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 47 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

We used Illumina Human HT-12 v4 arrays to compare RNA expression of middle temporal gyrus (MTG; BA21) in Alzheimer's disease (AD = 97) and non-demented controls (ND = 98). A total of 938 transcripts were highly differentially expressed (adj p < 0.01; log2 FC ≥ |0.500|, with 411 overexpressed and 527 underexpressed in AD. Our results correlated with expression profiling in neurons from AD and ND obtained by laser capture microscopy in MTG from an independent dataset (log2 FC correlation: r = 0.504; p = 2.2e-16). Additionally, selected effects were validated by qPCR. ANOVA analysis yielded no difference between genders in response to AD, but some gender specific genes were detected (e.g., IL8 and AGRN in males, and HSPH1 and GRM1 in females). Several transcripts were associated with Braak staging (e.g., AEBP1 and DNALI1), antemortem MMSE (e.g., AEBP1 and GFAP), and tangle density (e.g., RNU1G2, and DNALI1). At the pathway level, we detected enrichment of synaptic vesicle processes and GABAergic transmission genes. Finally, applying the Weighted Correlation Network Analysis, we identified four expression modules enriched for neuronal and synaptic genes, mitochondria-associated membrane, chemical stimulus and olfactory receptor and non-coding RNA metabolism genes. Our results represent an extensive description of MTG mRNA profiling in a large sample of AD and ND. These data provide a list of genes associated with AD, and correlated to neurofibrillary tangles density. In addition, these data emphasize the importance of mitochondrial membranes and transcripts related to olfactory receptors in AD.

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

APA 7th

Piras, I. S., Krate, J., Delvaux, E., Nolz, J., Mastroeni, D. F., Persico, A. M., et al. (2019). Transcriptome Changes in the Alzheimer's Disease Middle Temporal Gyrus: Importance of RNA Metabolism and Mitochondria-Associated Membrane Genes. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-181113

Vancouver

Piras IS, Krate J, Delvaux E, Nolz J, Mastroeni DF, Persico AM, et al. Transcriptome Changes in the Alzheimer's Disease Middle Temporal Gyrus: Importance of RNA Metabolism and Mitochondria-Associated Membrane Genes. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. 2019. doi:10.3233/jad-181113. PMID: 31256118.

BibTeX

@article{piras2019-31256118,
  author  = {Piras, I. S. and Krate, J. and Delvaux, E. and Nolz, J. and Mastroeni, D. F. and Persico, A. M. and Jepsen, W. M. and Beach, T. G. and others},
  title   = {{Transcriptome Changes in the Alzheimer's Disease Middle Temporal Gyrus: Importance of RNA Metabolism and Mitochondria-Associated Membrane Genes}},
  journal = {Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD},
  year    = {2019},
  doi     = {10.3233/jad-181113},
  pmid    = {31256118},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-181113}
}

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

Study details

How this study scored 47/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 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 2 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 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. 27 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 47 of 100. Total 47 of 100.27 of the 58 points we could judge = 47 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed 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 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD)
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 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 938 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 31256118)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 27 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100.
Total 47 / 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 Biomarkers

Also in Biomarkers

204 studies in the library are filed under Biomarkers with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Biomarkers hub.

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →