4.7 Article

Valproate Attenuates 25-kDa C-Terminal Fragment of TDP-43-Induced Neuronal Toxicity via Suppressing Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Activating Autophagy

期刊

出版社

IVYSPRING INT PUBL
DOI: 10.7150/ijbs.11880

关键词

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; Valproate; 25 kDa C-terminal fragment of TDP-43; Endoplasmic reticulum stress; Autophagy

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81471307, 81301086, 81100881, 81100949]
  2. Youth Innovation Fund of The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University
  3. 5451 Project of Health Department of Henan Province [201201007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal adult-onset neurodegenerative disease. To date, there is no any effective pharmacological treatment for improving patients' symptoms and quality of life. Rapidly emerging evidence suggests that C-terminal fragments (CTFs) of TAR DNA-binding protein of 43 kDa (TDP-43), including TDP-35 and TDP-25, may play an important role in ALS pathogenesis. Valproate (VPA), a widely used antiepileptic drug, has neuroprotective effects on neurodegenerative disorders. As for ALS, preclinical studies also provide encouraging evidence for multiple beneficial effects in ALS mouse models. However, the potential molecular mechanisms have not been explored. Here, we show protective effects of VPA against TDP-43 CTFs-mediated neuronal toxicity and its underlying mechanisms in vitro. Remarkably, TDP-43 CTFs induced neuronal damage via endoplastic reticulum (ER) stress-mediated apoptosis. Furthermore, autophagic self-defense system was activated to reduce TDP-43 CTFs-induced neuronal death. Finally, VPA attenuated TDP-25-induced neuronal toxicity via suppressing ER stress-mediated apoptosis and enhancing autophagy. Taken together, these results demonstrate that VPA exerts neuroprotective effects against TDP-43 CTFs-induced neuronal damage. Thus, we provide new molecular evidence for VPA treatment in patients with ALS and other TDP-43 proteinopathies.

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