↓ Skip to main content

Exploring therapeutic strategies for infantile neuronal axonal dystrophy (INAD/PARK14)

Overview of attention for article published in eLife, January 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Exploring therapeutic strategies for infantile neuronal axonal dystrophy (INAD/PARK14)
Published in
eLife, January 2023
DOI 10.7554/elife.82555
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Infantile Neuroaxonal Dystrophy (INAD) is caused by recessive variants in PLA2G6 and is a lethal pediatric neurodegenerative disorder. Loss of the Drosophila homolog of PLA2G6, leads to ceramide accumulation, lysosome expansion, and mitochondrial defects. Here, we report that retromer function, ceramide metabolism, the endolysosomal pathway, and mitochondrial morphology are affected in INAD patient-derived neurons. We show that in INAD mouse models the same features are affected in Purkinje cells, arguing that the neuropathological mechanisms are evolutionary conserved and that these features can be used as biomarkers. We tested 20 drugs that target these pathways and found that Ambroxol, Desipramine, Azoramide, and Genistein alleviate neurodegenerative phenotypes in INAD flies and INAD patient-derived NPCs. We also develop an AAV-based gene therapy approach that delays neurodegeneration and prolongs lifespan in an INAD mouse model.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 18 56%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 4 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 18 56%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 August 2025.
All research outputs
#1,384,630
of 34,195,206 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#3,467
of 19,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,177
of 524,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#62
of 455 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,195,206 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,205 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 524,955 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 455 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.