The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Membership in genetic groups predicts Alzheimer disease.
Abstract
The multiple polymorphisms contributing to Alzheimer disease (AD) have been difficult to identify. Three essentially sufficient risk sets were found using a fuzzy latent classification statistical model; that is, grade-of-membership analysis, and genotypes for APOE, APOCI, LDLr, cystatin C, and cathepsin D (180 cases, 120 controls). These were: (a) CST3:G A and CTSD:C T ; (b) APOE 44 and LDLr8: GG and LDLr13: TT ; and (c) APOE3 4 and LDLr13: T C. Consonance with one of the groups and high aggregate membership carried >800-fold elevated risk for AD. The absence of these combinations defined low risk. APOE3/– with heterozygous promoter and receptor genotypes predicted long life without dementia.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
Several groups identified a potential contribution of LDLR to AD and investigated potential links, with some apparently opposing results.
“Several groups identified a potential contribution of LDLR to AD and investigated potential links, for example by crossing AD transgenic mice with the LDLR−/− mouse model of hypercholesterolemia to investigate the effects of LDLR deficiency [30]–[40]. Some apparently opposing results were obtained.”
From LDLR Expression and Localization Are Altered in Mouse and Human Cell Culture Models of Alzheimer's Disease (2010) · cites this paper as [36]
Citations
Cites
Allelic polymorphisms in the transcriptional regulatory region of apolipoprotein E gene
Artiga, M. J., Bullido, M. J., Sastre, I., Recuero, M., Garcı́a, M. A., Aldudo, J., Vázquez, J., & Valdivieso, F. (1998) · FEBS Letters · doi:10.1016/s0014-5793(97)01543-3 · Cited by 229
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Abisambra, J. F., Fiorelli, T., Padmanabhan, J., Neame, P., Wefes, I., & Potter, H. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0008556 · Cited by 42
Metadata
- Authors
- Corder, E. H., Huang, R., Cathcart, H. M., Lanham, I. S., Parker, G. R., Cheng, D., Smith, S., & Poduslo, S. E.
- Affiliations
- Center for Demographic Studies, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
- Medical College of Georgia, Institute of Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Augusta, Georgia.
- Department of Neurology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, Georgia.
- Venue
- Rejuvenation Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-03
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 89-93
- ISSN
- 1549-1684
- 1557-8577
- Cited by
- 13
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
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
