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 40 out of 100. Drug development

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Although much work has been directed recently towards unravelling the protein chemistry of neurofibrillary tangle (NFT) and senile plaque (SP) components in Alzheimer's disease, the pathogeneses of these lesions remains largely unknown and the problem of their relationship is unresolved. In particular, although paired helical filaments (PHF) have long been documented in SP neurites, we do not know if they are of pathogenetic relevance for the formation of the SP. To investigate the relationship between NFT and SP, we examined antigenic properties of proteins in SP neurites in neocortical tissues of patients with senile dementia of Alzheimer type, in the presence or absence of NFT in the same cortical area. We used two polyclonal antibodies directed against PHF and microtubule-associated protein (MAP)-tau and three monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) (RT97, BF10, 147) to phosphorylated epitopes of human neurofilament polypeptides, as well as the Gallyas silver impregnation method which specifically stains PHF in NFT and neurites. The main finding of our investigations consists in a differential pattern of immunoreactivity of SP neurites depending on the presence or absence of NFT in the neocortex. In the presence of NFT, there were numerous neuropil threads and SP neurites containing Gallyas-positive, as well as anti-PHF- and anti-tau-labelled material. In the absence of NFT in the neocortex there was a striking absence of any Gallyas-positive or PHF- and tau-immunoreactive structure in the cortical neuropil and in SP neurites, irrespective of the maturation stage of the SP.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

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

APA 7th

Probst, A., Anderton, B. H., Brion, J. P., & Ulrich, J. (1989). Senile plaque neurites fail to demonstrate anti-paired helical filament and anti-microtubule-associated protein-tau immunoreactive proteins in the absence of neurofibrillary tangles in the neocortex. Acta neuropathologica. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00687379

Vancouver

Probst A, Anderton BH, Brion JP, Ulrich J. Senile plaque neurites fail to demonstrate anti-paired helical filament and anti-microtubule-associated protein-tau immunoreactive proteins in the absence of neurofibrillary tangles in the neocortex. Acta neuropathologica. 1989. doi:10.1007/bf00687379. PMID: 2711830.

BibTeX

@article{probst1989-2711830,
  author  = {Probst, A. and Anderton, B. H. and Brion, J. P. and Ulrich, J.},
  title   = {{Senile plaque neurites fail to demonstrate anti-paired helical filament and anti-microtubule-associated protein-tau immunoreactive proteins in the absence of neurofibrillary tangles in the neocortex}},
  journal = {Acta neuropathologica},
  year    = {1989},
  doi     = {10.1007/bf00687379},
  pmid    = {2711830},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00687379}
}

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 40/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 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 1 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 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; Multicenter collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 23 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 40 of 100. Total 40 of 100.23 of the 58 points we could judge = 40 of 100

Published in a leading specialty 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 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
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 1 / 5 1989 — 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 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 — / 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
Multicenter collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 2711830)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 23 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100.
Total 40 / 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.

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

Related studies in Drug development

Also tagged “fail”

3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “fail”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Drug development

See all studies in Drug development →