Brain Erythropoietin Receptor Expression in Alzheimer Disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellular mechanisms conferring neuroprotection in the brains of patients with Alzheimer disease (AD) remain incompletely understood. Erythropoietin (Epo) and the erythropoietin receptor (EpoR) are expressed in neural tissues and protect against oxidative and other stressors in various models of brain injury and disease. Our objective in this study was to determine whether EpoR is upregulated in the brains of persons with sporadic AD and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Postmortem hippocampus and temporal cortex from subjects with AD, MCI, and no cognitive impairment (NCI) were procured from the Religious Orders Study. Total immunoreactive EpoR protein was determined by Western blotting. Astrocytes expressing immunoreactive EpoR were quantified in 4 temporal and 6 hippocampal regions, and correlated with clinical, neuropsychologic, and neuropathologic indices. Total immunoreactive EpoR protein was markedly increased in AD and MCI temporal cortex versus NCI tissues. Composite measures of glial EpoR expression in temporal cortex layers I to IV were significantly greater in the MCI group compared with the NCI and AD groups. Hippocampal EpoR scores were increased in persons with MCI and AD relative to those with NCI. There was substantial subregional heterogeneity in disease-related EpoR expression patterns in AD and MCI temporal cortex and hippocampus. There was no association of EpoR-positive astrocytes with summary measures of global cognition or AD pathology. We conclude that upregulation of EpoR in temporal cortical and hippocampal astrocytes is an early, potentially neuroprotective, event in the pathogenesis of sporadic AD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".