4.3 Article

Presenilin mutations in familial Alzheimer disease and transgenic mouse models accelerate neuronal lysosomal pathology

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/jnen/63.8.821

关键词

animal models; familial Alzheimer disease; lysosomal system; neurodegeneration; presenilin; proteases; transgenic mice

资金

  1. NIA NIH HHS [P01 AG17617] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The neuronal lysosomal system is a major degradative pathway, induced by cell stress and closely linked to Alzheimer disease (AD) and other neurodegenerative diseases. Here, we show that mutations of presenilin (PS) I and 2, which cause familial early-onset AD (FAD), induce more severe lysosomal system neuropathology in humans than does sporadic AD (SAD). Cathepsin D and B levels were higher in PS-FAD neocortex than in SAD and, unlike neurons in SAD, expressed higher levels of the cation-independent mannose-6-phosphate receptor. Lysosomal pathology was also evident in more populations of neurons in PS-FAD brains, including the less vulnerable neurons in laminae 11 and IV and affected neurons contained high numbers of hydrolase-positive vesicular compartments with a broader range of abnormal morphology. In transgenic mice expressing mutant amyloid precursor protein (APPswe), introducing mutant PSI significantly upregulated the lysosomal system in neocortical and hippocampal neurons. This upregulation, though milder in severity, resembled that seen in human PS-FAD. Accumulation of hydrolases in dystrophic neurites in senile plaques was particularly strong, suggesting that amyloid deposition may be a stimulus for local mobilization of the lysosomal system. PSI mice lacking the APPswe transgene also had a mild lysosomal response in some neuronal populations, which was not seen in the APPswe mice. Our findings suggest that presenilin mutations have amyloid-independent effects on the lysosomal system, which are synergistic with the lysosomal system pathology that is associated with beta-amyloid.

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

4.3
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