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 43 out of 100. TREM2 and immune genetics

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Triggering Receptor Expressed in Myeloid Cells 2 (TREM2) is a pattern recognition receptor on myeloid cells, and is upregulated on microglia surrounding amyloid plaques in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Rare, heterozygous mutations in TREM2 (e.g., R47H) increase AD risk several fold. TREM2 can be cleaved at the plasma membrane by metalloproteases to release the ectodomain as soluble TREM2 (sTREM2). Wild-type sTREM2 binds oligomeric amyloid beta (Aβ) and acts as an extracellular chaperone, blocking and reversing Aβ oligomerization and fibrillization, and preventing Aβ-induced neuronal loss in vitro . Whereas, R47H sTREM2 increases Aβ fibrillization and neurotoxicity. AD brains expressing R47H TREM2 have more fibrous plaques with more neuritic pathology around these plaques, consistent with R47H sTREM2 promoting Aβ fibrillization relative to WT sTREM2. Brain expression or injection of wild-type sTREM2 reduces pathology in amyloid models of AD in mice, indicating that wild-type sTREM2 is protective against amyloid pathology. Levels of sTREM2 in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) fall prior to AD, rise in early AD, and fall again in late AD. People with higher sTREM2 levels in CSF progress more slowly into and through AD than do people with lower sTREM2 levels, suggesting that sTREM2 protects against AD. However, some of these experiments can be interpreted as full-length TREM2 protecting rather than sTREM2, and to distinguish between these two possibilities, we need more experiments testing whether sTREM2 itself protects in AD and AD models, and at what stage of disease. If sTREM2 is protective, then treatments could be designed to elevate sTREM2 in AD.

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

APA 7th

Brown, G. C., & St George-Hyslop, P. (2021). Does Soluble TREM2 Protect Against Alzheimer's Disease? Frontiers in aging neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2021.834697

Vancouver

Brown GC, St George-Hyslop P. Does Soluble TREM2 Protect Against Alzheimer's Disease? Frontiers in aging neuroscience. 2021. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2021.834697. PMID: 35153729.

BibTeX

@article{brown2021-35153729,
  author  = {Brown, G. C. and St George-Hyslop, P.},
  title   = {{Does Soluble TREM2 Protect Against Alzheimer's Disease?}},
  journal = {Frontiers in aging neuroscience},
  year    = {2021},
  doi     = {10.3389/fnagi.2021.834697},
  pmid    = {35153729},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2021.834697}
}

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

Study details

How this study scored 43/100
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 3 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. 25 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 43 of 100. Total 43 of 100.25 of the 58 points we could judge = 43 of 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 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Frontiers in aging neuroscience)
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 3 / 5 2021 — within 6 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 35153729)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 25 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100.
Total 43 / 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 TREM2 and immune genetics

Also in TREM2 and immune genetics

91 studies in the library are filed under TREM2 and immune genetics with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The TREM2 and immune genetics hub.

Similar studies

More on TREM2 and immune genetics

See all studies in TREM2 and immune genetics →