Regionally distinct GFAP promoter expression plays a role in off-target neuron expression following AAV5 transduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Astrocyte to neuron reprogramming has been performed using viral delivery of neurogenic transcription factors in GFAP expressing cells. Recent reports of off-target expression in cortical neurons following adeno-associated virus (AAV) transduction to deliver the neurogenic factors have confounded our understanding of the efficacy of direct cellular reprogramming. To shed light on potential mechanisms that may underlie the neuronal off-target expression of GFAP promoter driven expression of neurogenic factors in neurons, two regionally distinct cortices were compared-the motor cortex (MC) and medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC)-and investigated: (1) the regional tropism and astrocyte transduction with an AAV5-GFAP vector, (2) the expression of Gfap in MC and mPFC neurons; and (3) material transfer between astrocytes and neurons. Using a Cre-based system (AAV5-hGFAP-Cre; Rosa26R-tdTomato reporter mice), regional differences were observed in tdTomato expression between the MC and mPFC. Interestingly, this correlated with the presence of a greater expression of Gfap mRNA in neurons in the mPFC. Additionally, intercellular material transfer of Cre and tdTomato was observed between astrocytes and neurons in both regions, albeit at very low frequencies. Our study highlights regionally distinct variation in neurons that warrants consideration when designing genetic constructs for gene therapies targeting astrocytes including astrocyte to neuron reprogramming.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".