MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805222990 · doi:10.3389/fnins.2018.00419

Alzheimer Disease and Selected Risk Factors Disrupt a Co-regulation of Monoamine Oxidase-A/B in the Hippocampus, but Not in the Cortex

2018· article· en· W2805222990 on OpenAlexafffund
Maa O. Quartey, Jennifer N. K. Nyarko, Paul R. Pennington, Ryan M. Heistad, Paula C. Klassen, Glen B. Baker, Darrell D. Mousseau

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroscience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of AlbertaAlzheimer SocietySaskatchewan Health Research Foundation
KeywordsHippocampusHippocampal formationMonoamine oxidase AMonoamine oxidaseAlzheimer's diseaseInternal medicineAlleleEndocrinologyApolipoprotein ECortex (anatomy)PsychologyMedicineDiseaseBiologyNeuroscienceBiochemistryEnzymeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monoamine oxidase-A (MAO-A) and MAO-B have both been implicated in the pathology of Alzheimer disease (AD). We examined 60 autopsied control and AD donor brain samples to determine how well MAO function aligned with two major risk factors for AD, namely sex and APOE epsilon4 status. MAO-A activity was increased in AD cortical, but not hippocampal, samples. In contrast, MAO-B activity was increased in both regions (with a strong input from female donors) whether sample means were compared based on: (a) diagnosis alone; (b) diagnosis-by-APOE epsilon4 status (i.e. carriers vs. non-carriers of the epsilon4 allele); or (c) APOE epsilon4 status alone (i.e. ignoring ‘diagnosis’ as a variable). Sample means strictly based on the donor’s sex did not reveal any difference in either MAO-A or MAO-B activity. Unexpectedly, we found that cortical MAO-A and MAO-B activities were highly correlated in both males and females (if focussing strictly on the donor’s sex), while in the hippocampus, any correlation was lost in female samples. Stratifying for sex-by-APOE epsilon4 status revealed a strong correlation between cortical MAO-A and MAO-B activities in both non-carriers and carriers of the allele, but any correlation in hippocampal samples was lost in carriers of the allele. A diagnosis of AD disrupted the correlation between MAO-A and MAO-B activities in the hippocampus, but not the cortex. We observed a novel region-dependent co-regulation of MAO-A and MAO-B mRNAs (but not proteins), while a lack of correlation between MAO activities and the respective proteins corroborated previous reports. Overexpression of human APOE4 increased MAO activity (but not mRNA/protein) in C6 and in HT-22 cell cultures. We identified a novel co-regulation of MAO-A and MAO-B activities that is spared from any influence of risk factors for AD or AD itself in the cortex, but vulnerable to these same factors in the hippocampus. Sex- and region-dependent abilities to buffer influences on brain MAO activities could have significant bearing on ambiguous outcomes when monoaminergic systems are targeted in clinical populations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroscienceSame topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207