ALS RNA Metabolism and Proteostasis Failure

ALS RNA Metabolism and Proteostasis Failure

RNA Metabolism Dysregulation and Proteostasis Failure in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: Pathogenesis, Genetics, and Therapeutic Strategies

Overview

*RNA Metabolism Dysregulation and Proteostasis Failure in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: Pathogenesis, Genetics, and Therapeutic Strategies [@chio2013]* describes a key molecular or cellular mechanism implicated in neurodegenerative disease. This page provides a detailed overview of the pathway components, signaling cascades, and their relevance to conditions such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and related disorders.

1. Overview: Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis

1.1 Epidemiology

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that primarily affects upper and lower motor [neurons](/entities/neurons), leading to muscle weakness, atrophy, and ultimately respiratory failure. Global epidemiology studies estimate an annual incidence of 1–2 per 100 000 and a point prevalence of 4–6 per 100 000, making ALS one of the most common adult‑onset motor neuron diseases [1,2]. Incidence shows a slight male predominance (≈1.3:1) and peaks between 55–75 years of age, although early‑onset (<40 yr) cases can occur, especially in families携带特定基因突变 [3]. Geographic clusters have been reported (e.g., the Kii Peninsula of Japan, the Guam‑Pacific region), suggesting both genetic and environmental contributions. [@alchalabi2014]

1.2 Clinical Features

Clinically, ALS presents with a combination of upper motor neuron signs (spasticity, hyper‑reflexia, pathological reflexes such as Babinski) and lower motor neuron signs (fasciculations, muscle weakness, atrophy). Approximately two‑thirds of patients present with limb‑onset disease, while 25–30 % present with bulbar‑onset (dysarthria, dysphagia). Up to 15 % of patients develop frontotemporal dementia (FTD) or mild cognitive impairment, reflecting a clinical overlap between ALS and FTD, especially in carriers of the [C9orf72](/entities/c9orf72) hexanucleotide repeat expansion [4]. Respiratory insufficiency usually emerges within 2–4 years of symptom onset, and median survival is 2–5 years without invasive ventilation. [@kim2020]

1.3 Genetics

Approximately 5–10 % of ALS cases are familial, with an autosomal‑dominant inheritance pattern. To date, >25 genes have been implicated, including SOD1, TARDBP, FUS, C9orf72, ANG, UBQLN2, VCP, OPTN, and TBK1 [5]. The most common genetic cause is the hexanucleotide repeat expansion in C9orf72, accounting for ~40 % of familial and 5–10 % of sporadic ALS. SOD1 was the first gene linked to familial ALS and remains the most frequent in some populations [6]. TARDBP (encoding TDP‑43) and FUS encode RNA‑binding proteins that form the core of the disease’s pathological hallmarks. Additional rare variants in UBQLN2, VCP, OPTN, and TBK1 highlight defects in protein‑quality‑control pathways, suggesting convergent mechanisms across distinct genetic subgroups. [@renton2014]

--- [@rosen1993]

2. RNA Metabolism Dysregulation

2.1 Splicing Defects

TDP‑43 and FUS are central to the regulation of alternative splicing. Genome‑wide analyses of ALS motor neurons reveal widespread mis‑splicing of transcripts involved in neuronal development, synaptic function, and axonal maintenance. Notable examples include the cryptic exon inclusion in STMN2 and UNC13A, which are dramatically increased in ALS tissue and in iPSC‑derived motor neurons, leading to reduced expression of functional proteins essential for axonal stability [7]. Similarly, loss of FUS function disrupts splicing of MEF2C and GRIN1, affecting synaptic plasticity. These splicing alterations are thought to arise from both loss of nuclear TDP‑43/FUS and gain‑of‑toxicity in the cytoplasm, where they become sequestered in stress granules. [@cooper2012]

2.2 mRNA Transport and Local Translation

Both TDP‑43 and FUS participate in the transport of mRNA granules along dendrites and axons, enabling localized protein synthesis crucial for synaptic plasticity and axonal repair. In ALS, mislocalization of these proteins disrupts the formation and dynamics of RNA granules, leading to impaired delivery of transcripts such as ACTB, MAP1B, and FMR1 to distal compartments [8]. This loss of local translation is particularly detrimental in long motor axons, where local protein synthesis is required for mitochondrial maintenance, cytoskeletal remodeling, and synaptic signaling. [@liu2019]

2.3 microRNA Dysregulation

Several microRNAs (miRNAs) are consistently altered in ALS. miR‑9 and miR‑124, which are critical for neuronal differentiation and maintenance, are down‑regulated in the spinal cord of ALS patients and in SOD1 mouse models, correlating with re‑activation of glial markers and neuroinflammation [9]. Conversely, miR‑155, an NF‑κB‑dependent pro‑inflammatory miRNA, is markedly up‑regulated, promoting microglial activation and cytokine release. miR‑125 is also elevated in ALS and modulates synaptic homeostasis via targeting SYNAPTOTAGMIN‑2. These miRNA changes reflect a broader dysregulation of RNA‑mediated post‑transcriptional control that contributes to neuronal dysfunction. [@bolino2020]

2.4 Nuclear Granules and RNA‑Binding Protein Dynamics

ALS‑associated RBPs also modulate the formation of nuclear granules such as paraspeckles and nuclear speckles, which regulate RNA processing, editing, and stability. TDP‑43 interacts with the PABPN1 protein and influences the retention of polyadenylated transcripts within paraspeckles. Disruption of these interactions, either through mutations or cytoplasmic mislocalization, leads to aberrant accumulation of RNAs and further overwhelms the nuclear quality‑control machinery. Stress granules, which are cytoplasmic ribonucleoprotein complexes induced by cellular stress, incorporate TDP‑43 and FUS. While transient stress granule formation is protective, persistent granules become pathological sites where RBPs seed irreversible aggregation. [@hasegawa2008]

--- [@huang2020]

3. TDP‑43 Pathology

3.1 Aggregation and Post‑Translational Modifications

Approximately 95 % of ALS cases (sporadic and many familial) display TDP‑43‑positive inclusions in the cytoplasm of motor neurons. These inclusions consist of full‑length TDP‑43, hyper‑phosphorylated C‑terminal fragments (CTFs), and ubiquitinated species. Phosphorylation at Ser409/410, mediated primarily by casein kinase 1δ (CK1δ) and TANK‑binding kinase 1 (TBK1), is a hallmark of disease and correlates with aggregation propensity [10]. Additional PTMs, such as acetylation, methylation, and sumoylation, modulate TDP‑43’s solubility and propensity to form insoluble aggregates [11]. The generation of C‑terminal fragments (~25–35 kDa) via caspase‑mediated cleavage yields truncated species that are highly aggregation‑prone and have been detected in ALS brain and spinal cord. [@sreedharan2008]

3.2 Nuclear Loss and Cytoplasmic Toxicity

Loss of nuclear TDP‑43 disrupts its autoregulation and splicing function, leading to a feed‑forward loss of TDP‑43 expression. In TARDBP mutant motor neurons, reduced nuclear TDP‑43 results in mis‑splicing of its own pre‑mRNA, producing truncated isoforms that cannot replenish nuclear pools [12]. In the cytoplasm, TDP‑43 inclusions sequester essential factors such as PABP, eIF4G, and ribosomal subunits, leading to translational repression and stress‑granule–mediated translational arrest. Moreover, cytoplasmic TDP‑43 may directly impair mitochondria, causing oxidative stress and energy deficits. [@dormann2010]

3.3 Impact on RNA Metabolism

The combined effect of nuclear loss and cytoplasmic gain of toxic functions manifests as widespread RNA metabolism disturbances: global splicing alterations, impaired transcription termination, and defective RNA export. RNA‑seq analyses of ALS patient tissue and iPSC‑derived motor neurons reveal a consistent down‑regulation of mitochondrial and synaptic transcripts, and up‑regulation of stress‑responsive genes, reflecting a cellular attempt to compensate for proteostasis collapse. [@ito2011]

--- [@kato2012]

4. FUS Pathology

4.1 Mutations and Disease Mechanisms

FUS (Fused in Sarcoma) is an RNA‑binding protein that harbors an N‑terminal low‑complexity prion‑like domain, a central RGG‑rich region, and a C‑terminal nuclear localization sequence (NLS). Over 50 ALS‑associated mutations, predominantly in the NLS (e.g., R521C, P525L), disrupt binding to the nuclear import receptor transportin‑1, resulting in cytoplasmic accumulation [13]. The majority of FUS mutations are dominant and lead to early‑onset disease (<45 years), often with rapid progression. [@dejesushernandez2011]

4.2 Transport and Stress Granules

FUS participates in transcriptional regulation, alternative splicing, and the transport of mRNA to dendritic and axonal compartments. Under stress, FUS coalesces into stress granules via liquid‑liquid phase separation (LLPS), a process mediated by its low‑complexity domain. Mutations in FUS accelerate LLPS and transition to a solid‑like, irreversible gel state, promoting the formation of cytoplasmic inclusions that trap other RBPs and translation machinery [14]. [@rogaeva2021]

4.3 Liquid–Liquid Phase Separation (LLPS)

The concept of LLPS has reshaped our understanding of RBP dynamics in ALS. FUS and TDP‑43 can form membraneless organelles that concentrate RNA and protein while maintaining liquidity. In disease, mutations, phosphorylation, or arginine methylation alter the material properties of these droplets, shifting from dynamic, reversible assemblies to pathological aggregates [15]. Therapeutic strategies now aim to modulate phase behavior—e.g., by targeting phosphorylation or small molecules that restore liquid‑like behavior. [@lagiertourenne2013]

--- [@aggarwal2020]

5. C9orf72 Hexanucleotide Repeat Expansion

5.1 RNA Foci Formation and Nucleolar Stress

The GGGGCC (G4C2) repeat expansion in the first intron of C9orf72 is the most common genetic cause of ALS/FTD. The expanded repeat is transcribed in both sense and antisense directions, forming long non‑coding RNAs that accumulate as RNA foci in the nucleus and cytoplasm. These foci sequester essential RNA‑binding proteins such as TDP‑43, SC35, hnRNPA1, and Pur‑α, thereby disrupting normal RNA processing, splicing, and transport. In addition, sense and antisense RNAs can invade the nucleolus, causing nucleolar stress, nucleocytoplasmic transport defects, and reduced ribosome biogenesis [16]. [@taylor2016]

5.2 Dipeptide Repeat Proteins (DPRs) and Toxicity

The expanded repeat undergoes repeat‑associated non‑AUG (RAN) translation in all reading frames, producing five distinct dipeptide repeat proteins: poly‑GA, poly‑GP, poly‑PR, poly‑PA, and poly‑AGR. Among these, poly‑PR and poly‑GA are particularly toxic; poly‑PR binds to ribosomal subunits and inhibits translation, while poly‑GA forms insoluble aggregates that sequester proteasome components and impair [autophagy](/entities/autophagy) [17]. DPRs also interact with nuclear pore components (e.g., NUP62, NUP88) and disrupt nucleocytoplasmic transport, a pathway strongly implicated in ALS pathogenesis. [@deng2011]

5.3 Antisense Oligonucleotide Therapy

Antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) designed to bind the expanded repeat transcript can reduce both RNA foci and DPR production. Pre‑clinical studies in mouse models demonstrate that ASO treatment restores nucleolar morphology, decreases DPR burden, and improves motor performance [18]. Early‑phase human trials (e.g., IONIS‑C9Rx, BIIB058) have shown target engagement (reduction of CSF DPRs) and acceptable safety profiles, paving the way for pivotal efficacy studies. [@johnson2010]

--- [@maruyama2010]

6. Other Genetic Causes

| Gene | Protein | Typical Pathogenic Mechanisms | Key References | [@cirulli2015]
|------|---------|--------------------------------|----------------| [@ciechanover2018]
| SOD1 | Cu/Zn superoxide dismutase 1 | Protein misfolding, mitochondrial dysfunction, oxidative stress, vacuolization | [6,19] | [@kawabata2019]
| ANG | Angiogenin | Defective RNase activity, impaired stress‑granule dynamics, reduced angiogenic signaling | [20] | [@saito2021]
| UBQLN2 | Ubiquilin‑2 | Impaired proteasome recruitment, defective autophagy, accumulation of ubiquitinated proteins | [21] | [@miller2023]
| VCP | Valosin‑containing protein (p97) | Disrupted [UPS](/mechanisms/ubiquitin-proteasome-system) and autophagy, defective ERAD, mitochondrial stress | [22] | [@van2021]
| OPTN | Optineurin | Impaired mitophagy and autophagy receptor function, disrupted vesicle trafficking | [23] | [@franz2021]
| TBK1 | TANK‑binding kinase 1 | Reduced phosphorylation of autophagy receptors (OPTN, p62), diminished autophagic flux | [24] | [@abe2017]
| TARDBP | TDP‑43 (see Section 3) | — | [7,12] | [@kondo2021]

Collectively, these genes converge on pathways governing protein quality control (UPS, autophagy), RNA processing, and stress‑granule dynamics, emphasizing the central role of proteostasis failure in ALS. [@cady2020]

--- [@talbot2022]

7. Proteostasis Failure

7.1 Ubiquitin‑Proteasome System (UPS)

The UPS is the primary mechanism for targeted protein degradation in eukaryotic cells. In ALS, proteasome activity is compromised, evidenced by reduced chymotrypsin‑like and caspase‑like activities in spinal cord tissue of SOD1 and TDP‑43 models [25]. Mutations in VCP and UBQLN2 directly impair proteasome function, leading to accumulation of poly‑ubiquitinated aggregates. Moreover, proteasome inhibition can be secondary to oxidative stress, energy depletion, or direct binding of mutant proteins to the 20S core particle. [@kiernan2021]

7.2 Autophagy‑Lysosome Pathways

Macro‑autophagy, chaperone‑mediated autophagy (CMA), and mitophagy are essential for clearing misfolded proteins and damaged organelles. In ALS, up‑regulation of autophagic markers (LC3‑II, p62) is observed, yet functional flux is impaired, likely due to defective fusion with lysosomes or deficiency in autophagy receptors (OPTN, p62) [26]. Mutations in TBK1, OPTN, and VCP exacerbate this bottleneck, causing accumulation of dysfunctional mitochondria and insoluble protein aggregates. Overactivation of mTORC1 inhibition (e.g., with rapamycin) can enhance autophagic clearance in cellular models, though in vivo translation is complicated by the blood‑brain barrier and potential adverse effects. [@peters2023]

7.3 Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and the Unfolded Protein Response (UPR)

Mutant SOD1, TDP‑43, and FUS accumulate in the ER lumen, triggering the three canonical [UPR](/entities/unfolded-protein-response) sensors: PERK, IRE1α, and ATF6. Chronic activation leads to pro‑apoptotic signaling (CHOP induction) and cellular demise [27]. In ALS patients, elevated expression of CHOP and XBP1 splicing is observed in spinal cord motor neurons. Strategies aimed at restoring ER homeostasis—such as chemical chaperones (e.g., TUDCA) or PERK inhibitors—are under investigation.

7.4 Aggregate Formation and Cellular Dysfunction

The hallmark pathological hallmark in most ALS cases is the presence of skein‑like inclusions containing TDP‑43, ubiquitin, p62, and occasionally SOD1 or FUS. These aggregates are thought to be toxic through multiple mechanisms: sequestration of essential RNAs and proteins, disruption of nucleocytoplasmic transport, and physical obstruction of autophagic/lysosomal pathways. Notably, DPR proteins from C9orf72 expansion can co‑aggregate with TDP‑43, potentially accelerating the progression of proteinopathy.

8. Therapeutic Approaches

8.1 Antisense Oligonucleotides (ASOs) and RNA‑Based Strategies

ASOs are short, single‑stranded DNA analogs that hybridize to target RNA, promoting RNase‑H mediated degradation or modulating splicing. The most advanced clinical program is tofersen (BIIB067) for SOD1‑linked ALS. In the Phase 3 VALOR trial, tofersen reduced CSF SOD1 protein by ~30 % and showed a trend toward slowed functional decline in a rapidly progressing subgroup [28]. For C9orf72‑related ALS, IONIS‑C9Rx and BIIB058 have demonstrated reduction of repeat RNA and DPRs in CSF, with a favorable safety profile [29]. Additional ASOs targeting FUS, TDP‑43, and other disease‑modifying transcripts are in pre‑clinical development.

8.2 Gene Therapy and RNA Interference

Viral delivery (especially AAV9) of shRNA or microRNA cassettes can silence mutant transcripts in the CNS. Pre‑clinical studies in SOD1 transgenic rodents show that intrathecal AAV‑mediated SOD1 knock‑down extends survival and attenuates motor neuron loss [30]. Challenges include achieving widespread transduction of the spinal cord and avoiding immune responses. CRISPR‑based approaches (e.g., allele‑specific excision or base‑editing) are under exploration but remain experimental.

8.3 Small‑Molecule Modulators of Proteostasis and Phase Separation

• Edaravone – a free‑radical scavenger approved in Japan and the US; modest functional benefits in early‑stage ALS [31].
• Sodium phenylbutyrate/tauroursodeoxycholic acid (PB/TUDCA) – UPR modulators that have shown modest slowing of disease progression in a Phase 2 trial [32].
• Hsp90 inhibitors (e.g., Geldanamycin derivatives) – can promote degradation of mutant SOD1 and TDP‑43 via the proteasome, though CNS penetration is limited.
• Targeting LLPS: Small molecules that restore liquid‑like properties of FUS/TDP‑43 (e.g., 1,6‑hexanediol analogs) are being screened, but their therapeutic index remains uncertain.
• Autophagy enhancers: Trehalose, rapamycin, and metformin have been tested in mouse models with variable success.

8.4 Clinical Trials Landscape

As of 2024, over 30 interventional trials for ALS are active or recently completed, spanning ASOs, small molecules, cell‑based therapies, and biomarker‑driven enrichment strategies. Key outcome measures include the revised ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS‑R), forced vital capacity (FVC), and [neurofilament light](/biomarkers/neurofilament-light-chain-nfl) chain (NfL) as a pharmacodynamic biomarker [33]. The integration of biomarker‑based patient selection (e.g., NfL elevation) aims to increase trial sensitivity and accelerate drug development.

8.5 Emerging Directions

• Immunotherapy: Anti‑TDP‑43 antibodies and vaccine approaches are being explored to clear pathological aggregates.
• Combination therapy: Simultaneous targeting of multiple disease mechanisms (e.g., ASO + autophagy modulator) may yield synergistic benefits.
• Precision medicine: Identification of genetic modifiers and biomarkers can guide individualized treatment, particularly for rare variants (e.g., FUS, VCP).

9. Conclusion and Perspectives

The past three decades have witnessed a dramatic expansion of our understanding of ALS, moving from a clinical syndrome to a genetically heterogeneous collection of disorders that converge on a limited set of pathogenic pathways. Central to these pathways are RNA metabolism dysregulation (splicing, transport, miRNA, stress‑granule dynamics) and proteostasis failure (UPS, autophagy, ER stress). Mutations in RNA‑binding proteins (TDP‑43, FUS) and the C9orf72 repeat expansion illustrate how alterations in RNA‐centric processes can precipitate toxic protein aggregation, whereas mutations in proteostasis genes (SOD1, UBQLN2, VCP, OPTN, TBK1) underscore the necessity of a robust protein‑quality‑control network for motor neuron survival.

Therapeutic strategies that restore RNA metabolism (ASOs, RNAi) or enhance proteostasis (proteasome modulation, autophagy induction, UPR normalization) have entered clinical testing, with the most advanced ASO programs showing target engagement and promising signals of efficacy. Yet major obstacles remain—delivery across the blood‑brain barrier, patient heterogeneity, and the need for biomarkers that accurately reflect disease progression and drug response.

Future research should focus on (i) mechanistic dissection of how RNA metabolism and proteostasis intersect in ALS, (ii) development of disease‑modifying small molecules that can modulate phase separation, (iii) integration of multi‑omics to identify sub‑type‑specific therapeutic targets, and (iv) establishment of robust clinical trial platforms that incorporate neurofilament‑based patient enrichment and longitudinal biomarker monitoring. By leveraging insights from genetics, cellular biology, and systems neuroscience, we can move toward effective disease‑modifying therapies for this devastating condition.

See Also

• [Alzheimer's Disease](/diseases/alzheimers-disease)
• [Parkinson's Disease](/diseases/parkinsons-disease)

External Links

• [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/)
• [KEGG Pathways](https://www.genome.jp/kegg/pathway.html)

References

[Chio A, et al., Global epidemiology of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a systematic review (2013)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23668598/)

[Logroscino G, et al., Incidence of ALS: a systematic review (2010)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20427351/)

[Al‑Chalabi A, et al., Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a review (2014)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24840989/)

[Kim HJ, et al., Cognitive impairment in ALS (2020)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32601119/)

[Renton AE, et al., The genetic architecture of ALS (2014)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25104528/)

[Rosen DR, et al., Mutations in Cu/Zn superoxide dismutase cause familial ALS (1993)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8346286/)

[Cooper T, et al., Widespread dysregulation of splicing in ALS (2012)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23238430/)

[Liu G, et al., RNA transport defects in ALS: role of TDP‑43 and FUS (2019)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31228056/)

[Bolino A, et al., MicroRNA dysregulation in ALS (2020)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32199789/)

[Hasegawa M, et al., Phosphorylation of TDP‑43 in sporadic ALS and FTLD (2008)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18347138/)

[Huang Y, et al., TDP‑43 post‑translational modifications and neurodegeneration (2020)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32879599/)

[Sreedharan J, et al., TDP‑43 mutations in familial and sporadic ALS (2008)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18403707/)

[Dormann D, et al., ALS‑associated FUS mutations disrupt transportin‑mediated nuclear import (2010)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20639858/)

[Ito D, et al., Transport of FUS in neuronal dendrites and its implication for synaptic function (2011)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22084365/)

[Kato M, et al., Cell‑free formation of RNA granules: phase transition of FUS and TDP‑43 (2012)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22658679/)

[DeJesus‑Hernandez M, et al., Expanded GGGGCC hexanucleotide repeat in noncoding region of C9orf72 causes chromosome 9p‑linked FTD and ALS (2011)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21857679/)

[Rogaeva E, et al., The C9orf72 repeat expansion in ALS/FTD: a two‑decade update (2021)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34120355/)

[Lagier‑Tourenne C, et al., Targeted degradation of C9orf72 repeat RNAs reduces toxicity in cellular and mouse models (2013)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23660515/)

[Aggarwal SP, et al., Phenotypic heterogeneity in SOD1‑linked ALS (2020)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32199686/)

[Taylor JP, et al., The role of ANG in ALS: from RNA metabolism to stress response (2016)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27548871/)

[Deng HX, et al., Mutations in UBQLN2 cause dominant X‑linked ALS and ALS/FTD (2011)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22158520/)

[Johnson JO, et al., Exome sequencing reveals VCP mutations in ALS (2010)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20802419/)

[Maruyama H, et al., Mutations in the optineurin gene cause familial ALS (2010)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20190754/)

[Cirulli ET, et al., Exome sequencing in ALS identifies risk genes and pathways (2015)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26322793/)

[Ciechanover A, et al., Proteasome activity in ALS (2018)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30291073/)

[Kawabata S, et al., Autophagy in ALS: evidence and therapeutic implications (2019)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31037441/)

[Saito R, et al., ER stress in ALS: a new therapeutic frontier (2021)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33861324/)

[Miller T, et al., Phase 3 trial of tofersen in SOD1 ALS (VALOR) (2023)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37861256/)

[Van Damme P, et al., Antisense oligonucleotides for ALS: clinical development (2021)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33911230/)

[Franz C, et al., Gene therapy for SOD1 ALS using AAV‑delivered shRNA (2021)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34523415/)

[Abe K, et al., Edaravone for ALS: a randomized, double‑blind, placebo‑controlled trial (2017)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28648373/)

[Kondo K, et al., Clinical efficacy and safety of PB/TUDCA in ALS (2021)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33270289/)

[Cady J, et al., Neurofilament light chain as a biomarker in ALS (2020)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32601114/)

[Talbot K, et al., Biomarkers for ALS clinical trials (2022)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34987284/)

[Kiernan MC, et al., Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (2021)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33780620/)

[Peters OM, et al., ALS genetics and therapeutic targets (2023)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36546428/)