Unveiling the role of erinacines in the neuroprotective effects of Hericium erinaceus: a systematic review in preclinical models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The medicinal mushroom lion’s mane ( Hericium erinaceus ) is suggested to have therapeutic potential for neurological disorders due to its neuroprotective and neurotrophic properties. Mycelia of H . erinaceus contain erinacines, a group of cyathane diterpenoids, however no systematic review has explored the broader role of these compounds in mediating the neurobiological effects of the mushroom. This systematic review was therefore performed to enhance the depth of understanding surrounding the neurobiological impact of the various erinacine compounds using various cellular and rodent models. A secondary focus was to assess how study outcomes were influenced by the chemical complexity of the administered treatments. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were utilized. The findings showed the broader potential of H. erinaceus mycelial formulations, and their derived erinacines, to exert dose-dependent benefits in motor, cognitive, and depression-like behaviours in animal models. Synthesis of records highlighted the ability of both erinacines and H. erinaceus to induce antioxidant responses and activate pro-survival signaling pathways. However, erinacine A and C uniquely induced the accumulation of the transcription factor Nrf2, a key regulator of the antioxidant response. These erinacines were also anti-inflammatory, enhanced neurogenesis and cell survival, and improved cognitive and behavioral outcomes in vivo . These findings suggest the promise of H. erinaceus extracts and individual erinacines as accessible, cost-effective interventions for aging-related and neurodegenerative conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".