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 40 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Background Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most frequent form of dementia in the elderly and no effective treatment is currently available. The mechanisms triggering AD onset and progression are still imperfectly dissected. We aimed at deciphering the modifications occurring in vivo during the very early stages of AD, before the development of amyloid deposits, neurofibrillary tangles, neuronal death and inflammation. Most current AD models based on Amyloid Precursor Protein (APP) overproduction beginning from in utero, to rapidly reproduce the histological and behavioral features of the disease within a few months, are not appropriate to study the early steps of AD development. As a means to mimic in vivo amyloid APP processing closer to the human situation in AD, we used an adeno-associated virus (AAV)-based transfer of human mutant APP and Presenilin 1 (PS1) genes to the hippocampi of two-month-old C57Bl/6 J mice to express human APP, without significant overexpression and to specifically induce its amyloid processing. Results The human APP, βCTF and Aβ42/40 ratio were similar to those in hippocampal tissues from AD patients. Three months after injection the murine Tau protein was hyperphosphorylated and rapid synaptic failure occurred characterized by decreased levels of both PSD-95 and metabolites related to neuromodulation, on proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy ((1)H-MRS). Astrocytic GLT-1 transporter levels were lower and the tonic glutamatergic current was stronger on electrophysiological recordings of CA1 hippocampal region, revealing the overstimulation of extrasynaptic N-methyl D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) which precedes the loss of long-term potentiation (LTP). These modifications were associated with early behavioral impairments in the Open-field, Y-maze and Morris Mater Maze tasks. Conclusions Altogether, this demonstrates that an AD-like APP processing, yielding to levels of APP, βCTF and Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio similar to those observed in AD patients, are sufficient to rapidly trigger early steps of the amyloidogenic and Tau pathways in vivo. With this strategy, we identified a sequence of early events likely to account for disease onset and described a model that may facilitate efforts to decipher the factors triggering AD and to evaluate early neuroprotective strategies.

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

APA 7th

Audrain, M., Fol, R., Dutar, P., Potier, B., Billard, J. M., Flament, J., et al. (2016). Alzheimer's disease-like APP processing in wild-type mice identifies synaptic defects as initial steps of disease progression. Molecular neurodegeneration. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13024-016-0070-y

Vancouver

Audrain M, Fol R, Dutar P, Potier B, Billard JM, Flament J, et al. Alzheimer's disease-like APP processing in wild-type mice identifies synaptic defects as initial steps of disease progression. Molecular neurodegeneration. 2016. doi:10.1186/s13024-016-0070-y. PMID: 26759118.

BibTeX

@article{audrain2016-26759118,
  author  = {Audrain, M. and Fol, R. and Dutar, P. and Potier, B. and Billard, J. M. and Flament, J. and Alves, S. and Burlot, M. A. and others},
  title   = {{Alzheimer's disease-like APP processing in wild-type mice identifies synaptic defects as initial steps of disease progression}},
  journal = {Molecular neurodegeneration},
  year    = {2016},
  doi     = {10.1186/s13024-016-0070-y},
  pmid    = {26759118},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s13024-016-0070-y}
}

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 40/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 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 2 of 2. 23 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 40 of 100. Total 40 of 100.23 of the 58 points we could judge = 40 of 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 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Molecular neurodegeneration)
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 26759118)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 23 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100.
Total 40 / 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 in Biomarkers

224 studies in the library are filed under Biomarkers with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Biomarkers hub.

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →