The dynamics of monocytes and microglia in Alzheimer’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disorder affecting older people worldwide. It is a progressive disorder mainly characterized by the presence of amyloid-beta (Aβ) plaques and neurofibrillary tangles within the brain parenchyma. It is now well accepted that neuroinflammation constitutes an important feature in AD, wherein the exact role of innate immunity remains unclear. Although innate immune cells are at the forefront to protect the brain in the presence of toxic molecules including Aβ, this natural defense mechanism seems insufficient in AD patients. Monocytes are a key component of the innate immune system and they play multiple roles, such as the removal of debris and dead cells via phagocytosis. These cells respond quickly and mobilize toward the inflamed site, where they proliferate and differentiate into macrophages in response to inflammatory signals. Many studies have underlined the ability of circulating and infiltrating monocytes to clear vascular Aβ microaggregates and parenchymal Aβ deposits respectively, which are very important features of AD. On the other hand, microglia are the resident immune cells of the brain and they play multiple physiological roles, including maintenance of the brain's microenvironment homeostasis. In the injured brain, activated microglia migrate to the inflamed site, where they remove neurotoxic elements by phagocytosis. However, aged resident microglia are less efficient than their circulating sister immune cells in eliminating Aβ deposits from the brain parenchyma, thus underlining the importance to further investigate the functions of these innate immune cells in AD. The present review summarizes current knowledge on the role of monocytes and microglia in AD and how these cells can be mobilized to prevent and treat the disease.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".