Evidence Hub

Proteomic and non-proteomic changes of presynaptic proteins in animal models of Alzheimer's disease: A meta-analysis 2015–2023

Anne Anschuetz, K. Schwab, Charles R. Harrington, C. Wischik, Gernot Riedel

Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, 2025

7 citations

Abstract

Background Synaptic proteins are often used as markers for synaptic damage in non-clinical models of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and are known to be affected early in the disease in humans. Presynaptic protein loss has been shown to be especially strong in patients, though not all proteins and brain areas are affected equally. Objective To investigate whether presynaptic protein loss is similarly heterogenous in non-clinical AD models, a meta-analysis was conducted in rodent models of the disease. Methods PubMed, Embase, and Medline databases were searched for publications measuring presynaptic markers in AD rodent model brains between 2015–2023. A total of 1333 records arose from the searches, and these were screened for suitable studies. Meta-analyses on global presynaptic protein changes, protein-, area- and model-specific effects amongst others were performed on 184 studies. Studies employing proteomic approaches for protein quantification were analyzed separately from non-proteomic studies. Results Robust and significant global loss of presynaptic proteins was observed in these animal models. The effect size varied between different model types, with the greatest effects being observed in models in which either tau was genetically modified or where amyloid-β injection was used. The greatest severity was seen in hippocampal subregions and for proteins associated with the vesicle release machinery (SNARE proteins). Conclusions Proteomic studies confirmed that presynaptic…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free