Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
With our increasing appreciation of the true complexity of diseases and pathophysiologies, it is clear that this knowledge needs to inform the future development of pharmacotherapeutics. For many disorders, the disease mechanism itself is a complex process spanning multiple signaling networks, tissues, and organ systems. Identifying the precise nature and locations of the pathophysiology is crucial for the creation of systemically effective drugs. Diseases once considered constrained to a limited range of organ systems, e.g., central neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer's disease (AD), Parkinson's disease (PD), and Huntington' disease (HD), the role of multiple central and peripheral organ systems in the etiology of such diseases is now widely accepted. With this knowledge, it is increasingly clear that these seemingly distinct neurodegenerative disorders (AD, PD, and HD) possess multiple pathophysiological similarities thereby demonstrating an inter-related continuum of disease-related molecular alterations. With this systems-level appreciation of neurodegenerative diseases, it is now imperative to consider that pharmacotherapeutics should be developed specifically to address the systemic imbalances that create the disorders. Identification of potential systems-level signaling axes may facilitate the generation of therapeutic agents with synergistic remedial activity across multiple tissues, organ systems, and even diseases. Here, we discuss the potentially therapeutic systems-level interaction of the glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) ligand-receptor axis with multiple aspects of the AD, PD, and HD neurodegenerative continuum.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.