Cited by 50Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

The use of formic acid to embellish amyloid plaque detection in Alzheimer's disease tissues misguides key observations

D'Andrea, Michael R., Reiser, Patti A., Polkovitch, Deborah A., Gumula, Norah A., Branchide, Barbara, Hertzog, Brenda M., Schmidheiser, Danielle, Belkowski, Stanley +2 more·2003·Neuroscience Letters

Abstract

We compared our heat pretreatment method to the widely used formic acid pretreatment technique to immunohistochemically detect amyloid in control and Alzheimer's disease brain tissues. Both methods detected amyloid in plaques, neurons, ependymal cells, circulating monocytes, vascular smooth muscle and endothelial cells. Although there were no observable differences in the intensity of the amyloid labeling in these cell types using both pretreatment methods, there were considerable differences in the intensity of amyloid immunolabeling in the plaques. The formic acid produced much more intense amyloid labeling in the plaques than the heat method. With the heat method, the intensity of the amyloid labeling in the plaques was similar to that detected in nearby neurons suggesting a neuronal origin of plaques. Conversely, the intensity of the amyloid in nearby neurons and plaques was drastically different using the formic acid suggesting unique origins of amyloid. The obvious benefits of formic acid for increasing the sensitivity of amyloid plaque immunolabeling may artifactually emphasize plaques over amyloid-containing cells during analyses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0304-3940(03)00252-0

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Postmortem interval, pre-treatments, counter-stains, fixation and post-fixation, detergent, and blocking solutions can influence interpretation of immuno-histochemistry, and also that of intraneuronal Aβ.

    “Postmortem interval, pre-treatments, counter-stains, fixation and post-fixation, detergent, and blocking solutions, all can influence interpretation of immuno-histochemistry, and also that of intraneuronal Aβ [34, 39].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
D'Andrea, M. R., Reiser, P. A., Polkovitch, D. A., Gumula, N. A., Branchide, B., Hertzog, B. M., Schmidheiser, D., Belkowski, S., Gastard, M. C., & Andrade-Gordon, P.
Affiliations
Janssen Research & Development (United States) (US)
Venue
Neuroscience Letters
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-05
Volume
342
Issue
1-2
Pages
114-118
ISSN
0304-3940 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1991375242
Cited by
50
References
19
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuroscience Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, amyloid plaques, formic acid pretreatment, thermal pretreatment, fixation artifacts
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Autopsy, Formates, Hot Temperature, Humans, Immunohistochemistry, Case-Control Studies, Amyloid beta-Peptides, Plaque, Amyloid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review