The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Alzheimer Disease: DMA Fragmentation Indicates Increased Neuronal Vulnerability, but not Apoptosis
Open accessAbstract
Although nerve cell loss is prominent in certain brain regions in Alzheimer disease (AD), it is currently unresolved how these cells die. Recent studies unanimously agree that there are more neurons displaying DNA fragmentation in AD compared with normal controls. However, controversy remains as to whether cell death is mediated by apoptosis or necrosis. We addressed this question by comparing AD lesions with those from cases with pontosubicular neuron necrosis (PSNN), a human pathological condition with unequivocal neuronal apoptosis, with regard to cell and nuclear morphology, immunohistochemistry, and in situ tailing. Immunohistochemistry was performed for an array of proteins with presumptive roles in the apoptotic process or the protection thereof, i.e. a recently described apoptosis-specific protein (ASP), the transcription factor c-Jun, Bcl-2, and various stress proteins: alpha B-Crystallin, heat shock protein (HSP) 27, HSP 65, HSP 70, HSP 90, and ubiquitin. Apoptotic neurons in PSNN displayed chromatin condensation, nuclear fragmentation, and cytoplasmic condensation. They were labeled with the in situ tailing technique and stained for the ASP. Despite the large numbers of cells with DNA fragmentation identified in the hippocampus of AD brains, only exceptional cells displayed the morphological characteristics of apoptosis or labeled for the ASP. We suggest that the increased rate of neuronal DNA fragmentation in AD patients indicates a higher susceptibility of the cells to metabolic disturbances compared with normal controls. The large number of cells with DNA fragmentation most likely reflects metabolic disturbances in the premortem period, and cell destruction is mediated through necrosis rather than apoptosis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The relation between inflammation and neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis brains
Frischer, J. M., Bramow, S., Dal-Bianco, A., Lucchinetti, C. F., Rauschka, H., Schmidbauer, M., Laursen, H., Sorensen, P. S., & Lassmann, H. (2009) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awp070 · Cited by 1,450
Self-citationFricker, M., Tolkovsky, A. M., Borutaite, V., Coleman, M., & Brown, G. C. (2018) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00011.2017 · Cited by 1,108
Classification and basic pathology of Alzheimer disease
Duyckaerts, C., Delatour, B., & Potier, M.-C. (2009) · Acta Neuropathologica · doi:10.1007/s00401-009-0532-1 · Cited by 1,031
Oxidative Alterations in Alzheimer's Disease
Markesbery, W. R., & Carney, J. M. (1999) · Brain Pathology · doi:10.1111/j.1750-3639.1999.tb00215.x · Cited by 784
Cohen, R. M., Rezai-Zadeh, K., Weitz, T. M., Rentsendorj, A., Gate, D., Spivak, I., Bholat, Y., Vasilevko, V., Glabe, C. G., Breunig, J. J., et al. (2013) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3672-12.2013 · Cited by 531
Metadata
- Authors
- Stadelmann, C., Brück, W., Bancher, C., Jellinger, K., & Lassmann, H.
- Venue
- Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1998-05
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 456-464
- ISSN
- 0022-3069 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2087781170
- Cited by
- 208
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Alzheimer Disease: DMA Fragmentation Indicates Increased Neuronal Vulnerability, but not Apoptosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00005072-199805000-00009
- The paper
- Stadelmann, C., Brück, W., Bancher, C., Jellinger, K., & Lassmann, H. (1998). Alzheimer Disease: DMA Fragmentation Indicates Increased Neuronal Vulnerability, but not Apoptosis. Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005072-199805000-00009
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.