Proteomic differences in amyloid plaques in rapidly progressive and sporadic Alzheimer's disease
Drummond E, Nayak S, Faustin A, Pires G, Hickman RA, Askenazi M, Cohen M, Haldiman T et al.. Acta neuropathologica, 2017-03-04
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Rapidly progressive Alzheimer's disease (rpAD) is a particularly aggressive form of Alzheimer's disease, with a median survival time of 7-10 months after diagnosis. Why these patients have such a rapid progression of Alzheimer's disease is currently unknown. To further understand pathological differences between rpAD and typical sporadic Alzheimer's disease (sAD) we used localized proteomics to analyze the protein differences in amyloid plaques in rpAD and sAD. Label-free quantitative LC-MS/MS was performed on amyloid plaques microdissected from rpAD and sAD patients (n = 22 for each patient group) and protein expression differences were quantified. On average, 913 ± 30 (mean ± SEM) proteins were quantified in plaques from each patient and 279 of these proteins were consistently found in plaques from every patient. We found significant differences in protein composition between rpAD and sAD plaques. We found that rpAD plaques contained significantly higher levels of neuronal proteins (p = 0.0017) and significantly lower levels of astrocytic proteins (p = 1.08 × 10 -6 ). Unexpectedly, cumulative protein differences in rpAD plaques did not suggest accelerated typical sAD. Plaques from patients with rpAD were particularly abundant in synaptic proteins, especially those involved in synaptic vesicle release, highlighting the potential importance of synaptic dysfunction in the accelerated development of plaque pathology in rpAD. Combined, our data provide new direct evidence that amyloid plaques do not all have the same protein composition and that the proteomic differences in plaques could provide important insight into the factors that contribute to plaque development. The cumulative protein differences in rpAD plaques suggest rpAD may be a novel subtype of Alzheimer's disease.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Drummond, E., Nayak, S., Faustin, A., Pires, G., Hickman, R. A., Askenazi, M., et al. (2017). Proteomic differences in amyloid plaques in rapidly progressive and sporadic Alzheimer's disease. Acta neuropathologica. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-017-1691-0
Vancouver
Drummond E, Nayak S, Faustin A, Pires G, Hickman RA, Askenazi M, et al. Proteomic differences in amyloid plaques in rapidly progressive and sporadic Alzheimer's disease. Acta neuropathologica. 2017. doi:10.1007/s00401-017-1691-0. PMID: 28258398.
BibTeX
@article{drummond2017-28258398,
author = {Drummond, E. and Nayak, S. and Faustin, A. and Pires, G. and Hickman, R. A. and Askenazi, M. and Cohen, M. and Haldiman, T. and others},
title = {{Proteomic differences in amyloid plaques in rapidly progressive and sporadic Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Acta neuropathologica},
year = {2017},
doi = {10.1007/s00401-017-1691-0},
pmid = {28258398},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-017-1691-0}
}
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
- We found significant differences in protein composition between rpAD and sAD plaques.
- We found that rpAD plaques contained significantly higher levels of neuronal proteins (p = 0.0017) and significantly lower levels of astrocytic proteins (p = 1.08 × 10 -6 ).
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Genetics →
Study details
- Participants22
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 48/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, 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 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Acta neuropathologica) |
| 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 | 1 / 4 | 22 participants |
| 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 (participant count stated) |
| 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 28258398) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 28 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100. |
| Total | 48 / 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 Genetics
Also tagged “sporadic”
4 studies in the library carry the topic tag “sporadic”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 4 tagged studies.