Chronic and Acute Models of Retinal Neurodegeneration TrkA Activity Are Neuroprotective whereas p75NTR Activity Is Neurotoxic through a Paracrine Mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In normal adult retinas, NGF receptor TrkA is expressed in retinal ganglion cells (RGC), whereas glia express p75(NTR). During retinal injury, endogenous NGF, TrkA, and p75(NTR) are up-regulated. Paradoxically, neither endogenous NGF nor exogenous administration of wild type NGF can protect degenerating RGCs, even when administered at high frequency. Here we elucidate the relative contribution of NGF and each of its receptors to RGC degeneration in vivo. During retinal degeneration due to glaucoma or optic nerve transection, treatment with a mutant NGF that only activates TrkA, or with a biological response modifier that prevents endogenous NGF and pro-NGF from binding to p75(NTR) affords significant neuroprotection. Treatment of normal eyes with an NGF mutant-selective p75(NTR) agonist causes progressive RGC death, and in injured eyes it accelerates RGC death. The mechanism of p75(NTR) action during retinal degeneration due to glaucoma is paracrine, by increasing production of neurotoxic proteins TNF-α and α(2)-macroglobulin. Antagonists of p75(NTR) inhibit TNF-α and α(2)-macroglobulin up-regulation during disease, and afford neuroprotection. These data reveal a balance of neuroprotective and neurotoxic mechanisms in normal and diseased retinas, and validate each neurotrophin receptor as a pharmacological target for neuroprotection.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".