4.5 Review

Overexpression of neurotrophin receptor p75 contributes to the excitotoxin-induced cholinergic neuronal death in rat basal forebrain

期刊

BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 853, 期 2, 页码 174-185

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0006-8993(99)02054-5

关键词

Alzheimer's disease; kainic acid lesion; medial septum; nucleus of basalis of Meynert; apoptosis; nerve growth factor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Both excitotoxicity and altered trophic factor support have been implicated in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease. To determine whether stimulation of p75, the low-affinity receptor for nerve growth factor, contributes to the excitotoxin-induced apoptotic death of cholinergic neurons, we examined the effect of unilateral kainic acid (KA; PBS vehicle, 1.25, 2.5 and 5.0 nmol) administration into rat basal forebrain on neuronal loss and p75 expression. KA (2.5 nmol) destroyed 43% of Nissl-stained neurons and 70% of choline acetyltransferase (ChAT)-positive neurons 5 days after injection. Agarose gel electrophoresis revealed that KA (2.5 nmol) induced local intemucleosomal DNA fragmentation after 6-48 h. Immunohistochemical analysis further showed that KA (2.5 nmol) augmented p75 immunoreactivity at a time when terminal transferase-mediated deoxyuridine trophosphate (d-UTP)-digoxigenin nick end labeling (TUNEL)-positive nuclei were increased. Many fragmented nuclei were co-labeled with ChAT antibody. The chronic administration of anti-rat p75 or the protein synthesis inhibitor, cycloheximide, but not anti-human p75, substantially reduced the KA-induced destruction of cholinergic neurons and the induction of internucleosomal DNA fragmentation. Anti-rat p75, but not cycloheximide, also reversed the spatial memory impairment produced by KA. These findings suggest that overexpression of p75 contributes to the excitotoxin-induced death of rat basal forebrain cholinergic neurons by an apoptotic-like mechanism. (C) 2000 Published by Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

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