Abstract Background Self-assembly of the amyloid-β (Aβ) peptide into aggregates, from small oligomers to amyloid fibrils, is fundamentally linked with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However it is clear that not all forms of Aβ are equally harmful, and that linking a specific aggregate to toxicity also depends on the assays and model systems used [1, 2]. Though a central postulate of the amyloid cascade hypothesis, there remain many gaps in our understanding regarding the links between Aβ deposition and neurodegeneration. Methods In this study, we examined familial mutations of Aβ that increase aggregation and oligomerization, E22G and DE22, and induce cerebral amyloid angiopathy, E22Q and D23N. We also investigated synthetic mutations that stabilize dimerization, S26C, and a phospho-mimetic, S8E, and non-phospho-mimetic, S8A. To that end, we utilized BRI2-Aβ fusion technology and rAAV2/1 based somatic brain transgenesis in mice to selectively express individual mutant Aβ species in vivo. In parallel we generated PhiC31-based transgenic Drosophila melanogaster expressing wild type (WT) and Aβ40 and Aβ42 mutants, fused to the Argos signal peptide to assess the extent of Aβ42-induced toxicity as well as to interrogate the combined effect of different Aβ40 and Aβ42 species.Results When expressed in the mouse brain for 6 months, Aβ42 E22G, Aβ42 E22Q/D23N, and Aβ42WT formed amyloid aggregates consisting of some diffuse material as well as cored plaques, whereas other mutants formed predominantly diffuse amyloid deposits. Moreover, while Aβ40WT showed no distinctive phenotype, Aβ40 E22G and E22Q/D23N formed unique aggregates that accumulated in mouse brains. This is the first evidence that mutant Aβ40 overexpression leads to deposition under certain conditions. Interestingly, we found that mutant Aβ42 E22G, E22Q, and S26C, but not Aβ40, were toxic to the eye of Drosophila. In contrast, flies expressing a copy of Aβ40 (WT or mutants) in addition to Aβ42WT, showed improved phenotypes, suggesting possible protective qualities for Aβ40. Conclusions These studies suggest that while some Aβ40 mutants form unique amyloid aggregates in mouse brains, they do not exacerbate Aβ42 toxicity in Drosophila, which highlights the significance of using different systems for a better understanding of AD pathogenicity and more accurate screening for new potential therapies.
Aß40 mutants protect Drosophila against Aß42 toxicity despite their amyloidogenic properties in the non-transgenic mouse brain
Abstract BackgroundSelf-assembly of the amyloid-β (Aβ) peptide into aggregates, from small oligomers to amyloid fibrils, is fundamentally linked with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However it is clear that not all forms of Aβ are equally harmful, and that linking a specific aggregate to toxicity also depends on the assays and model systems used [1, 2]. Though a central postulate of the amyloid cascade hypothesis, there remain many gaps in our understanding regarding the links between Aβ deposition and neurodegeneration.MethodsIn this study, we examined familial mutations of Aβ that increase aggregation and oligomerization, E22G and DE22, and induce cerebral amyloid angiopathy, E22Q and D23N. We also investigated synthetic mutations that stabilize dimerization, S26C, and a phospho-mimetic, S8E, and non-phospho-mimetic, S8A. To that end, we utilized BRI2-Aβ fusion technology and rAAV2/1 based somatic brain transgenesis in mice to selectively express individual mutant Aβ species in vivo . In parallel we generated PhiC31-based transgenic Drosophila melanogaster expressing wild type (WT) and Aβ40 and Aβ42 mutants, fused to the Argos signal peptide to assess the extent of Aβ42-induced toxicity as well as to interrogate the combined effect of different Aβ40 and Aβ42 species.ResultsWhen expressed in the mouse brain for 6 months, Aβ42 E22G, Aβ42 E22Q/D23N, and Aβ42WT formed amyloid aggregates consisting of some diffuse material as well as cored plaques, whereas other mutants formed predominantly diffuse amyloid deposits. Moreover, while Aβ40WT showed no distinctive phenotype, Aβ40 E22G and E22Q/D23N formed unique aggregates that accumulated in mouse brains. This is the first evidence that mutant Aβ40 overexpression leads to deposition under certain conditions. Interestingly, we found that mutant Aβ42 E22G, E22Q, and S26C, but not Aβ40, were toxic to the eye of Drosophila . In contrast, flies expressing a copy of Aβ40 (WT or mutants) in addition to Aβ42WT, showed improved phenotypes, suggesting possible protective qualities for Aβ40.ConclusionsThese studies suggest that some Aβ40 mutants form unique amyloid aggregates in mouse brains, despite protecting against Aβ42 toxicity in Drosophila , which highlights the significance of using different systems for a better understanding of AD pathogenicity and more accurate screening for new potential therapies.
Aß 40 Mutants Protect Drosophila Against aß 42 Toxicity Despite Their Amyloidogenic Properties in the Non-transgenic Mouse Brain
Abstract BackgroundSelf-assembly of the amyloid-β (Aβ) peptide into aggregates, ranging from small oligomers to amyloid fibrils, is fundamentally linked with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However it is clear that not all forms of Aβ are equally harmful, and that linking a specific aggregate to toxicity also depends on the assays and model systems used [1, 2]. Indeed, though a central postulate of the amyloid cascade hypothesis, there remain many gaps in our understanding regarding the links between Aβ deposition and neurodegeneration.MethodsIn this study we utilized BRI2-Aβ fusion technology and rAAV2/1 based somatic brain transgenesis to examine Aβ aggregates that form from selective expression of individual mutant Aβ species in vivo. In parallel we generated PhiC31-based transgenic Drosophila melanogaster expressing WT and mutant Aβ40 and Aβ42, fused to the Argos signal peptide and placed under the GAL4-upstream activation sequence (UAS) expression system in order to assess the extent of Aβ42-induced toxicity as well as to interrogate the combined effect of different forms of Aβ40 and Aβ42 species.ResultsWhen expressed in the mouse brain for 6 months, Aβ42 E22G, Aβ42 E22Q/D23N, and Aβ42 WT formed amyloid aggregates consisting of some diffuse material as well as cored plaques, whereas other mutants formed predominantly diffuse amyloid deposits. Moreover, while Aβ40WT showed no distinctive phenotype, Aβ40 E22G and E22Q/D23N formed unique aggregates that accumulated in mouse brains. This is the first evidence that mutant Aβ40 overexpression leads to deposition under certain conditions. Interestingly, we found that mutant Aβ42 E22G, E22Q, and S26C, but not Aβ40, were toxic to the eye of the flies and exacerbated their behavior. In contrast, flies expressing a copy of Aβ40 (wild type [WT] or mutants) in addition to Aβ42 WT, showed improved phenotypes, suggesting possible protective qualities for Aβ40.ConclusionsThese studies suggest that some Aβ40 mutants form unique amyloid aggregates in mouse brains, despite being protective against Aβ42 toxicity in Drosophila, which highlights the significance of using different systems for a better understanding of AD pathogenicity and more accurate screening for new potential therapies.
rAAV-based brain slice culture models of Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease inclusion pathologies
It has been challenging to produce ex vivo models of the inclusion pathologies that are hallmark pathologies of many neurodegenerative diseases. Using three-dimensional mouse brain slice cultures (BSCs), we have developed a paradigm that rapidly and robustly recapitulates mature neurofibrillary inclusion and Lewy body formation found in Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, respectively. This was achieved by transducing the BSCs with recombinant adeno-associated viruses (rAAVs) that express α-synuclein or variants of tau. Notably, the tauopathy BSC model enables screening of small molecule therapeutics and tracking of neurodegeneration. More generally, the rAAV BSC “toolkit” enables efficient transduction and transgene expression from neurons, microglia, astrocytes, and oligodendrocytes, alone or in combination, with transgene expression lasting for many months. These rAAV-based BSC models provide a cost-effective and facile alternative to in vivo studies, and in the future can become a widely adopted methodology to explore physiological and pathological mechanisms related to brain function and dysfunction.
TLR5 decoy receptor as a novel anti-amyloid therapeutic for Alzheimer’s disease
There is considerable interest in harnessing innate immunity to treat Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Here, we explore whether a decoy receptor strategy using the ectodomain of select TLRs has therapeutic potential in AD. AAV-mediated expression of human TLR5 ectodomain (sTLR5) alone or fused to human IgG4 Fc (sTLR5Fc) results in robust attenuation of amyloid β (Aβ) accumulation in a mouse model of Alzheimer-type Aβ pathology. sTLR5Fc binds to oligomeric and fibrillar Aβ with high affinity, forms complexes with Aβ, and blocks Aβ toxicity. Oligomeric and fibrillar Aβ modulates flagellin-mediated activation of human TLR5 but does not, by itself, activate TLR5 signaling. Genetic analysis shows that rare protein coding variants in human TLR5 may be associated with a reduced risk of AD. Further, transcriptome analysis shows altered TLR gene expression in human AD. Collectively, our data suggest that TLR5 decoy receptor–based biologics represent a novel and safe Aβ-selective class of biotherapy in AD.
F2‐01‐04: From Systems Level Transcriptomics to new Immune Targets for Alzheimer’s Disease
Abstract Reactive gliosis surrounding amyloid β (Aβ) plaques is an early feature of Alzheimer’s disease pathogenesis and has been postulated to represent activation of the innate immune system in an apparently ineffective attempt to clear or neutralize Aβ aggregates. To evaluate the role of IFN-γ–mediated neuroinflammation on the evolution of Aβ pathology in transgenic (Tg) mice, we have expressed murine IFN-γ (mIFN-γ) in the brains of Aβ precursor protein (APP) Tg mice using recombinant adeno-associated virus serotype 1. Expression of mIFN-γ in brains of APP TgCRND8 mice results in robust noncell autonomous activation of microglia and astrocytes, and a concomitant significant suppression of Aβ deposition. In these mice, mIFN-γ expression upregulated multiple glial activation markers, early components of the complement cascade as well as led to infiltration of Ly-6c positive peripheral monocytes but no significant effects on APP levels, APP processing or steady-state Aβ levels were noticed in vivo. Taken together, these results suggest that mIFN-γ expression in the brain suppresses Aβ accumulation through synergistic effects of activated glia and components of the innate immune system that enhance Aβ aggregate phagocytosis.
Massive gliosis induced by interleukin‐6 suppresses Aβ deposition
in vivo:
evidence against inflammation as a driving force for amyloid deposition
Proinflammatory stimuli, after amyloid β (Aβ) deposition, have been hypothesized to create a self‐reinforcing positive feedback loop that increases amyloidogenic processing of the Aβ precursor protein (APP), promoting further Aβ accumulation and neuroinflammation in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Interleukin‐6 (IL‐6), a proinflammatory cytokine, has been shown to be increased in AD patients implying a pathological interaction. To assess the effects of IL‐6 on Aβ deposition and APP processing in vivo ,we overexpressed murine IL‐6 (mIL‐6) in the brains of APP transgenic TgCRND8 and TG2576 mice. mIL‐6 expression resulted in extensive gliosis and concurrently attenuated Aβ deposition in TgCRND8 mouse brains. This was accompanied by up‐regulation of glial phagocytic markers in vivo and resulted in enhanced microglia‐mediated phagocytosis of Aβ aggregates in vitro . Further, mIL‐6‐induced neuroinflammation had no effect on APP processing in TgCRND8 and had no effect on APP processing or steady‐state levels of Aβ in young Tg2576 mice. These results indicate that mIL‐6‐mediated reactive gliosis may be beneficial early in the disease process by potentially enhancing Aβ plaque clearance rather than mediating a neurotoxic feedback loop that exacerbates amyloid pathology. This is the first study that methodically dissects the contribution of mIL‐6 with regard to its potential role in modulating Aβ deposition in vivo .—Chakrabarty, P., Jansen‐West, K., Beccard, A., Ceballos‐Diaz, C., Levites, Y., Verbeeck, C., Zubair, A. C., Dickson, D., Golde, T. E., Das, P. Massive gliosis induced by interleukin‐6 suppresses Aβ deposition in vivo: evidence against inflammation as a driving force for amyloid deposition. FASEB J . 24, 548–559 (2010). www.fasebj.org