Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Defects in central response to insulin is suspected to play a role in AD. However, to act on the brain, pancreas‐secreted insulin must interact first with the blood‐brain barrier (BBB). The insulin receptor (INSR) consists in 2 insulin‐binding extracellular α chains, either short (INSRα‐A) or long (INSRα‐B) isoforms, as well as 2 intracellular β‐chains (INSRβ) containing auto‐phosphorylation sites. The aim of the present study was to better understand the role of INSR located on the BBB in AD. Method We used microvessel‐enriched brain samples from individuals classified as Controls, MCI or AD and from 3xTg‐AD mice from different ages. In situ cerebral perfusion was used to directly assess the interaction between circulating insulin and the BBB. Results We first show that INSR in human and mouse brains are concentrated in blood microvessels, with INSRα‐B being almost absent from the parenchymal fractions. Lower levels of INSRα‐B were observed in microvessel extracts from the parietal cortex of AD persons, associated with cognitive decline. The resulting shift toward a higher INSRα‐A:INSRα‐B ratio is consistent with insulin resistance situated on the BBB. Intracarotid infusion of insulin induced a rapid phosphorylation of INSRβ retrieved from cerebrovascular extracts, but not from parenchymal extracts of the mouse brain. In the 3xTg‐AD mouse model of AD neuropathology, lower levels of cerebrovascular INSRα‐B were observed whereas activation of INSRβ was blunted upon intracarotid administration of insulin. Finally, we provide some insights on a possible association between BACE1 activation and the reduction of cerebrovascular INSR. Conclusion Overall, data gathered from postmortem AD brains and an animal model of AD neuropathology suggest that brain insulin resistance in AD may occur at the level of INSR located on microvessels. These results also indicate that INSR and its downstream signaling within endothelial cells of the BBB are systemically accessible drug targets in AD.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".