Increased expression of the receptor for advanced glycation end‐products in human peripheral neuropathies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Diabetic neuropathy and idiopathic neuropathy are among the most prevalent neuropathies in human patients. The molecular mechanism underlying pathological changes observed in the affected nerve remains unclear but one candidate molecule, the receptor for advanced glycation end-products (RAGE), has recently gained attention as a potential contributor to neuropathy. Our previous studies revealed that RAGE expression is higher in porcine and murine diabetic nerve, contributing to the inflammatory mechanisms leading to diabetic neuropathy. Here, for the first time, we focused on the expression of RAGE in human peripheral nerve. METHODS: Our study utilized de-identified human sural nerve surplus obtained from 5 non-neuropathic patients (control group), 6 patients with long-term mild-to-moderate diabetic neuropathy (diabetic group) and 5 patients with mild-to-moderate peripheral neuropathy of unknown etiology (idiopathic group). By using immunofluorescent staining and protein immunoblotting we studied the expression and colocalization patterns of RAGE and its ligands: carboxymethyllysine (CML), high mobility group box 1 (HMBG1) and mammalian Diaphanous 1 (mDia1) in control and neuropathic nerves. RESULTS: We found that in a normal, healthy human nerve, RAGE is expressed in almost 30% of all nerve fibers and that number is higher in pathological states such as peripheral neuropathy. We established that the levels of RAGE and its pro-inflammatory ligands, CML and HMBG1, are higher in both idiopathic and diabetic nerve, while the expression of the RAGE cytoplasmic domain-binding partner, mDia1 is similar among control, diabetic, and idiopathic nerve. The highest number of double stained nerve fibers was noted for RAGE and CML: ∼76% (control), ∼91% (idiopathic) and ∼82% (diabetic) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest roles for RAGE and its inflammatory ligands in human peripheral neuropathies and lay the foundation for further, more detailed and clinically oriented investigation involving these proteins and their roles in disorders of the human peripheral nerve.
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 | 0.000 | 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".