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 35 out of 100. Risk genes beyond APOE

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Intramembrane proteolysis by γ-secretase is critically implicated in Alzheimer disease pathogenesis by processing of its amyloid precursor protein substrate C99 into harmful amyloid-β peptide (Aβ) species. Recruitment of C99 involves binding of its N-terminal extracellular domain to exosites in γ-secretase. However, the role of these interactions has been elusive. Here, we show that the N-terminally shorter extracellular domain of the non-amyloidogenic C83 substrate also interacts with γ-secretase exosites, but more weakly. Moreover, we found that bulky aromatic mutations within the 16 amino acid extension of C99 interfere with exosite binding and inhibit substrate cleavage. Likewise, peptides binding to the C99 N-terminus that selectively inhibit Aβ production in vitro and in vivo interfere with exosite binding of C99. Our data show that exosite interactions of the C99 N-terminal region with γ-secretase can impact substrate cleavage and indicate that interfering with exosite interactions of C99 may provide a means for modulating amyloidogenic substrate processing.

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

APA 7th

Maruyama, R., Fukumori, A., Funamoto, S., Okada, K., Akamine, S., Yanagida, K., et al. (2025). γ-Secretase exosites as targets for substrate-selective lowering of Aβ generation. Structure. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2025.11.010

Vancouver

Maruyama R, Fukumori A, Funamoto S, Okada K, Akamine S, Yanagida K, et al. γ-Secretase exosites as targets for substrate-selective lowering of Aβ generation. Structure. 2025. doi:10.1016/j.str.2025.11.010. PMID: 41418776.

BibTeX

@article{maruyama2025-41418776,
  author  = {Maruyama, Riki and Fukumori, Akio and Funamoto, Satoru and Okada, Ken and Akamine, Shoshin and Yanagida, Kanta and Shinohara, Mitsuru and Sato, Naoyuki and others},
  title   = {{γ-Secretase exosites as targets for substrate-selective lowering of Aβ generation}},
  journal = {Structure},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.str.2025.11.010},
  pmid    = {41418776},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2025.11.010}
}

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

Why it matters

This laboratory study shows that interactions between the C99 N-terminal region and gamma-secretase exosites affect substrate cleavage, and that interfering with these interactions can modulate amyloidogenic processing. It suggests a possible approach for lowering amyloid-beta generation, but no treatment in humans is tested.

Study details

How this study scored 35/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 2 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomized / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 1 of 7; Citations per year 0 of 5; Impact for its field and year 2 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 0 of 4; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record 1 of 3; Multicenter collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 34 of the 96 points it could be judged on, which is 35 of 100. Total 35 of 100.34 of the 96 points we could judge = 35 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 34 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 35 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Structure)
Journal's citation record 2 / 4 Structure: journal h-index 237 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
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 4 / 5 2025 — within 3 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)
Randomized / blinded 0 / 2 No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 1 / 7 Cited 2 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 0 / 5 0.7 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year 2 / 6 Cited 1.1× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 0 / 4 Cited 2 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record 1 / 3 Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München: institution h-index 1,224 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration 2 / 3 OpenAlex lists 6 institution(s) in 2 countries
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 41418776)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 34 / 96 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 34 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 35 out of 100.
Total 35 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Related studies in Risk genes beyond APOE

Also tagged “tdp-43”

1,150 studies in the library carry the topic tag “tdp-43”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,150 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Risk genes beyond APOE

See all studies in Risk genes beyond APOE →