Home › Research › Drug development
Immunohistochemical examination of phosphorylated tau in granulovacuolar degeneration granules
Ikegami K, Kimura T, Katsuragi S, Ono T, Yamamoto H, Miyamoto E, Miyakawa T.. Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences, 1996-06-01
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Granulovacuolar degeneration (GVD) and neurofibrillary tangles (NFT) are neuropathological features in Alzheimer's disease (AD). The molecular mechanism of GVD formation remains unknown. Recent immunohistochemical investigations suggested a potential link of NFT to GVD formation. Enzyme histochemical studies and electronmicroscopic findings suggested that GVD is formed through lysosomal autophagy of intraneuronal substances. We recently demonstrated that in non-demented cases NFT was phosphorylated at serines 199, 202 and 422 in paired helical filament (PHF)-tau more than in serine 396, while NFT in AD cases was similarly phosphorylated at these four sites in tau. In this study, we demonstrated immunohistochemically a similar phosphorylation state of tau in GVD granules to that in NFT in both non-demented cases and AD patients by using a mouse monoclonal anti-tau antibody and three phosphorylation site-specific antibodies for PHF-tau, indicating that GVD granules and NFT are composed of similar phosphorylated-tau. However, we could not detect PHF structures within any GVD using electronmicroscopy, indicating that PHF itself is not phagocytized by lysosomes during GVD formation. Therefore, the source of GVD granules might be phosphorylated pre-PHF-tau.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Ikegami, K., Kimura, T., Katsuragi, S., Ono, T., Yamamoto, H., Miyamoto, E., et al. (1996). Immunohistochemical examination of phosphorylated tau in granulovacuolar degeneration granules. Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1819.1996.tb01678.x
Vancouver
Ikegami K, Kimura T, Katsuragi S, Ono T, Yamamoto H, Miyamoto E, et al. Immunohistochemical examination of phosphorylated tau in granulovacuolar degeneration granules. Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences. 1996. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1819.1996.tb01678.x. PMID: 9201760.
BibTeX
@article{ikegami1996-9201760,
author = {Ikegami, K. and Kimura, T. and Katsuragi, S. and Ono, T. and Yamamoto, H. and Miyamoto, E. and Miyakawa, T.},
title = {{Immunohistochemical examination of phosphorylated tau in granulovacuolar degeneration granules}},
journal = {Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences},
year = {1996},
doi = {10.1111/j.1440-1819.1996.tb01678.x},
pmid = {9201760},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1819.1996.tb01678.x}
}
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 names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Enzyme histochemical studies and electronmicroscopic findings suggested that GVD is formed through lysosomal autophagy of intraneuronal substances.
- We recently demonstrated that in non-demented cases NFT was phosphorylated at serines 199, 202 and 422 in paired helical filament (PHF)-tau more than in serine 396, while NFT in AD cases was similarly phosphorylated at these four sites in tau.
- In this study, we demonstrated immunohistochemically a similar phosphorylation state of tau in GVD granules to that in NFT in both non-demented cases and AD patients by using a mouse monoclonal anti-tau antibody and three phosphorylation site-specific antibodies for PHF-tau, indicating that GVD granules and NFT are composed of similar phosphorylated-tau.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 41/100
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 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences) |
| 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 | 1996 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| 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 | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study) |
| 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 9201760) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 24 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100. |
| Total | 41 / 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 the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.