Cross-species comparative hippocampal transcriptomics in Alzheimer’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a multifactorial pathology, with most cases having a sporadic origin. Recently, knock-in (KI) mouse models, such as the novel humanized amyloid-β (hAβ)-KI, have been developed to better resemble sporadic human AD. METHODS: Here, we compared hippocampal publicly available transcriptomic profiles of transgenic (5xFAD and APP/PS1) and KI (hAβ-KI) mouse models with early- (EOAD) and late- (LOAD) onset AD patients. RESULTS: The three mouse models presented more Gene Ontology biological processes terms and enriched signaling pathways in common with LOAD than with EOAD individuals. Experimental validation of consistently dysregulated genes revealed five altered in mice (SLC11A1, S100A6, CD14, CD33, and C1QB) and three in humans (S100A6, SLC11A1, and KCNK). Finally, we identified 17 transcription factors potentially acting as master regulators of AD. CONCLUSION: Our cross-species analyses revealed that the three mouse models presented a remarkable similarity to LOAD, with the hAβ-KI being the more specific one.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".