Is Tau the Initial Pathology in Dopaminergic Nigrostriatal Degeneration? Studies in Parkinsonism and Parkinson’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract While Parkinson’s disease (PD) remains clinically defined by cardinal motor symptoms resulting from nigrostriatal degeneration, it is now appreciated that PD consists of multiple pathologies, but it is unclear which occurs first and which are responsible for the nigrostriatal degeneration. For the past number of years, we have been studying a well-characterized cohort of subjects with motor impairment that we have termed mild motor deficits (MMD). Motor deficits were determined on a modified and validated Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale III (UPDRS III), but they occur to a degree insufficient to diagnose PD. We consider this population to have prodromal PD. However, in past studies, cases in this cohort had a selection bias as both a clinical syndrome in between no motor deficits and PD, plus nigral Lewy pathology as defined post-mortem, were required for inclusion. Therefore, in this study, we only based inclusion on a clinical phenotype intermediate between no motor impairment and PD. Then, we divided this group further based upon whether or not they had a synucleinopathy. Here we demonstrate that loss of nigral dopaminergic neurons, loss of putamenal dopaminergic innervation, loss of TH-phenotype in the substantia nigra and putamen, and changes in axonal transport occur equally in groups with and without nigral alpha-synuclein aggregates. Indeed, the common feature of these two groups is that both have similar degrees of AT8-expressing phospho-tau, a pathology not seen in the nigrostriatal system of aged-matched controls. These finding were confirmed with early (CP13) and late (PHF1) tau markers. This suggests that the initiation of nigrostriatal dopaminergic neurodegeneration occurs independently of alpha-synuclein aggregation and is likely tau mediated.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".