SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

The challenges of experimental pharmacology in identifying novel treatments for Parkinson's disease.

Curr Opin Neurobiol · 2026-01-21

DOI: 10.1016/j.conb.2025.103164PMID: 41570740

Check source for accessReview; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

An important part of the field of experimental pharmacology encompasses the study of the effects of molecules in animals. In the case of Parkinson's disease (PD), animal models have played an invaluable role in refining our understanding of the disease, in characterizing the effect of new compounds on the illness, and in bringing new treatments to the clinic. Indeed, it is now hardly conceivable that a drug would be tested in humans if several parameters pertaining to safety, toxicology, efficacy, etc. had not previously been evaluated in animal models. Quite unfortunately, efficacy in experimental models of PD does not necessarily guarantee positive clinical outcomes. In this article, which primarily focusses on the past five years, we review drugs that entered clinical trials for the treatment of levodopa-induced dyskinesia, parkinsonism, disease modification, and had previously been assessed in animal models of PD. The drugs discussed are buspirone, JM-010, befiradol, mesdopetam, foliglurax, dipraglurant, tavapadon, prasinezumab, cinpanemab, nilotinib, minzasolmin, exenatide, NLY01, liraglutide, lixisenatide, and semaglutide. For each molecule, we examine how previous preclinical studies succeeded or failed in predicting efficacy in clinical trials and discuss possible ways to optimize animal-model design and selection to maximize the probability of translational success.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.