Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41717632›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in dementia2026

An integrative neurogenomics workflow for precision medicine in neurodegenerative disorders.

Carlos Perezcano, Mariana Pérez-Coria

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in dementia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Carlos PerezcanoCenter for Research in Precision Medicine and Clinical Genomics, GENOMICS 360, Mexico City, Mexico.
Mariana Pérez-CoriaCenter for Research in Precision Medicine and Clinical Genomics, GENOMICS 360, Mexico City, Mexico.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neurodegenerative diseases represent an expanding global health challenge, with rapidly increasing prevalence and substantial economic impact. The therapeutic clinical approach continues to seek solutions through pharmacological means-such as inhibitors and antibodies-which, while sometimes controlling symptoms, have not addressed the underlying pathophysiology. By integrating advanced genomics with selected biochemical markers, under the continuous oversight of a multidisciplinary team working in consensus, it is possible to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of individual phenotypes, enabling the design of truly personalized neurogenomics-based functional plans. This article outlines the steps of the proposed integrative neurogenomics workflow, discussing its advantages and limitations, and presents highlights from an illustrative case intended as a potential reference model to establish the foundation for a new standard of personalized genomic medicine in neurodegeneration. The workflow underscores the importance of considering the additive burden of genetic variants typically classified as benign-beyond the ACMG pathogenicity framework-for accurate phenotypic assessment. It further demonstrates the feasibility of developing actionable and highly precise functional interventions by integrating genomic and biochemical data. Findings from the case example reveal correlations between genetic variants and biochemical markers, providing the basis for personalized recommendations in nutrition, lifestyle, and supplementation. This framework aims to establish the foundations of personalized genomic medicine in neurodegenerative diseases, underscoring the urgent need to move beyond one-size-fits-all approaches.

Indexed as

Alzheimerdementiagenomicsintegrative workflowneurodegenerative diseasesprecision medicine

Identifiers

PMID41717632
PMCPMC12913181

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.