4.6 Review

Transthyretin and the brain re-visited: Is neuronal synthesis of transthyretin protective in Alzheimer's disease?

期刊

MOLECULAR NEURODEGENERATION
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1750-1326-6-79

关键词

Beta-amyloid precursor protein (A beta PP, APP); Beta-amyloid (A beta); Alzheimer's disease (AD); Transthyretin (TTR); Amyloidosis; Protein homeostasis; Aggregation

资金

  1. NIH [AG R01 030027, AG18440, AG5131, AG22074, AG11385, AG10435, NS057096]
  2. WM Keck Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Since the mid-1990's a trickle of publications from scattered independent laboratories have presented data suggesting that the systemic amyloid precursor transthyretin (TTR) could interact with the amyloidogenic beta-amyloid (A beta) peptide of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The notion that one amyloid precursor could actually inhibit amyloid fibril formation by another seemed quite far-fetched. Further it seemed clear that within the CNS, TTR was only produced in choroid plexus epithelial cells, not in neurons. The most enthusiastic of the authors proclaimed that TTR sequestered A beta in vivo resulting in a lowered TTR level in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of AD patients and that the relationship was salutary. More circumspect investigators merely showed in vitro interaction between the two molecules. A single in vivo study in Caenorhabditis elegans suggested that wild type human TTR could suppress the abnormalities seen when A beta was expressed in the muscle cells of the worm. Subsequent studies in human A beta transgenic mice, including those from our laboratory, also suggested that the interaction reduced the A beta deposition phenotype. We have reviewed the literature analyzing the relationship including recent data examining potential mechanisms that could explain the effect. We have proposed a model which is consistent with most of the published data and current notions of AD pathogenesis and can serve as a hypothesis which can be tested.

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