↓ Skip to main content

Proteasome impairment in neural cells derived from HMSN-P patient iPSCs

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Brain, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Proteasome impairment in neural cells derived from HMSN-P patient iPSCs
Published in
Molecular Brain, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13041-017-0286-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nagahisa Murakami, Keiko Imamura, Yuishin Izumi, Naohiro Egawa, Kayoko Tsukita, Takako Enami, Takuya Yamamoto, Toshitaka Kawarai, Ryuji Kaji, Haruhisa Inoue

Abstract

Hereditary motor and sensory neuropathy with proximal dominant involvement (HMSN-P) is caused by a heterozygous mutation (P285L) in Tropomyosin-receptor kinase Fused Gene (TFG), histopathologically characterized by progressive spinal motor neuron loss with TFG cytosolic aggregates. Although the TFG protein, found as a type of fusion oncoprotein, is known to facilitate vesicle transport from endoplasmic reticulum (ER) to Golgi apparatus at ER exit site, it is unclear how mutant TFG causes motor neuron degeneration. Here we generated induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) from HMSN-P patients, and differentiated the iPSCs into neural cells with spinal motor neurons (iPS-MNs). We found that HMSN-P patient iPS-MNs exhibited ubiquitin proteasome system (UPS) impairment, and HMSN-P patient iPS-MNs were vulnerable to UPS inhibitory stress. Gene correction of the mutation in TFG using the CRISPR-Cas9 system reverted the cellular phenotypes of HMSN-P patient iPS-MNs. Collectively, these results suggest that our cellular model with defects in cellular integrity including UPS impairments may lead to identification of pathomechanisms and a therapeutic target for HMSN-P.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 19%
Researcher 9 19%
Other 4 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Student > Master 3 6%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 12 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 13%
Neuroscience 5 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 13 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 15 February 2017.
All research outputs
#19,577,470
of 24,079,942 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Brain
#898
of 1,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#344,891
of 461,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Brain
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,079,942 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,164 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 461,391 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.