The same criteria were used to examine cortical areas. Single-labelled immunohistochemistry in mild and severe AD cases (BST II and V respectively) was performed by using PHF-1 marker (phosphorylation at sites Ser396–404). A substantial NFT pathology around the affected areas (see Table 2 and methods) of mild AD cases was observed (Figure 1a). In a similar way, in severe AD cases with advanced cognitive deficit, substantial

NFT pathology click here was found (Figure 1b). We divide tau pathology in two groups; NFT-like structure (iNFT) that comprises all kind of phospho-tau aggregates (Figure 1c–e) and NFTs that comprises a well-defined and mature NFT, a densely immunoreactive set of phospho-tau fibrils in the shape of a neuronal

cell body (Figure 1f–h). We included cells containing diffuse phospho-tau positive staining within the cytoplasm, sometimes comprising small punctate regions (Figure 1c); in this stage the BMN 673 price nucleus was detectable and the general cell morphology appeared normal. No condensed inclusions were noted (Figure 1c). On the other hand, intermediate-NFTs are defined by their presence of aggregated filamentous structures within the cytoplasm that are positive for phospho-tau. These groups were included into the NFT group (Figure 1f). The nucleus was frequently displaced by the inclusion (Figure 1f–h). In summary, in both severe and mild AD cases, the immunoreactivity of Protein kinase N1 PHF-1

is present and, more importantly this marker is able to detect all kinds of aggregates during AD progression, from early aggregates (iNFTs) to mature aggregates (NFTs). The main difference between phosphorylation at sites labelled by AT8 and PHF-1 is that they are located in different sites of the molecule (Figure 2a). The PHF-1 sites are situated close to the carboxyl terminus whereas the AT8 sites are located close to the middle of the molecule (Figure 2a). We evaluated the presence of all events labelled by AT8 and PHF-1 respectively. Here we found that all events were present in different cases around the affected areas (Figure 2b,c). Both markers displayed the typical AD pathology, NFTs and neurites (Figure 2b,c). However, by taking a closer look, we observed a major difference in the patterns of both markers; PHF-1 seemed to label more iNFT than the AT8 marker (Figure 2d). Indeed, when we analysed the total amount of lesions in mild and severe cases, we found that PHF-1 immunoreactive structures per mm2 were significantly higher when compared with AT8 immunoreactive structures (Figure 2e). Interestingly, for the PHF-1 marker, around 50% of the total numbers of structures were iNFTs and 50% NFTs, whereas in the case of the AT8 marker, 30% were iNFTs and 70% were NFTs (Figure 2f).