MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414015742 · doi:10.11159/icbes25.147

RIN3 Protein Mutation and Astrocyte Dynamics in the Hippocampus: Implications for Alzheimer’s Disease

2025· article· en· W4414015742 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiyeon Song, Yicheng Zhao, Aspen Lee, Maddaly Ravi, Cindy Kuei, Linda Shi, Claudia Wu, Kijung Sung

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMitochondrial Function and Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHippocampusAstrocyteMutationDiseaseNeuroscienceAlzheimer's diseaseBiologyGeneticsMedicineInternal medicineCentral nervous systemGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's Disease (AD), a progressive neurodegenerative disorder, is the leading cause of dementia and deteriorates memory and cognitive function.As found in the pathogenesis of AD, if the amyloid-precursor protein (APP) aggregates to form amyloid plaques at abnormal levels [1], the synaptic communication and cellular trafficking processes could be potentially disrupted [2].Guanine nucleotide exchange factor Ras and Rab Interactor 3 (RIN3) also plays a significant role in the regulation of endocytic pathways, strengthening the aggregation of APP formation [2][3][4].Of all researched AD cases, an estimated 5-6% are diagnosed with a specific type of AD disease, Early-Onset Alzheimer's Disease, which occurs when symptoms present and diagnosis are made prior to age 65 [5].It has been determined in previous studies that the missense mutation in protein RIN3, known as W63C, plays a predominant role in patients with early-onset AD [2][4].The altered function of RIN3 could be a potential factor for the loss of synaptic communication observed in patients with AD [2][4].This study focuses on analyzing the astrocytes in the hippocampus of mouse models with various genotypes of the W63C mutation to further predict the role of this variant in brain cell health and memory.Brain tissue samples were collected from five mice, categorized into three genotypic groups: Wild Type (WT), Homozygous (HOMO) for the RIN3 W63C mutation, and Heterozygous (HET) for the same mutation.One mouse was assigned to the WT group, while the HOMO and HET groups each included two mice, in order to investigate astrocyte proliferation in the hippocampus.The use of immunohistochemistry enabled the observation of astrocyte intensities with red fluorescent labeling, utilizing GFAP-a type of glial cell marker in the central nervous system (CNS)-which indicates astrogliosis and contributes to the formation of intermediate filaments.After collecting the images, the intensities across the genotypic variants of the hippocampus were compared, followed by a Two-Way ANOVA statistical analysis and post-hoc familywise comparison tests to identify any significant differences.Intensity of astrocyte signals in hippocampal regions was manually measured and cross-checked for consistency between individuals.Normalized intensities were calculated by dividing the total intensity by the total area of the selected regions, allowing for comparison between various genotypes.This project aims to identify the specific effects of the RIN3 protein mutation, W63C, in Alzheimer's Disease, contributing to the ongoing research aimed at preventing brain cell function and memory decay in individuals with AD.The project hypothesized that the W63C point mutation in RIN3 is implicated in an increased number of activated astrocytes in hetero or/and homozygous animals compared to wild type.However, the results did not show a significant difference between the conditions and categories.Nonetheless, the data revealed a trend: the HOMO group exhibited a higher range of intensity values compared to the HET and WT groups.This suggests that astrocytes may be increased in homozygotes for the RIN3 mutation to compensate for dysfunctional neuronal cells.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and ScienceSame topicMitochondrial Function and PathologyFrench-language works237,207