That's just *56. Amyloid has been known for decades to play some role, even though *56's data was fraudulent (for a lay-friendly discussion, see https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/what-we-do/researchers/news/explaining-amyloid-research-study-controversy). Amyloid is certainly not the only thing at play, but it does play some role.

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 7 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Do we know it plays a role? I thought we basically just knew it was an associated biomarker. I kinda thought the research was leaning towards the underlying problem being some kind of issue that kept glial cells from clearing debris effectively, and that the amyloid plaques were mostly another consequence of that same cause, rather than a key mechanism in the chain that led to the dementia.

[–] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 9 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, it plays a role. What exactly it's doing is unclear, and it's probably more that it's setting up tau to do the real nasty stuff, but it contributes. We know that from experimental work in nonhuman animal models and converging longitudinal work in humans. See, for example: https://www.cell.com/neuron/pdfExtended/S0896-6273(22)00305-1

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 5 points 7 hours ago

Huh, I was misinformed about that. Thanks!