Reduction in <scp>DHA</scp> transport to the brain of mice expressing human <i><scp>APOE</scp>4</i> compared to <i><scp>APOE</scp>2</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Benefits on cognition from docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, 22 : 6 n-3) intake are absent in humans carrying apolipoprotein E ε4 allele (APOE4), the most important genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD). To test the hypothesis that carrying APOE4 impairs DHA distribution, we evaluated plasma and brain fatty acid profiles and uptake of [(14) C]-DHA using in situ cerebral perfusion through the blood-brain barrier in 4- and 13-month-old male and female APOE-targeted replacement mice (APOE2, APOE3, and APOE4), fed with a DHA-depleted diet. Cortical and plasma DHA were 9% lower and 34% higher in APOE4 compared to APOE2 mice, respectively. Brain uptake of [(14) C]-DHA was 24% lower in APOE4 versus APOE2 mice. A significant relationship was established between DHA and apoE concentrations in the cortex of mice (r(2) = 0.21) and AD patients (r(2) = 0.32). Altogether, our results suggest that lower brain uptake of DHA in APOE4 than in APOE2 mice may limit the accumulation of DHA in cerebral tissues. These data provide a mechanistic explanation for the lack of benefit of DHA in APOE4 carriers on cognitive function and the risk of AD. Using human APOE2, 3, and 4 isoform-specific transgenic mice, we found a lower brain uptake of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) in APOE4 than in APOE2 mice that may limit the biodistribution of DHA in cerebral tissues. These data provide a mechanistic explanation for the lack of benefit of DHA in APOE4 carriers on cognitive function and the risk of Alzheimer's disease (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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".