Home › Research › Treatments
A comparative study of dietary curcumin, nanocurcumin, and other classical amyloid-binding dyes for labeling and imaging of amyloid plaques in brain tissue of 5×-familial Alzheimer's disease mice
Maiti P, Hall TC, Paladugu L, Kolli N, Learman C, Rossignol J, Dunbar GL.. Histochemistry and cell biology, 2016-07-12
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Deposition of amyloid beta protein (Aβ) is a key component in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). As an anti-amyloid natural polyphenol, curcumin (Cur) has been used as a therapy for AD. Its fluorescent activity, preferential binding to Aβ, as well as structural similarities with other traditional amyloid-binding dyes, make it a promising candidate for labeling and imaging of Aβ plaques in vivo. The present study was designed to test whether dietary Cur and nanocurcumin (NC) provide more sensitivity for labeling and imaging of Aβ plaques in brain tissues from the 5×-familial AD (5×FAD) mice than the classical Aβ-binding dyes, such as Congo red and Thioflavin-S. These comparisons were made in postmortem brain tissues from the 5×FAD mice. We observed that Cur and NC labeled Aβ plaques to the same degree as Aβ-specific antibody and to a greater extent than those of the classical amyloid-binding dyes. Cur and NC also labeled Aβ plaques in 5×FAD brain tissues when injected intraperitoneally. Nanomolar concentrations of Cur or NC are sufficient for labeling and imaging of Aβ plaques in 5×FAD brain tissue. Cur and NC also labeled different types of Aβ plaques, including core, neuritic, diffuse, and burned-out, to a greater degree than other amyloid-binding dyes. Therefore, Cur and or NC can be used as an alternative to Aβ-specific antibody for labeling and imaging of Aβ plaques ex vivo and in vivo. It can provide an easy and inexpensive means of detecting Aβ-plaque load in postmortem brain tissue of animal models of AD after anti-amyloid therapy.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Maiti, P., Hall, T. C., Paladugu, L., Kolli, N., Learman, C., Rossignol, J., et al. (2016). A comparative study of dietary curcumin, nanocurcumin, and other classical amyloid-binding dyes for labeling and imaging of amyloid plaques in brain tissue of 5×-familial Alzheimer's disease mice. Histochemistry and cell biology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00418-016-1464-1
Vancouver
Maiti P, Hall TC, Paladugu L, Kolli N, Learman C, Rossignol J, et al. A comparative study of dietary curcumin, nanocurcumin, and other classical amyloid-binding dyes for labeling and imaging of amyloid plaques in brain tissue of 5×-familial Alzheimer's disease mice. Histochemistry and cell biology. 2016. doi:10.1007/s00418-016-1464-1. PMID: 27406082.
BibTeX
@article{maiti2016-27406082,
author = {Maiti, P. and Hall, T. C. and Paladugu, L. and Kolli, N. and Learman, C. and Rossignol, J. and Dunbar, G. L.},
title = {{A comparative study of dietary curcumin, nanocurcumin, and other classical amyloid-binding dyes for labeling and imaging of amyloid plaques in brain tissue of 5×-familial Alzheimer's disease mice}},
journal = {Histochemistry and cell biology},
year = {2016},
doi = {10.1007/s00418-016-1464-1},
pmid = {27406082},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s00418-016-1464-1}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- We observed that Cur and NC labeled Aβ plaques to the same degree as Aβ-specific antibody and to a greater extent than those of the classical amyloid-binding dyes.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Histochemistry and cell biology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2016 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Laboratory or animal study (title names “mice”) — scores zero |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 27406082) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Treatments
Also tagged “labeling”
2 studies in the library carry the topic tag “labeling”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 2 tagged studies.