MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4214492651 · doi:10.1101/2022.02.25.481812

Hippocampal GFAP-positive astrocyte responses to amyloid and tau pathologies

2022· preprint· en· W4214492651 on OpenAlexafffund
Marco Antônio De Bastiani, Bruna Bellaver, Wagner S. Brum, Débora Guerini de Souza, Pâmela C.L. Ferreira, Andréia Silva da Rocha, Guilherme Povala, João Pedro Ferrari‐Souza, Andréa Lessa Benedet, Nicholas J. Ashton, Thomas K. Karikari, Henrik Zetterberg, Kaj Blennow, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Tharick A. Pascoal, Eduardo R. Zimmer

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéInstituto SerrapilheiraCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlzheimerfondenInstituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia para Excitotoxicidade e NeuroproteçãoUK Dementia Research InstituteVetenskapsrådetFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do SulParkinsonfondenHjärnfondenConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorEU Joint Programme – Neurodegenerative Disease ResearchEuropean CommissionStiftelsen för Gamla TjänarinnorFamiljen Erling-Perssons StiftelseInternational Society for NeurochemistryBrightFocus FoundationAlzheimer's AssociationConsortium canadien en neurodégénérescence associée au vieillissementAlzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation
KeywordsAstrocyteGlial fibrillary acidic proteinAstrogliosisBiologyContext (archaeology)TranscriptomeBiomarkerHippocampal formationNeurosciencePathologyNeurodegenerationGeneGene expressionMedicineImmunologyDiseaseGeneticsCentral nervous systemImmunohistochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction In Alzheimer’s disease clinical research, glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) released into the cerebrospinal fluid and blood is widely measured and perceived as a biomarker of reactive astrogliosis. However, it was demonstrated that GFAP levels differ in individuals presenting with amyloid-β (Aβ) or tau pathology. The molecular underpinnings behind this specificity are unexplored. Here we investigated biomarker and transcriptomic associations of GFAP-positive astrocytes with Aβ and tau pathologies in humans and mouse models. Methods We studied 90 individuals with plasma GFAP, Aβ- and Tau-PET to investigate the association between biomarkers. Then, transcriptomic analysis in hippocampal GFAP-positive astrocytes isolated from mouse models presenting Aβ (PS2APP) or tau (P301S) pathologies was applied to explore differentially expressed genes (DEGs), Gene Ontology processes, and protein-protein interaction networks associated with each phenotype. Results In humans, we found that plasma GFAP associates with Aβ but not tau pathology. Unveiling the unique nature of GFAP-positive astrocytic responses to Aβ or tau pathology, mouse transcriptomics showed scarce overlap of DEGs between the Aβ and tau mouse models, While Aβ GFAP-positive astrocytes were overrepresented with genes associated with proteostasis and exocytosis-related processes, tau hippocampal GFAP-positive astrocytes presented greater abnormalities in functions related to DNA/RNA processing and cytoskeleton dynamics. Conclusion Our results offer insights into Aβ- and tau-driven specific signatures in GFAP-positive astrocytes. Characterizing how different underlying pathologies distinctly influence astrocyte responses is critical for the biological interpretation of astrocyte-related biomarker and suggests the need to develop context-specific astrocyte targets to study AD. Funding This study was supported by Instituto Serrapilheira, Alzheimer’s Association, CAPES, CNPq and FAPERGS.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments→French-language works237,207→