MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4210432241 · doi:10.1002/alz.056338

Quantifying acute tau inoculations in living rats using PET

2021· article· en· W4210432241 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Kunach

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBinding potentialIn vivoTau pathologyNuclear medicineEx vivoMedicineChemistryPathologyInternal medicinePositron emission tomographyAlzheimer's diseaseBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Monitoring tau propagation in the living brain has important pathophysiological and therapeutic implications. As tau imaging agents are dependent on tau conformations, we aimed to determine the tau species amenable to in vivo imaging. Previously we demonstrated that ex vivo tau preparations may be used to image tau seeds in living murine systems, as opposed to recombinant preparations. As such, the goal of this work is to examine the dose‐dependent relationship of patient derived AD‐tau fibrils on PET imaging outcomes. Method A total of two 15‐month‐old (2 wild‐type, one male and one female) rats were used. All animal had a baseline scan with [18F] MK6240 before the stereotaxic injections. We tested tau PHFs from AD brains using ultracentrifugation of sarkosyl‐insoluble brain fractions. AD‐tau preparations were stereotaxically injected in the dorsal hippocampus. We tested injection volumes of 1 and 3 uL of equal concentrations (80 ng/uL). Contralateral hemispheres were injected with equivalent amounts of PBS, the solvent for tau preparations. All PET images were coregistered to the Waxholm Space Atlas of the Sprague Dawley Rat Brain sMRI using a linear transformation. The non‐displaceable binding potential (BPND) images were generated using cerebellar grey as a reference region based on Simplified Reference Tissue Method (SRTM). Result Injection of sarkosyl‐insoluble brain fractions from AD patients displayed positive BPnd outcome in both volumes tested. Control hemispheres injected with PBS showed potential off‐target binding. Reliability of this outcome was investigated using peak normalized TACs. Hemispheres receiving AD‐tau injections showed visible divergence in retention, as compared to baseline. The hemisphere that was inoculated with 3uL of AD‐tau showed separation during washout. A similar effect was seen in the control hemisphere. Conclusion These results continue to suggest ex vivo tau preparations may be used to image tau seeds in living murine systems. The reliability of PET and kinetic outcomes are dependent on the volume injected. Further investigation will aim to evaluate AD‐tau concentration as the dosage variable instead of injection volume. Cerebellar tissue from patients used to extract AD‐tau species should be as a control injection to account for the reagents used for protein extraction, instead of PBS alone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.184
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research→French-language works237,207→