MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007197286 · doi:10.4061/2011/962352

Cell Surface Binding and Internalization of A<i>β</i> Modulated by Degree of Aggregation

2011· article· en· W2007197286 on OpenAlexafffund
David A. Bateman, Avijit Chakrabartty

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Alzheimer s Disease · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsDiscovery CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMuscular Dystrophy Association
KeywordsInternalizationDegree (music)MedicineSurface (topology)Internal medicineMathematicsReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The amyloid peptides, Aβ40 and Aβ42, are generated through endoproteolytic cleavage of the amyloid precursor protein. Here we have developed a model to investigate the interaction of living cells with various forms of aggregated Aβ40/42. After incubation at endosomal pH 6, we observed a variety of Aβ conformations after 3 (Aβ(3)), 24 (Aβ(24)), and 90 hours (Aβ(90)). Both Aβ42(24) and Aβ40(24) were observed to rapidly bind and internalize into differentiated PC12 cells, leading to accumulation in the lysosome. In contrast, Aβ40/42(90) were both found to only weakly associate with cells, but were observed as the most aggregated using dynamic light scattering and thioflavin-T. Internalization of Aβ40/42(24) was inhibited with treatment of monodansylcadaverine, an endocytosis inhibitor. These studies indicate that the ability of Aβ40/42 to bind and internalize into living cells increases with degree of aggregation until it reaches a maximum beyond which its ability to interact with cells diminishes drastically.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Alzheimer s DiseaseSame topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207