4.4 Article

Appearance pattern of TDP-43 in Japanese frontoternporal lobar degeneration with ubiquitin-positive inclusions

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS
卷 419, 期 3, 页码 213-218

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2007.04.051

关键词

TDP-43; ubiquitin; frontotemporal lobar degeneration; atypical Pick's disease; dementia with motor neuron disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

TAR-DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43) was identified as a major component of ubiquitin-positive intracellular inclusions from brains of patients with frontotemporal lobar degeneration with ubiquitin-positive inclusions (FTLD-U). Here, we immunohistochemically investigated the appearance pattern of TDP-43 to compare the distribution of TDP-43-positive structures with that of ubiquitin-positive structures in brains of seven patients with Japanese FTLD-U. five of atypical Pick's disease (aPiD) and two of dementia with motor neuron disease (D-MND), as well as two patients with PiD as control. TDP-43-immunoreactivity generally colocalized to ubiquitin-immunoreactivity in both neuronal cytoplasmic inclusions and neurites in FTLD-U brains, but TDP-43-immunoreactivity alone or ubiquitin-immunoreactivity alone was also observed. In five aPiD cases, double-immunostaining with TDP-43 and ubiquitin demonstrated that diffuse neuronal cytoplasmic immunostaining for ubiquitin did not always display TDP-43-immunoreactivity. In contrast, ubiquitin-positive neuronal cytoplasmic inclusions usually displayed TDP-43-immunoreactivity in two D-MND cases. although most glial inclusions in one of two cases were immunostained only for TDP-43. TDP-43-positive structures were not detected in two PiD cases. Thus, the ratio in the appearance pattern of TDP-43 and ubiquitin was different between aPiD and D-MND, leading to the hypothesis that this difference may be associated with the two pathogenic variants related to clinical and pathological heterogeneity in FTLD-U. (C) 2007 Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据