4.5 Article

Transgenic minipig model of Huntington's disease exhibiting gradually progressing neurodegeneration

期刊

DISEASE MODELS & MECHANISMS
卷 13, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/dmm.041319

关键词

Large animal model; TgHD; Brain; Huntingtin; Neuropathology

资金

  1. National Sustainability Programme (Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports) [LO1609]
  2. CHDI foundation [RA: A11609]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recently developed therapeutic approaches for the treatment of Huntington's disease (HD) require preclinical testing in large animal models. The minipig is a suitable experimental animal because of its large gyrencephalic brain, body weight of 70-100 kg, long lifespan, and anatomical, physiological and metabolic resemblance to humans. The Libechov transgenic minipig model for HD (TgHD) has proven useful for proof of concept of developing new therapies. However, to evaluate the efficacy of different therapies on disease progression, a broader phenotypic characterization of the TgHD minipig is needed. In this study, we analyzed the brain tissues of TgHD minipigs at the age of 48 and 60-70 months, and compared them to wild-type animals. We were able to demonstrate not only an accumulation of different forms of mutant huntingtin (mHTT) in TgHD brain, but also pathological changes associated with cellular damage caused by mHTT. At 48 months, we detected pathological changes that included the demyelination of brain white matter, loss of function of striatal neurons in the putamen and activation of microglia. At 60-70 months, we found a clear marker of neurodegeneration: significant cell loss detected in the caudate nucleus, putamen and cortex. This was accompanied by clusters of structures accumulating in the neurites of some neurons, a sign of their degeneration that is also seen in Alzheimer's disease, and a significant activation of astrocytes. In summary, our data demonstrate age-dependent neuropathology with later onset of neurodegeneration in TgHD minipigs.

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