ArticleJournal of neuroinflammation2026
Selective neuronal restoration of progranulin does not prevent the frontotemporal dementia like-phenotype of progranulin knockout mice.
Article in Journal of neuroinflammation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Progranulin (PGRN) is a neurotrophic and anti-inflammatory factor produced mainly by neurons and microglia in the central nervous system. Progranulin haploinsufficiency causes frontotemporal dementia (FTD). It is unclear to what extent neuronal versus microglial PGRN deficiency contributes to FTD pathology. In this study, we restored progranulin in neurons in progranulin knockout mice using Nestin-driven expression of mouse Grn transgene in a knockout background (NesGrn KOBG). They were compared with full PGRN KO mice and floxed control mice that carry a loxP flanked STOP codon in front of mGrn transgene (Grn-flfl). The expected neuron-only PGRN rescue was confirmed at RNA and protein level in brain tissue and primary cells, and single nucleus RNA sequencing. Despite neuronal PGRN-restoration, there was no difference in microgliosis, astrogliosis, and microglia phenotypes as assessed by histology, microglia morphometry and bulk RNAseq showing strong upregulation of microglia-associated genes equally in both KO lines. However, a microglial subpopulation with a phagocyte signature expressing Gpnmb, Lgals3, Atp6v0d2 and Apobec1 occurred only in PGRN KO brain, and accordingly, the loss of synapses and dendritic spines, which is caused by excessive synaptic pruning in PGRN KO mice, was partially attenuated in NesGrn KOBG mice. Lipidomic studies showed that phosphatidylserine eat-me-signals were increased in PGRN KO but not in NesGrn KOBG brain. Furthermore, some neuronal genes involved in axonal structure and dynamics were co-restored with progranulin in NesGrn KOBG mice. However, the modest improvement of neuronal health was not associated with an improvement of FTD-like behavior including hyperactivity, compulsive licking and impaired avoidance learning and memory. The results suggest that (still) viable neurons do not provide (sufficient) progranulin to prevent microgliosis but may shape the phenotype by presenting or hiding eat-me signals. Nonetheless, neuron-only-progranulin restoration may be insufficient to halt the progression of FTD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.