↓ Skip to main content

Alzheimer's disease: the amyloid hypothesis and the Inverse Warburg effect

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
122 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
293 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Alzheimer's disease: the amyloid hypothesis and the Inverse Warburg effect
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2015
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2014.00522
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lloyd A. Demetrius, Pierre J. Magistretti, Luc Pellerin

Abstract

Epidemiological and biochemical studies show that the sporadic forms of Alzheimer's disease (AD) are characterized by the following hallmarks: (a) An exponential increase with age; (b) Selective neuronal vulnerability; (c) Inverse cancer comorbidity. The present article appeals to these hallmarks to evaluate and contrast two competing models of AD: the amyloid hypothesis (a neuron-centric mechanism) and the Inverse Warburg hypothesis (a neuron-astrocytic mechanism). We show that these three hallmarks of AD conflict with the amyloid hypothesis, but are consistent with the Inverse Warburg hypothesis, a bioenergetic model which postulates that AD is the result of a cascade of three events-mitochondrial dysregulation, metabolic reprogramming (the Inverse Warburg effect), and natural selection. We also provide an explanation for the failures of the clinical trials based on amyloid immunization, and we propose a new class of therapeutic strategies consistent with the neuroenergetic selection model.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 293 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Unknown 287 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 57 19%
Researcher 49 17%
Student > Master 42 14%
Student > Bachelor 37 13%
Student > Postgraduate 13 4%
Other 45 15%
Unknown 50 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 58 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 54 18%
Neuroscience 47 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 9%
Engineering 11 4%
Other 39 13%
Unknown 59 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 March 2021.
All research outputs
#1,830,275
of 22,778,347 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#996
of 13,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,423
of 353,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#11
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,778,347 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,560 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 353,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.