4.6 Article

Contrasting roles for axonal degeneration in an autoimmune versus viral model of multiple sclerosis - When can axonal injury be beneficial?

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY
Volume 170, Issue 1, Pages 214-226

Publisher

AMER SOC INVESTIGATIVE PATHOLOGY, INC
DOI: 10.2353/ajpath.2007.060683

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS034497, NS34497] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE [R01NS034497] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Although demyelination is a cardinal feature in multiple sclerosis, axonal injury also occurs. We tested whether a delay in axonal degeneration could affect the disease severity in two models for multiple sclerosis: experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) and Theiler's murine encephalomyelitis virus (TMEV) infection. We compared wild-type C57BL/6 (B6) mice with C57BL/Wld(s) (Wld) mice, which carry a mutation that delays axonal degeneration. In EAE, both mouse strains were sensitized with myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG)(35-55) peptide and showed a similar disease onset, MOG-specific lymphoproliferative responses, and inflammation during the acute stage of EAE. However, during the chronic stage, B6 mice continued to show paralysis with a greater extent of axonal damage, demyelination, and MOG-specific lymphoproliferative responses compared with Wld mice, which showed complete recovery. In TMEV infection, only Wld mice were paralyzed and had increased inflammation, virus antigen-positive cells, and TMEV-specific lymphoproliferative responses versus infected B6 mice. Because TMEV can use axons to disseminate in the brain, axonal degeneration in B6 mice might be a beneficial mechanism that limits the virus spread, whereas slow axonal degeneration in Wld mice could favor virus spread. Therefore, axonal degeneration plays contrasting roles (beneficial versus detrimental) depending on the initiator driving the disease.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available