4.5 Article

Blocking acid-sensing ion channel 1 alleviates Huntington's disease pathology via an ubiquitin-proteasome system-dependent mechanism

期刊

HUMAN MOLECULAR GENETICS
卷 17, 期 20, 页码 3223-3235

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/hmg/ddn218

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology [17025044]
  2. Ministry of Health, Welfare and Labour
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [17025044] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Huntington's disease (HD) is a fatal neurodegenerative disorder. Despite a tremendous effort to develop therapeutic tools in several HD models, there is no effective cure at present. Acidosis has been observed previously in cellular and in in vivo models as well as in the brains of HD patients. Here we challenged HD models with amiloride (Ami) derivative benzamil (Ben), a chemical agent used to rescue acid-sensing ion channel (ASIC)-dependent acidotoxicity, to examine whether chronic acidosis is an important part of the HD pathomechanism and whether these drugs could be used as novel therapeutic agents. Ben markedly reduced the huntingtin-polyglutamine (htt-polyQ) aggregation in an inducible cellular system, and the therapeutic value of Ben was successfully recapitulated in the R6/2 animal model of HD. To reveal the mechanism of action, Ben was found to be able to alleviate the inhibition of the ubiquitin-proteasome system (UPS) activity, resulting in enhanced degradation of soluble htt-polyQ specifically in its pathological range. More importantly, we were able to demonstrate that blocking the expression of a specific isoform of ASIC (asic1a), one of the many molecular targets of Ben, led to an enhancement of UPS activity and this blockade also decreased htt-polyQ aggregation in the striatum of R6/2 mice. In conclusion, we believe that chemical compounds that target ASIC1a or pharmacological alleviation of UPS inhibition would be an effective and promising approach to combat HD and other polyQ-related disorders.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据