Defective linear and circular RNAs biogenesis in Huntington’s disease: CAG repeat expansion hijacks neuronal splicing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Alternative splicing (AS) appears to be altered in Huntington’s disease (HD), but its significance for early, pre-symptomatic disease stages has not been inspected. Here, taking advantage of Htt CAG knock-in mouse in vitro and in vivo models, we demonstrate a strong correlation between Htt CAG repeat length and increased aberrant linear AS, specifically affecting neural progenitors and, in vivo, the striatum prior to overt behavioral phenotypes stages. Remarkably, expanded Htt CAG repeats reflect on a previously neglected, global impairment of back-splicing, leading to decreased circular RNAs production in neural progenitors. Though the mechanisms of this dysregulation remain uncertain, our study unveils network of transcriptionally altered micro-RNAs and RNA-binding proteins (CELF, hnRNPS, PTBP, SRSF) which, in turn, might influence the AS machinery, primarily in neural cells. We suggest that this unbalanced expression of linear and circular RNAs might result in altered neural fitness, contributing to HD striatal vulnerability.
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) | 0.002 | 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".