0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A systematic review and meta-analysis of cognitive and behavioral tests in rodents treated with different doses of D-ribose

      systematic-review

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          D-ribose is an aldehyde sugar and a necessary component of all living cells. Numerous reports have focused on D-ribose intervention in animal models to assess the negative effects of D-ribose on cognition. However, the results across these studies are inconsistent and the doses and actual effects of D-ribose on cognition remain unclear. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effect of D-ribose on cognition in rodents.

          Methods

          The articles from PubMed, Embase, Sciverse Scopus, Web of Science, the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, SinoMed, Wanfang, and Cqvip databases were screened. The results from the abstract on cognitive-related behavioral tests and biochemical markers from the included articles were extracted and the reporting quality was assessed.

          Results

          A total of eight trials involving 289 rodents met the eligibility criteria, and both low- and high-dose groups were included. Meta-analyses of these studies showed that D-ribose could cause a significant decrease in the number of platform crossings (standardized mean difference [SMD]: –0.80; 95% CI: –1.14, –0.46; p < 0.00001), percentage of distance traversed in the target quadrant (SMD: –1.20; 95% CI: –1.47, –0.92; p < 0.00001), percentage of time spent in the target quadrant (SMD: –0.93; 95% CI: –1.18, –0.68; p < 0.00001), and prolonged escape latency (SMD: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.65; p = 0.001) in the Morris water maze test. Moreover, D-ribose intervention increased the levels of advanced glycation end products (AGEs) in the brain (SMD: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.34, 0.63; p < 0.00001) and blood (SMD: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.92; p = 0.02). Subsequently, subgroup analysis for the dose of D-ribose intervention revealed that high doses injured cognitive function more significantly than low D-ribose doses.

          Conclusion

          D-ribose treatment caused cognitive impairment, and cognition deteriorated with increasing dose. Furthermore, the increase in AGEs in the blood and brain confirmed that D-ribose may be involved in cognitive impairment through non-enzymatic glycosylation resulting in the generation of AGEs. These findings provide a new research idea for unveiling basic mechanisms and prospective therapeutic targets for the prevention and treatment of patients with cognitive impairment.

          Related collections

          Most cited references53

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis.

          There are two popular statistical models for meta-analysis, the fixed-effect model and the random-effects model. The fact that these two models employ similar sets of formulas to compute statistics, and sometimes yield similar estimates for the various parameters, may lead people to believe that the models are interchangeable. In fact, though, the models represent fundamentally different assumptions about the data. The selection of the appropriate model is important to ensure that the various statistics are estimated correctly. Additionally, and more fundamentally, the model serves to place the analysis in context. It provides a framework for the goals of the analysis as well as for the interpretation of the statistics. In this paper we explain the key assumptions of each model, and then outline the differences between the models. We conclude with a discussion of factors to consider when choosing between the two models. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research

            Reproducible science requires transparent reporting. The ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) were originally developed in 2010 to improve the reporting of animal research. They consist of a checklist of information to include in publications describing in vivo experiments to enable others to scrutinise the work adequately, evaluate its methodological rigour, and reproduce the methods and results. Despite considerable levels of endorsement by funders and journals over the years, adherence to the guidelines has been inconsistent, and the anticipated improvements in the quality of reporting in animal research publications have not been achieved. Here, we introduce ARRIVE 2.0. The guidelines have been updated and information reorganised to facilitate their use in practice. We used a Delphi exercise to prioritise and divide the items of the guidelines into 2 sets, the “ARRIVE Essential 10,” which constitutes the minimum requirement, and the “Recommended Set,” which describes the research context. This division facilitates improved reporting of animal research by supporting a stepwise approach to implementation. This helps journal editors and reviewers verify that the most important items are being reported in manuscripts. We have also developed the accompanying Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document, which serves (1) to explain the rationale behind each item in the guidelines, (2) to clarify key concepts, and (3) to provide illustrative examples. We aim, through these changes, to help ensure that researchers, reviewers, and journal editors are better equipped to improve the rigour and transparency of the scientific process and thus reproducibility.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Alzheimer's disease

              In this Seminar, we highlight the main developments in the field of Alzheimer's disease. The most recent data indicate that, by 2050, the prevalence of dementia will double in Europe and triple worldwide, and that estimate is 3 times higher when based on a biological (rather than clinical) definition of Alzheimer's disease. The earliest phase of Alzheimer's disease (cellular phase) happens in parallel with accumulating amyloid β, inducing the spread of tau pathology. The risk of Alzheimer's disease is 60-80% dependent on heritable factors, with more than 40 Alzheimer's disease-associated genetic risk loci already identified, of which the APOE alleles have the strongest association with the disease. Novel biomarkers include PET scans and plasma assays for amyloid β and phosphorylated tau, which show great promise for clinical and research use. Multidomain lifestyle-based prevention trials suggest cognitive benefits in participants with increased risk of dementia. Lifestyle factors do not directly affect Alzheimer's disease pathology, but can still contribute to a positive outcome in individuals with Alzheimer's disease. Promising pharmacological treatments are poised at advanced stages of clinical trials and include anti-amyloid β, anti-tau, and anti-inflammatory strategies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Aging Neurosci
                Front Aging Neurosci
                Front. Aging Neurosci.
                Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1663-4365
                09 November 2022
                2022
                : 14
                : 1036315
                Affiliations
                [1] 1School of Nursing, Peking University , Beijing, China
                [2] 2Department of Endocrinology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital , Beijing, China
                Author notes

                Edited by: Woon-Man Kung, Chinese Culture University, Taiwan

                Reviewed by: Heather M. Wilkins, University of Kansas Medical Center Research Institute, United States; Saheem Ahmad, University of Hail, Saudi Arabia

                *Correspondence: Yanhui Lu, luyanhui@ 123456bjmu.edu.cn

                These authors have contributed equally to this work and share first authorship

                This article was submitted to Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias, a section of the journal Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience

                Article
                10.3389/fnagi.2022.1036315
                9681890
                36438006
                d99f2ae7-94fb-4aa6-906c-5c2f146b32fe
                Copyright © 2022 Song, Du, An, Zheng and Lu.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 04 September 2022
                : 17 October 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 7, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 53, Pages: 11, Words: 6376
                Categories
                Neuroscience
                Systematic Review

                Neurosciences
                d-ribose,rodent,cognition,behavioral test,meta-analysis
                Neurosciences
                d-ribose, rodent, cognition, behavioral test, meta-analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article