↓ Skip to main content

Pathogenesis of FUS-associated ALS and FTD: insights from rodent models

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Neuropathologica Communications, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
96 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
226 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.
Title
Pathogenesis of FUS-associated ALS and FTD: insights from rodent models
Published in
Acta Neuropathologica Communications, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40478-016-0358-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew Nolan, Kevin Talbot, Olaf Ansorge

Abstract

Disruptions to genes linked to RNA processing and homeostasis are implicated in the pathogenesis of two pathologically related but clinically heterogeneous neurodegenerative diseases, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). Mutations in the Fused-in-Sarcoma (FUS) gene encoding a 526 amino-acid RNA-binding protein are found in a small subset of ALS cases, but FUS mutations do not appear to be a direct cause of FTD. Structural and functional similarities between FUS and another ALS-related RNA-binding protein, TDP-43, highlight the potential importance of aberrant RNA processing in ALS/FTD, and this pathway is now a major focus of interest. Recently, several research groups have reported transgenic vertebrate models of FUSopathy, with varying results. Here, we discuss the evidence for FUS pathogenicity in ALS/FTD, review the experimental approaches used and phenotypic features of FUS rodent models reported to date, and outline their contribution to our understanding of pathogenic mechanisms. Further refinement of vertebrate models will likely aid our understanding of the role of FUS in both diseases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 226 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 226 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 22%
Student > Master 41 18%
Student > Bachelor 32 14%
Researcher 16 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 6%
Other 19 8%
Unknown 55 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 52 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 50 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 3%
Other 7 3%
Unknown 60 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 27 October 2017.
All research outputs
#2,830,778
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Acta Neuropathologica Communications
#530
of 1,383 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,673
of 334,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Neuropathologica Communications
#8
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,383 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 334,695 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.