Relevance of oxidative injury in the pathogenesis of motor neuron diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oxidative stress, which results from a complex interplay of pro- and anti-oxidant forces, is generally considered to be the major effector of accumulation of oxidatively modified protein accumulation in cells, although reduced degradation due to impairment of proteolytic activity could also contribute. The discovery that a familial lateral sclerosis (ALS) results from mutations in the gene encoding Cu/Zn superoxide dismutase a anti-oxidant enzyme, stimulated considerable evaluation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation and oxidative protein damage in both familial and sporadic forms of the disease. Mutations in SOD1 do not cause disease by compromising dismutating activity, but through some toxic gain of function. Although exacerbation of other copper-catalyzed enzymatic activities has been demonstrated in vitro, there is little evidence substantiating that this property is responsible for toxicity in vivo. Studies of ROS generation and oxidative damage in vivo have produced mixed results, but collectively are consistent with oxidative stress playing a secondary role in pathogenesis of the disease. Studies of post-mortem tissue from sporadic ALS patients has yielded more consistent evidence of accumulation of oxidative damage to proteins, lipids, and DNA, but the time course of accumulation cannot be determined and the initiating causes of the disease have not been identified. The interplay between motor neurons and glial cells is important in the clinical progression of both familial and sporadic motor neuron diseases and release of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species or cytokines from microglia could contribute to the demise of motor neurons. This review describes the general mechanisms of radical-mediated cellular damage followed by the evidence for and against the contribution of oxidative injury to the pathogenesis of motor neuron diseases.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".