Home › Research › Disease mechanisms
A mechanistic hypothesis for the impairment of synaptic plasticity by soluble Aβ oligomers from Alzheimer's brain
Li S, Selkoe DJ.. Journal of neurochemistry, 2020-04-05
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
It is increasingly accepted that early cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's disease results in considerable part from synaptic dysfunction caused by the accumulation of a range of oligomeric assemblies of amyloid β-protein (Aβ). Most studies have used synthetic Aβ peptides to explore the mechanisms of memory deficits in rodent models, but recent work suggests that Aβ assemblies isolated from human (AD) brain tissue are far more potent and disease-relevant. Although reductionist experiments show Aβ oligomers to impair synaptic plasticity and neuronal viability, the responsible mechanisms are only partly understood. Glutamatergic receptors, GABAergic receptors, nicotinic receptors, insulin receptors, the cellular prion protein, inflammatory mediators, and diverse signaling pathways have all been suggested. Studies using AD brain-derived soluble Aβ oligomers suggest that only certain bioactive forms (principally small, diffusible oligomers) can disrupt synaptic plasticity, including by binding to plasma membranes and changing excitatory-inhibitory balance, perturbing mGluR, PrP, and other neuronal surface proteins, down-regulating glutamate transporters, causing glutamate spillover, and activating extrasynaptic GluN2B-containing NMDA receptors. We synthesize these emerging data into a mechanistic hypothesis for synaptic failure in Alzheimer's disease that can be modified as new knowledge is added and specific therapeutics are developed.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Li, S., & Selkoe, D. J. (2020). A mechanistic hypothesis for the impairment of synaptic plasticity by soluble Aβ oligomers from Alzheimer's brain. Journal of neurochemistry. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnc.15007
Vancouver
Li S, Selkoe DJ. A mechanistic hypothesis for the impairment of synaptic plasticity by soluble Aβ oligomers from Alzheimer's brain. Journal of neurochemistry. 2020. doi:10.1111/jnc.15007. PMID: 32180217.
BibTeX
@article{li2020-32180217,
author = {Li, S. and Selkoe, D. J.},
title = {{A mechanistic hypothesis for the impairment of synaptic plasticity by soluble Aβ oligomers from Alzheimer's brain}},
journal = {Journal of neurochemistry},
year = {2020},
doi = {10.1111/jnc.15007},
pmid = {32180217},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/jnc.15007}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- It is increasingly accepted that early cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's disease results in considerable part from synaptic dysfunction caused by the accumulation of a range of oligomeric assemblies of amyloid β-protein (Aβ).
- Most studies have used synthetic Aβ peptides to explore the mechanisms of memory deficits in rodent models, but recent work suggests that Aβ assemblies isolated from human (AD) brain tissue are far more potent and disease-relevant.
- Studies using AD brain-derived soluble Aβ oligomers suggest that only certain bioactive forms (principally small, diffusible oligomers) can disrupt synaptic plasticity, including by binding to plasma membranes and changing excitatory-inhibitory balance, perturbing mGluR, PrP, and other neuronal surface proteins, down-regulating glutamate transporters, causing glutamate spillover, and activating extrasynaptic GluN2B-containing NMDA receptors.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 38/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 38 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of neurochemistry) |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2020 — within 10 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 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 32180217) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 22 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 38 out of 100. |
| Total | 38 / 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 Disease mechanisms
Also tagged “precursor”
1,337 studies in the library carry the topic tag “precursor”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,337 tagged studies.