MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410032192 · doi:10.3390/ph18050659

A Review of the Clinical Progress of CT1812, a Novel Sigma-2 Receptor Antagonist for the Treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease

2025· review· en· W4410032192 on OpenAlexaff
Sara R. Steinfield, Daniel F. Stenn, Helen Chen, Bettina E. Kalisch

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceuticals · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPharmacological Receptor Mechanisms and Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurodegenerationDiseaseMedicineNeuroscienceClinical trialAntagonistAlzheimer's diseasePharmacologyReceptorMechanism (biology)Amyloid βReceptor antagonistSigma-1 receptorBioinformaticsInternal medicineBiologyAgonistPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disease marked by the accumulation of toxic amyloid-beta (Aβ) oligomers. These oligomers are thought to cause synaptic dysfunction and contribute to neurodegeneration. CT1812 is a small-molecule sigma-2 receptor antagonist that is currently being investigated and tested as a potential disease-modifying treatment for AD. CT1812 acts by displacing Aβ oligomers into the cerebrospinal fluid and preventing their interaction with receptors on neurons. Preclinical studies and early clinical trials of CT1812 show promising results and provide evidence for its potential to slow AD progression. This review outlines the role of Aβ oligomers in AD, CT1812's mechanism of action, and the effectiveness and limitations of CT1812 based on preclinical and clinical studies.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmaceuticalsSame topicPharmacological Receptor Mechanisms and EffectsFrench-language works237,207