MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408431596 · doi:10.1186/s13195-025-01706-w

Beyond expectations: investigating nilotinib’s potential in attenuating neurodegeneration in Alzheimer’s disease

2025· review· en· W4408431596 on OpenAlexaff
Darcy Tocci, Vanya Gupta, Peter Kim, Jean J. Latimer, Aida Adlimoghaddam, Lisa S. Robison, Benedict C. Albensi

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s Research & Therapy · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaSt. Boniface Hospital
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsNeurodegenerationNeurologyDiseaseMedicineGeriatric psychiatryPsychopharmacologyNeuroscienceNilotinibPsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD), pose a formidable global challenge. While therapeutic options are available, their limitations are significant, necessitating the development of innovative treatment approaches. Here, we highlight the importance of repurposing drugs and discuss the future of drug treatments for AD. We review the potential of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) for mitigating AD pathology and symptoms, as well as neurodegenerative processes more broadly. We focus on nilotinib, a selective BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitor, which has unique mechanisms of action involving the modulation of cell responses and removal of toxic proteins associated with AD pathogenesis. Encouraging studies have demonstrated its efficacy, calling for further investigation through clinical trials to assess its potential in various neurodegenerative conditions. However, despite these promising preclinical findings, no clinical studies have yet conclusively demonstrated its efficacy in treating AD. Considering the future directions in AD research, personalized medicine approaches hold promise by incorporating patient-specific factors, including sex and gender differences, to tailor nilotinib treatment for improved efficacy and safety profiles.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.250
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s Research & TherapySame topicLung Cancer Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207