Two distinct conformers of PrPD type 1 of sporadic Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease with codon 129VV genotype faithfully propagate in vivo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Current classifications of sporadic Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (sCJD) identify five subtypes associated with different disease phenotypes. Most of these histopathological phenotypes (histotypes) co-distribute with distinct pairings of methionine (M)/valine (V) genotypes at codon 129 of the prion protein (PrP) gene and the type (1 or 2) of the disease-associated PrP (PrPD). Types 1 and 2 are defined by the molecular mass (~ 21 kDa and ~ 19 kDa, respectively) of the unglycosylated isoform of the proteinase K-resistant PrPD (resPrPD). We recently reported that the sCJDVV1 subtype (129VV homozygosity paired with PrPD type 1, T1) shows an electrophoretic profile where the resPrPD unglycosylated isoform is characterized by either one of two single bands of ~ 20 kDa (T120) and ~ 21 kDa (T121), or a doublet of ~ 21–20 kDa (T121−20). We also showed that T120 and T121 in sCJDVV have different conformational features but are associated with indistinguishable histotypes. The presence of three distinct molecular profiles of T1 is unique and raises the issue as to whether T120 and T121 represent distinct prion strains. To answer this question, brain homogenates from sCJDVV cases harboring each of the three resPrPD profiles, were inoculated to transgenic (Tg) mice expressing the human PrP-129M or PrP-129V genotypes. We found that T120 and T121 were faithfully replicated in Tg129V mice. Electrophoretic profile and incubation period of mice challenged with T121−20 resembled those of mice inoculated with T121 and T120, respectively. As in sCJDVV1, Tg129V mice challenged with T121 and T120 generated virtually undistinguishable histotypes. In Tg129M mice, T121 was not replicated while T120 and T121−20 generated a ~ 21–20 kDa doublet after lengthier incubation periods. On second passage, Tg129M mice incubation periods and regional PrP accumulation significantly differed in T120 and T121−20 challenged mice. Combined, these data indicate that T121 and T120 resPrPD represent distinct human prion strains associated with partially overlapping histotypes.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".