 years for its robust neuroprotective and neurotrophic effects against diverse insults, such as ischemia, both in vitro and in vivo. This has generated several preclinical and clinical studies of lithium treatment for managing neurodegenerative diseases and cerebral ischemia. Evidence suggests that lithium may protect against the cerebral atrophy and neuronal degeneration induced by the neurochemical processes and pathways known to regulate cell death and atrophy after an ischemic event. Lithiummediated neurotroprotective and neurotrophic effects involve mechanisms highly relevant to the post-stroke population including the increased expression of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and Bcl-2, and inhibition of GSK-3β. Lithium-induced increases in human gray matter have been reported and occur within a time frame consistent with the known effects of lithium through increased expression of BDNF, Bcl-2 and GSK-3β inhibition. This article reviews the evidence to support the use of lithium to reduce neuronal damage post-stroke through 1) mechanisms of excitotoxicity and post-ischemic inflammation; and 2) neurotrophic signaling cascades. Lithiums relevant actions in preclinical and clinical studies will be reviewed and presented to support the neuroprotective and neurotrophic effects of lithium as well as other clinical considerations in using lithium in the post-ischemic stroke population. Keywords: Stroke, ischemia, atrophy, neuroprotection, neurotrophic factors, brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), glycogen synthase kinase 3 beta (GSK-3β), lithium, brain gray matter volume, cognitive impairment, neurological injury, post-ischemic inflammation, functional outcome, rehabilitation, neuronal degeneration, neurotrophic drugs, depression, anxiety, apathy, Current Treatments for Ischemic Stroke, heparin, acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), clopidogrel, dipyridamole, ticlopidine, oral anticoagulants, POST-ISCHEMIC STROKE, excitotoxicity, neurotransmitters, glutamate receptors, Neurotrophic Signaling Cascades Post-Stroke, Lithium Increases BDNF, Lithium Increases the Expression of Bcl-2, Lithium Inhibits GSK-3, Pro-Apoptotic Signaling Molecule, Post-Stroke Atrophy, Polymorphisms, Hemorrhagic Strokes

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Drug TargetsSame topicNeurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207