4.7 Article

The relationship between iron dyshomeostasis and amyloidogenesis in Alzheimer's disease: Two sides of the same coin

期刊

NEUROBIOLOGY OF DISEASE
卷 81, 期 -, 页码 49-65

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.nbd.2015.08.007

关键词

Alzheimer's disease; AD; Iron; Metallosis; Dyshomeostasis; Beta-amyloid; Amyloidogenesis; Pathology

资金

  1. NIH-NIA [R03AG047461]
  2. Charleston Conference on Alzheimer's Disease Research Grant
  3. Barsumian Trust
  4. Neuroimaging Research Grant
  5. George M. Leader Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The dysregulation of iron metabolism in Alzheimer's disease is not accounted for in the current framework of the amyloid cascade hypothesis. Accumulating evidence suggests that impaired iron homeostasis is an early event in Alzheimer's disease progression. Iron dyshomeostasis leads to a loss of function in several enzymes requiring iron as a cofactor, the formation of toxic oxidative species, and the elevated production of beta-amyloid proteins. Several common genetic polymorphisms that cause increased iron levels and dyshomeostasis have been associated with Alzheimer's disease but the pathoetiology is not well understood. A full picture is necessary to explain how heterogeneous circumstances lead to iron loading and amyloid deposition. There is evidence to support a causative interplay between the concerted loss of iron homeostasis and amyloid plaque formation. We hypothesize that iron misregulation and beta-amyloid plaque pathology are synergistic in the process of neurodegeneration and ultimately cause a downward cascade of events that spiral into the manifestation of Alzheimer's disease. In this review, we amalgamate recent findings of brain iron metabolism in healthy versus Alzheimer's disease brains and consider unique mechanisms of iron transport in different brain cells as well as how disturbances in iron regulation lead to disease etiology and propagate Alzheimer's pathology. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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