Systematic interaction network filtering identifies CRMP1 as a novel suppressor of huntingtin misfolding and neurotoxicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assemblies of huntingtin (HTT) fragments with expanded polyglutamine (polyQ) tracts are a pathological hallmark of Huntington's disease (HD). The molecular mechanisms by which these structures are formed and cause neuronal dysfunction and toxicity are poorly understood. Here, we utilized available gene expression data sets of selected brain regions of HD patients and controls for systematic interaction network filtering in order to predict disease-relevant, brain region-specific HTT interaction partners. Starting from a large protein-protein interaction (PPI) data set, a step-by-step computational filtering strategy facilitated the generation of a focused PPI network that directly or indirectly connects 13 proteins potentially dysregulated in HD with the disease protein HTT. This network enabled the discovery of the neuron-specific protein CRMP1 that targets aggregation-prone, N-terminal HTT fragments and suppresses their spontaneous self-assembly into proteotoxic structures in various models of HD. Experimental validation indicates that our network filtering procedure provides a simple but powerful strategy to identify disease-relevant proteins that influence misfolding and aggregation of polyQ disease proteins.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".