Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disease and it poses an ever-increasing burden to an aging population. Several loci responsible for the rare, autosomal dominant form of AD have been identified (APP, PS1 and PS2), and these have facilitated the development of the amyloid cascade hypothesis of AD aetiology. The late onset form of the disease (LOAD) is poorly defined genetically, and up until recently the only known risk factor was the ε4 allele of APOE. Recent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified common genetic variants that increase risk of LOAD. Two of the genes highlighted in these studies, CLU and CR1, suggest a role for the complement system in the aetiology of AD. In this review we analyse the evidence for an involvement of complement in AD. In particular we focus on one gene, CR1, and its role in the complement cascade. CR1 is a receptor for the complement fragments C3b and C4b and is expressed on many different cell types, particularly in the circulatory system. We look at the evidence for genetic polymorphisms in the gene and the possible physiological effects of these well-documented changes. Finally, we discuss the possible impact of CR1 genetic polymorphisms in relation to the amyloid cascade hypothesis of AD and the way in which CR1 may lead to AD pathogenesis.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Crehan, H., Holton, P., Wray, S., Pocock, J., Guerreiro, R., & Hardy, J. (2012). Complement receptor 1 (CR1) and Alzheimer's disease. Immunobiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imbio.2011.07.017
Vancouver
Crehan H, Holton P, Wray S, Pocock J, Guerreiro R, Hardy J. Complement receptor 1 (CR1) and Alzheimer's disease. Immunobiology. 2012. doi:10.1016/j.imbio.2011.07.017. PMID: 21840620.
BibTeX
@article{crehan2012-21840620,
author = {Crehan, H. and Holton, P. and Wray, S. and Pocock, J. and Guerreiro, R. and Hardy, J.},
title = {{Complement receptor 1 (CR1) and Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Immunobiology},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.1016/j.imbio.2011.07.017},
pmid = {21840620},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imbio.2011.07.017}
}
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
- In this review we analyse the evidence for an involvement of complement in AD.
- In particular we focus on one gene, CR1, and its role in the complement cascade.
- CR1 is a receptor for the complement fragments C3b and C4b and is expressed on many different cell types, particularly in the circulatory system.
- We look at the evidence for genetic polymorphisms in the gene and the possible physiological effects of these well-documented changes.
- Finally, we discuss the possible impact of CR1 genetic polymorphisms in relation to the amyloid cascade hypothesis of AD and the way in which CR1 may lead to AD pathogenesis.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Genetics →
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, 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 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 (Immunobiology) |
| 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 | 2012 — 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 | 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 21840620) |
| 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.