SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Current progress in the use of pyrazole-containing compounds for neuroprotection as a strategy to counteract neurodegeneration.

Biochem Pharmacol · 2026-06-15

DOI: 10.1016/j.bcp.2026.118161PMID: 42297218

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

Pyrazoles, a versatile class of five-membered heterocyclic compounds, have attracted significant attention due to their broad biological activities, including neuroprotection. This review examines the role of pyrazole-containing compounds in protecting neuronal tissues against various forms of damage, such as oxidative stress, excitotoxicity, and neuroinflammation, which are critical contributors to neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. The targets and molecular mechanisms through which pyrazoles exert their neuroprotective effects, including the modulation of signaling pathways, enzyme inhibition, and antioxidant activity, are also comprehensively discussed. Furthermore, recent advances in the design of pyrazole-bearing compounds with enhanced neuroprotective properties are highlighted through the presentation of key structure-activity relationships (SARs), emphasizing their therapeutic potential in the most prevalent neurodegenerative disorders, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Parkinson's disease (PD). This review provides an up-to-date overview of pyrazoles, either as standalone scaffolds or in combination with other ring systems, in neuroprotection, thereby paving the way for future research and drug development in this promising field.

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.