Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
From eyeless to neurological diseases
Jochen Graw. Experimental eye research, 2015-11-22
Topic: Disease mechanisms in lab and animal studies
Age-related cataracts are frequently associated with degenerative changes in the ocular lens including the aggregation of proteins - mainly crystallins, but also other proteins including amyloids (Aβ) leading to the hypothesis that cataracts could be used as "biomarkers" for Alzheimer disease. Even if this hypothesis was rejected by David Beebe's last paper (Bei et al., Exp. Eye Res., 2015), it is a fascinating aspect to look for commonalities between eye diseases and neurological disorders. In this review, I discuss such commonalities between eye and brain mainly from a developmental point of view. The finding of the functional homology of the Drosophila eyeless gene with the mammalian Pax6 gene marks a first highlight in the developmental genetics of the eye - this result destroyed the "dogma" of the different evolutionary routes of eye development in flies and mammals. The second highlight was the finding that Pax6 is also involved in the development of the forebrain supporting the pleiotropic role of many genes. These findings opened a new avenue for research showing that a broad variety of transcription factors, but also structural proteins are involved both, in eye and brain development as well as into the maintenance of the functional integrity of the corresponding tissue(s). In this review recent findings are summarized demonstrating that genes whose mutations have been identified first to be causative for congenital or juvenile eye disorders are also involved in regenerative processes and neurogenesis (Pax6), but also in neurodegenerative diseases like Parkinson (e.g. Pitx3) or in neurological disorders like Schizophrenia (e.g. Crybb1, Crybb2).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Graw, J. (2017). From eyeless to neurological diseases. Experimental eye research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exer.2015.11.006
Vancouver
Graw J. From eyeless to neurological diseases. Experimental eye research. 2017. doi:10.1016/j.exer.2015.11.006. PMID: 26593886.
BibTeX
@article{graw2017-26593886,
author = {Graw, Jochen},
title = {{From eyeless to neurological diseases}},
journal = {Experimental eye research},
year = {2017},
doi = {10.1016/j.exer.2015.11.006},
pmid = {26593886},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exer.2015.11.006}
}
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
- Age-related cataracts are frequently associated with degenerative changes in the ocular lens including the aggregation of proteins - mainly crystallins, but also other proteins including amyloids (Aβ) leading to the hypothesis that cataracts could be used as "biomarkers" for Alzheimer disease.
- The finding of the functional homology of the Drosophila eyeless gene with the mammalian Pax6 gene marks a first highlight in the developmental genetics of the eye - this result destroyed the "dogma" of the different evolutionary routes of eye development in flies and mammals.
- These findings opened a new avenue for research showing that a broad variety of transcription factors, but also structural proteins are involved both, in eye and brain development as well as into the maintenance of the functional integrity of the corresponding tissue(s).
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 39/100
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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 39 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Experimental eye research) |
| 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 | 2017 — 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 26593886) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 22 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 39 out of 100. |
| Total | 39 / 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 Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “coherence-tomography”
151 studies in the library carry the topic tag “coherence-tomography”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 151 tagged studies.