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.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Objective The most common pathogenesis for familial Alzheimer's disease (FAD) involves misprocessing (or alternative processing) of the amyloid precursor protein (APP) by γ-secretase due to mutations of the presenilin 1 (PS1) gene. This misprocessing/alternative processing leads to an increase in the ratio of the level of a minor γ-secretase reaction product (Aβ42) to that of the major reaction product (Aβ40). Although no PS1 mutations are present, altered Aβ42/40 ratios are also observed in sporadic Alzheimer's disease (SAD), and these altered ratios apparently reflect deposition of Aβ42 as amyloid. Methods Using immunoprecipitation-mass spectrometry with quantitative accuracy, we analyzed in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of various clinical populations the peptide products generated by processing of not only APP but also an unrelated protein, alcadein (Alc). Alc undergoes metabolism by the identical APP α-secretases and γ-secretases, yielding a fragment that we have named p3-Alc(α) because of the parallel genesis of p3-Alc(α) peptides and the p3 fragment of APP. As with Aβ, both major and minor p3-Alc(α) s are generated. We studied the alternative processing of p3-Alc(α) in various clinical populations. Results We previously reported that changes in the Aβ42/40 ratio showed covariance in a linear relationship with the levels of p3-Alc(α) [minor/major] ratio in media conditioned by cells expressing FAD-linked PS1 mutants. Here we studied the speciation of p3-Alc(α) in the CSF from 3 groups of human subjects (n = 158): elderly nondemented control subjects; mild cognitive impairment (MCI) subjects with a clinical dementia rating (CDR) of 0.5; SAD subjects with CDR of 1.0; and other neurological disease (OND) control subjects. The CSF minor p3-Alc(α) variant, p3-Alc(α) 38, was elevated (p < 0.05) in MCI subjects or SAD subjects, depending upon whether the data were pooled and analyzed as a single cohort or analyzed individually as 3 separate cohorts. Interpretation These results suggest that some SAD may involve alternative processing of multiple γ-secretase substrates, raising the possibility that the molecular pathogenesis of SAD might involve γ-secretase dysfunction.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Hata, S., Fujishige, S., Araki, Y., Taniguchi, M., Urakami, K., Peskind, E., et al. (2011). Alternative processing of γ-secretase substrates in common forms of mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease: evidence for γ-secretase dysfunction. Annals of neurology. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.22343

Vancouver

Hata S, Fujishige S, Araki Y, Taniguchi M, Urakami K, Peskind E, et al. Alternative processing of γ-secretase substrates in common forms of mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease: evidence for γ-secretase dysfunction. Annals of neurology. 2011. doi:10.1002/ana.22343. PMID: 21681798.

BibTeX

@article{hata2011-21681798,
  author  = {Hata, S. and Fujishige, S. and Araki, Y. and Taniguchi, M. and Urakami, K. and Peskind, E. and Akatsu, H. and Araseki, M. and others},
  title   = {{Alternative processing of γ-secretase substrates in common forms of mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease: evidence for γ-secretase dysfunction}},
  journal = {Annals of neurology},
  year    = {2011},
  doi     = {10.1002/ana.22343},
  pmid    = {21681798},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.22343}
}

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's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 52/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 30 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 52 of 100. Total 52 of 100.30 of the 58 points we could judge = 52 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, 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 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 52 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Annals of neurology)
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 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2011 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 158 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
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 21681798)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 30 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 52 out of 100.
Total 52 / 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 Biomarkers

Also tagged “processing”

3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “processing”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →