Glutamate receptors function as scaffolds for the regulation of β-amyloid and cellular prion protein signaling complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that affects 36 million people worldwide, but currently has no effective treatment options. One of the original hallmarks of AD are plaques comprised of beta amyloid (Aβ) and neurofibrillary tangles comprised of phosphorylated Tau protein. However, it is soluble oligomeric Aβ which is more closely correlated with cognitive decline and is therefore considered to be the neurotoxic species. Oligomeric Aβ has recently been shown to form complexes with the glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchored membrane protein, cellular prion protein (PrP(c)), and these complexes are believed to play an important role in the progression of AD pathogenesis. Glutamate, the major excitatory neurotransmitter is responsible for mediating learning and memory under normal physiological conditions. However, the dysregulation of glutamatergic signaling has also been implicated in a number of neurodegenerative diseases including AD. Glutamate acts via both ionotropic glutamate receptors (iGluR) and metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluR), each of which have been implicated in AD. There is now growing evidence to suggest that mGluR5 may contribute the AD pathogenesis by acting as scaffolds for the PrP(c)/Aβ oligomer complex, enabling the propagation of neurotoxic signaling in AD. In addition, PrP(c) and Aβ oligomer signaling via NMDARs may also contribute to AD pathology. The current review overviews our current understanding of the role of PrP(c) and Aβ oligomers in regulating glutamate receptor signaling, as well as highlights the importance of understanding these signaling complexes to develop more effective therapeutic strategies to treat 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".