MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406049828 · doi:10.1002/alz.084937

Nonfibrillar Dutch mutant amyloid beta (Aß) aggregates (oligomers) are associated with aging‐related synaptic dysfunction

2024· article· en· W4406049828 on OpenAlexaff
Sam Gandy, Emilie L. Castranio, Merina Varghese, Elentina K. Argyrousi, Kuldeep Tripathi, Linda Söderberg, Erin Bresnahan, David K. Lerner, Francesca Garretti, Hong Zhang, Jonathan Van de Loo, Ronan Talty, Charles Glabe, Efrat Levy, Minghui Wang, Bin Zhang, Lars Lannfelt, William D. Lubell, Brigitte Guérin, Shai Rahimipour, Dara L. Dickstein, Ottavio Arancio, Michelle E. Ehrlich

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmyloid (mycology)NeuroscienceMutantChemistryMedicinePsychologyBiochemistryPathologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Clinicopathological studies of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) have demonstrated that synaptic or neuronal loss and clinical cognitive decline do not reliably correlate with fibrillar amyloid burden. We created a transgenic mouse model overexpressing Dutch (E693Q) mutant human amyloid precursor protein (APP) driven by the pan‐neuronal Thy1 promoter. Accumulation of APP carboxyl‐terminal fragments was observed in the brains of these mice, which develop an impaired learning phenotype directly proportional to brain oAβ levels. Method Male and female TgAPPE693Q mice and wildtype controls were compared using learning behavioral studies, immunocytochemistry, transmission electron microscopy, electrophysiology, protofibril‐specific assays, and single cell RNA sequencing. Result Brain levels of nonfibrillar oAβ in Dutch mice were shown to increase aging‐dependently using A11 immunocytochemistry and FITC‐cyclic peptide (FITC‐CP‐2) microscopy. Two assays excluded the presence of protofibrils. Electrophysiological characterization of hippocampal synapses in Dutch and wildtype mice at ∼7 and ∼11 months revealed no change in basal excitatory transmission, consistent with normal density and morphology of mGluR2/3+ synapses in hippocampal CA1 of the same mice. One exception was increased postsynaptic density in non‐perforated mGluR‐2/3+ synapses in the Dutch mice. Functional characterization of the presynaptic terminal showed abnormalities in post‐tetanic potentiation, synaptic fatigue, and synaptic replenishment after depletion in Dutch mice. Single cell RNA‐seq to elucidate cell‐type specific transcriptional responses to oAβ revealed altered transcriptional profiles in multiple cell types. Unexpectedly, no obvious differences existed between profiles of microglia from Dutch compared to those from wildtype mice. Excitatory neurons showed the most altered profile which was associated with ‘protein translation’ and ‘oxidative phosphorylation’. Ultrastructural analysis of presynaptic mitochondria at excitatory synapses revealed fewer mitochondria in the presynaptic terminals of Dutch mice. Conclusion The profound learning behavior deficits in Dutch mice are associated with presynaptic functional deficits and mitochondrial abnormalities in excitatory neurons of the hippocampus. Nonfibrillar oAβ deposits were revealed by co‐localization of A11 immunoreactivity with FITC‐CP‐2 microscopy. Mice accumulating only oAβ may be especially useful for further characterization of the oligomer‐specific cyclic azaglycine PET tracer Lys (64Cu/NOTA)1]‐CP‐7 that shows robust PET signal from 44‐day‐old presymptomatic 5xFAD mice [Habashi, M. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2022].

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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments→French-language works237,207→