Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Find studies

Showing 226–250 of 701 studies in TREM2 and immune genetics (page 10 of 29) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

What “TREM2 and immune genetics” covers

TREM2 and immune genetics — The TREM2 gene and related immune pathways in the brain, and what they mean for risk and treatment.

A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.

We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.

A soluble fragment (sTREM2) is often found abnormally increased in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Haploinsufficiency of the progranulin (PGRN)-encoding gene (GRN) causes frontotemporal lobar degeneration (GRN-FTLD) and results in microglial hyperactivation, TREM2 activation, lysosomal dysfunction, and TDP-43 deposition. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Homozygous TREM2 mutation in a family with atypical frontotemporal dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 2014-04-18

TREM2 mutations were first identified in Nasu-Hakola disease, a rare autosomal recessive disease characterized by recurrent fractures because of bone cysts and presenile dementia. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

TREM2 is a pattern recognition receptor, expressed on microglia and myeloid cells, detecting lipids and Aβ and inducing an innate immune response. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

CSF sTREM2 increased with systemic and CNS HIV-1 disease severity, with the highest levels found in patients with HIV-associated dementia (HAD). 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

The strongest risk factors for late-onset sporadic Alzheimer's disease (AD) include the ε4 allele of apolipoprotein E (APOE), the R47H variant of triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2), and female sex. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Outer retinal degenerations, including age-related macular degeneration (AMD), are characterized by photoreceptor and retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) atrophy. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Ovarian carcinomas (OCs) are poorly immunogenic and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have offered a modest benefit. 4 key findings →

Participants: 312 Evidence: low

Recent studies have reported that a rare mutation of triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 gene (TREM2 [rs75932628-T]) has significantly increased the risk of late-onset Alzhemier's disease (LOAD) in European-descendent population. 4 key findings →

Participants: 1,133 Evidence: moderate

Oxidized phospholipids play a key role in the atherogenic potential of lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]); however, Lp(a) is a complex particle that warrants research into additional proinflammatory mediators. 4 key findings →

Participants: 13 Evidence: low

Polymorphisms of the triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) gene have been reported to be potentially associated with the risks of developing frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD), with inconsistent conclusions. 4 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

TREMs in the immune system and beyond

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Nature reviews. Immunology 2003-06-01

Triggering receptors expressed by myeloid cells (TREMs) belong to a rapidly expanding family of receptors that include activating and inhibitory isoforms encoded by a gene cluster linked to the MHC. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

& aims The immune landscape of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) remains to be clarified. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

We have characterised the proteolytic cleavage events responsible for the shedding of triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) from primary cultures of human macrophages, murine microglia and TREM2-expressing human embryonic kidney (HEK293) cells. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

TREM2 is an Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk gene expressed in microglia. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

↑ Change the filters

Where “Free full text” comes from

Free full text links and the Full text may need a subscription label come from Unpaywall, Europe PMC and OpenAlex records of free copies, checked 10 Oct 2026. A study with neither is unknown, not paywalled. Show only studies that are free to read

How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped

This is alzhub's own score. It is not an official metric, not an impact factor, and no journal, publisher or ranking body endorses it. We built it so that a reader who is not a scientist can tell a landmark trial from a conference abstract without having to already know the difference. Every point comes from one of 20 components, all of them printed on the study itself, so you can disagree with our arithmetic rather than having to trust the total.

  • Journal tier up to 10 pts
  • Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
  • Study design up to 12 pts
  • Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
  • Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
  • How recent up to 5 pts
  • Sample size up to 4 pts
  • Effect reported up to 3 pts
  • Studied in people up to 3 pts
  • Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
  • Times cited up to 7 pts
  • Citations per year up to 5 pts
  • Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
  • Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
  • Still being cited up to 4 pts
  • Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
  • Institution's track record up to 3 pts
  • Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
  • Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
  • Free to read up to 2 pts

Journals are placed in ordered tiers, never given a numeric impact factor — we could not verify current impact factors from a source we control, and an invented one would be worse than none. Tier 1 is the top-tier general journals (NEJM, The Lancet, JAMA, Nature, Science, Nature Medicine); tier 2 is the leading specialty journals; tier 3 is every other peer-reviewed journal. A separate part scores how much the journal's own papers are cited, which tells the tier-3 journals apart.

Two rules we don't bend. First, we never fill in a missing value: if a record does not state a sample size or a design, that component scores zero, and if we simply have no data for a part, such as a citation count, that part is left out and the study is scored on the parts we could check. The study card says which. Second, anything that is not a peer-reviewed article is capped at 16/100 and carries a warning chip — so a conference abstract or a company press release can never outrank a peer-reviewed paper, no matter how good it looks.

We rank a rigorous null result — a good trial showing that something does not work — above an early positive finding. Someone deciding whether to buy a supplement is served by that, and the rigour is already counted by the design and journal components.

The score is computed from the published data alone and is reproducible: the same file always yields the same numbers.

See the whole rubric drawn out → — four charts covering all 27,380 studies: how the scores are spread and where the cap bites, which of the 20 components the library is strong and weak on, which subjects rest on stronger evidence, and what kinds of study each subject is actually built from.

What this library is — and isn't

This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), plus smaller pulls from PubMed, Crossref and medRxiv. If a study, a drug, or a finding isn't here, that is not evidence it doesn't exist in the literature — it may simply not have been pulled in yet.

1,032 records (3.8% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 962 of those are preprints posted before any journal review, and the rest are conference abstracts, regulatory notices and reports. Every study card on this page states its status plainly, and the score above is capped for anything that isn't a peer-reviewed article.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed