4.6 Article

Phenolic Compounds Prevent Amyloid β-Protein Oligomerization and Synaptic Dysfunction by Site-specific Binding

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 287, 期 18, 页码 14631-14643

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M111.325456

关键词

-

资金

  1. Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology [22240051, 20390242]
  2. Knowledge Cluster Initiative (High Tech Sensing and Knowledge Handling Technology (Brain Technology)) from the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology
  3. Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare (Japan)
  4. Novartis Foundation for Gerontological Research
  5. Alumni Association of Showa University School of Medicine
  6. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  7. National Institutes of Health [AG027818, AG027853]
  8. Jim Easton Consortium for Alzheimer Drug Discovery and Biomarkers at UCLA
  9. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20390242, 22240051, 22790815] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cerebral deposition of amyloid beta protein (A beta) is an invariant feature of Alzheimer disease (AD), and epidemiological evidence suggests that moderate consumption of foods enriched with phenolic compounds reduce the incidence of AD. We reported previously that the phenolic compounds myricetin (Myr) and rosmarinic acid (RA) inhibited A beta aggregation in vitro and in vivo. To elucidate a mechanistic basis for these results, we analyzed the effects of five phenolic compounds in the A beta aggregation process and in oligomer-induced synaptic toxicities. We now report that the phenolic compounds blocked A beta oligomerization, and Myr promoted significant NMR chemical shift changes of monomeric A beta. Both Myr and RA reduced cellular toxicity and synaptic dysfunction of the A beta oligomers. These results suggest that Myr and RA may play key roles in blocking the toxicity and early assembly processes associated with A beta through different binding.

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

4.6
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