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. Biomarkers

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Tau-immunoreactive astrocytes in progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) have a distinctive morphology and are referred to as tufted astrocytes (TA). We hypothesized that TA may be a degenerative change in reactive astrocytes. To test this hypothesis we examined the relationship of TA to gliosis in PSP. We first examined the distribution of gliosis [glial fibrillary acid protein (GFAP)-positive astrocytes], TA, neurofibrillary tangles (NFT) and pretangles in brain sections of neuropathologically pure PSP cases. Second, we examined PSP cases complicated by infarcts or Alzheimer's disease, since these cases would have reactive astrocytes associated with lesions. We used double immunostaining for GFAP and tau for cases with vascular lesions, and triple immunostaining for GFAP, tau and beta-amyloid protein for sections with senile plaques. There was no correlation between the distribution of gliosis and TA, with gliosis prominent in globus pallidus and subthalamic nucleus, and TA prominent in motor cortex and striatum. On the other hand, gliosis paralleled the distribution of NFT, but not the distribution of pretangles, suggesting that NFT contributes to gliosis in PSP. Although reactive astrocytes were present around infarcts and senile plaques, TA were not associated with these lesions. Tau accumulation in astrocytes in PSP was not preferential to (and was actually independent of) reactive astrocytes. This is consistent with the notion that tau accumulation in astrocytes is a degenerative rather than reactive process. Unlike NFT, astrocytic degeneration does not seem to contribute to gliosis or neuronal loss in PSP, and its clinical significance remains unclear.

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

APA 7th

Togo, T., & Dickson, D. W. (2002). Tau accumulation in astrocytes in progressive supranuclear palsy is a degenerative rather than a reactive process. Acta neuropathologica. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-002-0569-x

Vancouver

Togo T, Dickson DW. Tau accumulation in astrocytes in progressive supranuclear palsy is a degenerative rather than a reactive process. Acta neuropathologica. 2002. doi:10.1007/s00401-002-0569-x. PMID: 12200627.

BibTeX

@article{togo2002-12200627,
  author  = {Togo, T. and Dickson, D. W.},
  title   = {{Tau accumulation in astrocytes in progressive supranuclear palsy is a degenerative rather than a reactive process}},
  journal = {Acta neuropathologica},
  year    = {2002},
  doi     = {10.1007/s00401-002-0569-x},
  pmid    = {12200627},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-002-0569-x}
}

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; Randomised / 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; Multi-centre 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 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 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 2002 — 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)
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 12200627)
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 Biomarkers

Also tagged “reactive”

3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “reactive”; 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 Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →