4.6 Article

Does the cytotoxic effect of transient amyloid oligomers from common equine lysozyme in vitro imply innate amyloid toxicity?

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 280, 期 8, 页码 6269-6275

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M407273200

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In amyloid diseases, it is not evident which protein aggregates induce cell death via specific molecular mechanisms and which cause damage because of their mass accumulation and mechanical properties. We showed that equine lysozyme assembles into soluble amyloid oligomers and protofilaments at pH 2.0 and 4.5, 57 degreesC. They bind thioflavin-T and Congo red similar to common amyloid structures, and their morphology was monitored by atomic force microscopy. Molecular volume evaluation from microscopic measurements allowed us to identify distinct types of oligomers, ranging from tetramer to octamer and 20-mer. Monomeric lysozyme and protofilaments are not cytotoxic, whereas the oligomers induce cell death in primary neuronal cells, primary fibroblasts, and the neuroblastoma IMR-32 cell line. Cytotoxicity was accessed by ethidium bromide staining, MTT reduction, and TUNEL assays. Primary cultures were more susceptible to the toxic effect induced by soluble amyloid oligomers than the neuroblastoma cell line. The cytotoxicity correlates with the size of oligomers; the sample incubated at pH 4.5 and containing larger oligomers, including 20-mer, appears to be more cytotoxic than the lysozyme sample kept at pH 2.0, in which only tetramers and octamers were found. Soluble amyloid oligomers may assemble into rings; however, there was no correlation between the quantity of rings in the sample and its toxicity. The cytotoxicity of transient oligomeric species of the ubiquitous protein lysozyme indicates that this is an intrinsic feature of protein amyloid aggregation, and therefore soluble amyloid oligomers can be used as a primary therapeutic target and marker of amyloid disease.

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