MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040079480 · doi:10.1586/ern.09.89

Prevention of dementia by antihypertensive drugs: how AT1-receptor-blockers and dihydropyridines better prevent dementia in hypertensive patients than thiazides and ACE-inhibitors

2009· review· en· W2040079480 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Neurotherapeutics · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaMedicineCognitive declineStroke (engine)PharmacologyInternal medicineAlzheimer's diseaseDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our review of cohort studies and clinical trials evaluating antihypertensive drugs in the prevention of cognition decline and all dementia in patients with hypertension indicates that two antihypertensive drug classes have greater protective effects, independent of blood pressure decrease: dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers as shown in the Syst-Eur trial and angiotensin-AT1 receptor blockers as found in the MOSES and ONTARGET trials. By contrast, diuretics and angiotensin-converting enzyme-inhibitors (ACEIs) prevent dementia only in patients with a stroke history, provided they are combined, and prevent stroke recurrence. A Japanese cohort study and a small trial in patients already suffering from Alzheimer's disease (AD) suggest, however, that the BBB-penetrating ACEI may slow down cognitive decline. Only cohort studies support the hypothesis that diuretics, (especially potassium-sparing diuretics), may decrease the risk of AD. beta-blockers worsen cognition decline, or are neutral, according to whether or not they cross the BBB. Centrally-acting sympatholytic agent have a negative impact on cognition as BBB-penetrating beta-blockers, probably by blunting the adrenergic pathways. The AD protective effect of DHP appears related to the blockade of neuronal calcium channels. The ambiguous effect of ACEI on cognitive decline and dementia prevention may be explained by the fact that brain ACE is not specific for angiotensin-I. Brain ACE also catabolizes cognition-enhancing brain peptides, amyloid peptides and converts toxic Abeta(42) into less toxic Abeta(40). Therefore, ACEIs may have short-term cognition-enhancing properties and may increase in the long term Abeta(42) brain burden and cognitive decline. The clinical relevance of this scenario, mainly observed in animals, cannot be excluded in man, since the ACE gene has been associated with AD via the human whole genome analysis. To support the hypothesized deleterious effect of ACEI on human AD, confirmation that the ACE gene polymorphism DD is associated with protection against AD is necessary, since this polymorphism increases ACE activity. Independently of their preventive impact on beta-amyloid degenerative neuropathological process by overexpressing insulin degrading enzyme which catabolyses amyloid, the angiotensin AT1-receptor-blockers may have greater cognition protective effects than ACEI (observed in the ONTARGET trial), as they share with ACEI cognition-enhancing effects directly linked with a common AT1-blunting effect. In addition, they increase angiotensin II and IV formation and therefore stimulate non-opposed AT2 and AT4 receptors, whose activation in cognitive processes is well established.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.292 · 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