Alzheimer’s Disease is Driven by Beta-Amyloid Generated in the Amyloid Precursor Protein-Independent Pathway and Retained Intraneuronally: Research and Therapeutic Strategies in a New AD Paradigm

V. Volloch, Sophia Rits-Volloch
{"title":"Alzheimer’s Disease is Driven by Beta-Amyloid Generated in the Amyloid Precursor Protein-Independent Pathway and Retained Intraneuronally: Research and Therapeutic Strategies in a New AD Paradigm","authors":"V. Volloch, Sophia Rits-Volloch","doi":"10.33597/aimm.-v2-id1010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The present article describes a New Paradigm of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). In the Old Paradigm, formalized in the Amyloid Cascade Hypothesis (ACH) theory of AD, beta amyloid (Aβ) is produced, both in health and disease, solely in the amyloid precursor protein (βAPP) proteolytic/secretory pathway. Two βAPP cleavages are involved. First cleavage, by beta-secretase (Beta-site APP Cleaving Enzyme, BACE) between Met671 and Asp672 (numbering according to the βAPP770 isoform), generates the C-terminal fragment of βAPP (C99, reflecting the number of its amino acid residues) and forms the N-terminus of Aβ. Subsequent second cleavage of C99 by gamma-secretase (gamma-site βAPP cleaving enzyme) forms the C-terminus of Aβ, completes its production, and coincides with its secretion. The overproduction of Aβ results in its extracellular accumulation commencing early in life. This triggers a cascade of molecular and cellular events, including formation of neurofibrillary tangles, which results in neurodegeneration. When the extent of neurodegeneration reaches critical levels, symptoms of the disease are manifested. In this Paradigm, Alzheimer’s disorder is a quintessential “slow” disease. The ACH clearly defined therapeutic targets, which included key events of βAPP proteolysis as well as secreted extracellular Aβ. Eventually, a number of candidate AD drugs, highly effective in animal model systems, was developed. Of those, especially successful were inhibitors of beta-sectretase that not only prevented the emergence of AD symptoms, but also reversed them when administered after symptomatic manifestation of the disease in animal models. At this point, there was every reason to hope that a solution to the Alzheimer’s problem is at hand; this, however proved not to be the case. Both the Old and the New Paradigms share the common point of departure, namely that the overproduction of beta-amyloid is the causative basis of AD. The rest of the notions of the New Paradigm are distinctly different from those of the Old one. Formulation of the New Paradigm theory of Alzheimer’s disease was necessitated by the analysis of results of massive human clinical trials of candidate AD drugs that performed outstandingly in animal studies. They all failed in human trials as spectacularly as they succeeded in animal studies. Or did they? Whereas they indeed showed no efficacy whatsoever, they performed perfectly within confines of their design and purpose. For example, a BACE inhibitor verubecestat penetrated the brain of AD patients, greatly inhibited βAPP cleavage, and strongly suppressed extracellular levels of Aβ. It did all this with the same efficiency it exhibited in animal studies, where it indisputably succeeded in mitigating symptoms of the disease. Why did it fail to do so in human clinical trials? This failure, apparently inexplicable within the confines of the ACH, seems as good an occasion as any to apply the central dictum of Sherlock Holmes: “... when you eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth”. In the case under discussion, after the elimination of the “impossible”, including elements of the ACH, and provided that Alzheimer’s disease is indeed caused by the overproduction of Aβ, a notion strongly supported by experimental data, the “however improbable”, which is consistent with the outcomes of human clinical trials of AD candidate drugs, is the following. 1. In addition to the βAPP proteolytic/secretory process, in Alzheimer’s disease in humans, Aβ is also produced in the βAPP-independent pathway. This pathway is active only in AD patients. It does not operate in animals and healthy humans. 2. The output of the βAPP-independent Aβ generation pathway is retained intraneuronally, and it is this pool of intraneuronal beta-amyloid that causes and sustains Alzheimer’s disease. These notions constitute the core of the New Paradigm theory of AD. Several mechanisms are capable of achieving the above. They include: RNA-dependent βAPP mRNA amplification, a process implicated in overproduction of specific proteins in mammalian cells; the internal initiation of transcription within the human βAPP gene; cleavage within βAPP mRNA; the internal initiation of translation within βAPP mRNA. Conceptually, in the context of the present article, the nature of the mechanism generating Aβ independently of βAPP is not important; in every case, identical therapeutic strategies would be indicated. All potential mechanisms of βAPP-independent Aβ generation share several common features. (a) In each case, the expression of a crucial component(s) required for activation of a specific mechanism is induced by the integrated stress response (ISR) elicited via OMA1-DELE1- HRI signaling pathway activated by mitochondrial dysfunction triggered by over-the-threshold levels of βAPP-derived Aβ accumulated intracellularly through cellular uptake of secreted Aβ as well as by retention of a fraction of beta-amyloid produced in the βAPP proteolytic pathway. (b) In every potential mechanism of βAPP-independent Aβ generation, translation initiates at the AUG normally encoding Met671 of βAPP and results in C100, i.e. N-terminal Met-containing C99, which is subsequently cleaved by gamma-secretase to produce Aβ (or Met-Aβ). (c) N-terminal Met of C100 is removed post- rather than co-translationally. Therefore a steady-state population of C100 and, possibly, of N-terminal Met-containing Aβ should occur within human neuronal cells with the activated βAPP-independent Aβ production pathway; their detection would provide irrefutable proof of operation of the pathway. (d) The Aβ (or Met-Aβ) output of every potential mechanism is retained intraneuronally. (e) Once activated, every potential βAPP-independent mechanism would, through generation of intraneuronally retained Aβ, sustain mitochondrial dysfunction and support the activity of the OMA1-DELE1-HRI signaling pathway, which, in turn, will promote, via elicitation of the ISR, the operation of the βAPP-independent Aβ production pathway. These self-perpetuating {βAPP-independent generation of intracellularly retained Aβ}/{mitochondrial dysfunction} mutual feedback cycles constitute the “Engine” that drives Alzheimer’s disease. The life- long accumulation of intraneuronal βAPP-derived Aβ to critical levels, sufficient to trigger mitochondrial dysfunction, plays the role of a starter motor in getting car engine moving in a self-sustainable manner. Only when the AD “Engine” is activated does the disease commence. In the New Paradigm, therefore, Alzheimer’s disorder is a “fast” disease that can be treated and cured at the symptomatic stages. The present article proposes conceptually novel research and therapeutic strategies and suggests that BACE activation (yes, activation!) could be a valid approach in AD therapy.","PeriodicalId":92750,"journal":{"name":"Annals of integrative molecular medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of integrative molecular medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33597/aimm.-v2-id1010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Abstract The present article describes a New Paradigm of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). In the Old Paradigm, formalized in the Amyloid Cascade Hypothesis (ACH) theory of AD, beta amyloid (Aβ) is produced, both in health and disease, solely in the amyloid precursor protein (βAPP) proteolytic/secretory pathway. Two βAPP cleavages are involved. First cleavage, by beta-secretase (Beta-site APP Cleaving Enzyme, BACE) between Met671 and Asp672 (numbering according to the βAPP770 isoform), generates the C-terminal fragment of βAPP (C99, reflecting the number of its amino acid residues) and forms the N-terminus of Aβ. Subsequent second cleavage of C99 by gamma-secretase (gamma-site βAPP cleaving enzyme) forms the C-terminus of Aβ, completes its production, and coincides with its secretion. The overproduction of Aβ results in its extracellular accumulation commencing early in life. This triggers a cascade of molecular and cellular events, including formation of neurofibrillary tangles, which results in neurodegeneration. When the extent of neurodegeneration reaches critical levels, symptoms of the disease are manifested. In this Paradigm, Alzheimer’s disorder is a quintessential “slow” disease. The ACH clearly defined therapeutic targets, which included key events of βAPP proteolysis as well as secreted extracellular Aβ. Eventually, a number of candidate AD drugs, highly effective in animal model systems, was developed. Of those, especially successful were inhibitors of beta-sectretase that not only prevented the emergence of AD symptoms, but also reversed them when administered after symptomatic manifestation of the disease in animal models. At this point, there was every reason to hope that a solution to the Alzheimer’s problem is at hand; this, however proved not to be the case. Both the Old and the New Paradigms share the common point of departure, namely that the overproduction of beta-amyloid is the causative basis of AD. The rest of the notions of the New Paradigm are distinctly different from those of the Old one. Formulation of the New Paradigm theory of Alzheimer’s disease was necessitated by the analysis of results of massive human clinical trials of candidate AD drugs that performed outstandingly in animal studies. They all failed in human trials as spectacularly as they succeeded in animal studies. Or did they? Whereas they indeed showed no efficacy whatsoever, they performed perfectly within confines of their design and purpose. For example, a BACE inhibitor verubecestat penetrated the brain of AD patients, greatly inhibited βAPP cleavage, and strongly suppressed extracellular levels of Aβ. It did all this with the same efficiency it exhibited in animal studies, where it indisputably succeeded in mitigating symptoms of the disease. Why did it fail to do so in human clinical trials? This failure, apparently inexplicable within the confines of the ACH, seems as good an occasion as any to apply the central dictum of Sherlock Holmes: “... when you eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth”. In the case under discussion, after the elimination of the “impossible”, including elements of the ACH, and provided that Alzheimer’s disease is indeed caused by the overproduction of Aβ, a notion strongly supported by experimental data, the “however improbable”, which is consistent with the outcomes of human clinical trials of AD candidate drugs, is the following. 1. In addition to the βAPP proteolytic/secretory process, in Alzheimer’s disease in humans, Aβ is also produced in the βAPP-independent pathway. This pathway is active only in AD patients. It does not operate in animals and healthy humans. 2. The output of the βAPP-independent Aβ generation pathway is retained intraneuronally, and it is this pool of intraneuronal beta-amyloid that causes and sustains Alzheimer’s disease. These notions constitute the core of the New Paradigm theory of AD. Several mechanisms are capable of achieving the above. They include: RNA-dependent βAPP mRNA amplification, a process implicated in overproduction of specific proteins in mammalian cells; the internal initiation of transcription within the human βAPP gene; cleavage within βAPP mRNA; the internal initiation of translation within βAPP mRNA. Conceptually, in the context of the present article, the nature of the mechanism generating Aβ independently of βAPP is not important; in every case, identical therapeutic strategies would be indicated. All potential mechanisms of βAPP-independent Aβ generation share several common features. (a) In each case, the expression of a crucial component(s) required for activation of a specific mechanism is induced by the integrated stress response (ISR) elicited via OMA1-DELE1- HRI signaling pathway activated by mitochondrial dysfunction triggered by over-the-threshold levels of βAPP-derived Aβ accumulated intracellularly through cellular uptake of secreted Aβ as well as by retention of a fraction of beta-amyloid produced in the βAPP proteolytic pathway. (b) In every potential mechanism of βAPP-independent Aβ generation, translation initiates at the AUG normally encoding Met671 of βAPP and results in C100, i.e. N-terminal Met-containing C99, which is subsequently cleaved by gamma-secretase to produce Aβ (or Met-Aβ). (c) N-terminal Met of C100 is removed post- rather than co-translationally. Therefore a steady-state population of C100 and, possibly, of N-terminal Met-containing Aβ should occur within human neuronal cells with the activated βAPP-independent Aβ production pathway; their detection would provide irrefutable proof of operation of the pathway. (d) The Aβ (or Met-Aβ) output of every potential mechanism is retained intraneuronally. (e) Once activated, every potential βAPP-independent mechanism would, through generation of intraneuronally retained Aβ, sustain mitochondrial dysfunction and support the activity of the OMA1-DELE1-HRI signaling pathway, which, in turn, will promote, via elicitation of the ISR, the operation of the βAPP-independent Aβ production pathway. These self-perpetuating {βAPP-independent generation of intracellularly retained Aβ}/{mitochondrial dysfunction} mutual feedback cycles constitute the “Engine” that drives Alzheimer’s disease. The life- long accumulation of intraneuronal βAPP-derived Aβ to critical levels, sufficient to trigger mitochondrial dysfunction, plays the role of a starter motor in getting car engine moving in a self-sustainable manner. Only when the AD “Engine” is activated does the disease commence. In the New Paradigm, therefore, Alzheimer’s disorder is a “fast” disease that can be treated and cured at the symptomatic stages. The present article proposes conceptually novel research and therapeutic strategies and suggests that BACE activation (yes, activation!) could be a valid approach in AD therapy.
阿尔茨海默病是由淀粉样蛋白前体蛋白独立通路中产生的β -淀粉样蛋白驱动并保留在神经内:一种新的AD范式的研究和治疗策略
摘要:本文描述了阿尔茨海默病(AD)的一种新范式。在旧范式中,在AD的淀粉样蛋白级联假说(ACH)理论中形式化,在健康和疾病中,β淀粉样蛋白(Aβ)仅在淀粉样蛋白前体蛋白(βAPP)蛋白水解/分泌途径中产生。其中涉及两个βAPP裂解。首先,β -分泌酶(β -site APP cleicing Enzyme, BACE)在Met671和Asp672之间(根据βAPP770同工型编号)进行切割,生成βAPP的c端片段(C99,反映其氨基酸残基的数量),并形成Aβ的n端。随后,γ -分泌酶(γ -site βAPP切割酶)对C99进行第二次切割,形成Aβ的c端,完成其产生,并与其分泌一致。Aβ的过量产生导致其在生命早期就开始在细胞外积累。这引发了一系列分子和细胞事件,包括神经原纤维缠结的形成,从而导致神经变性。当神经退行性变的程度达到临界水平时,疾病的症状就会显现出来。在这种范式中,阿尔茨海默病是一种典型的“缓慢”疾病。ACH明确了治疗靶点,包括βAPP蛋白水解的关键事件以及分泌的细胞外Aβ。最终,一些候选的AD药物被开发出来,在动物模型系统中非常有效。其中,特别成功的是β -分泌酶抑制剂,它不仅可以防止阿尔茨海默病症状的出现,而且在动物模型中疾病症状出现后给药可以逆转症状。在这一点上,有充分的理由希望解决阿尔茨海默病的问题近在咫尺;然而,事实证明并非如此。旧范式和新范式都有一个共同的出发点,即β -淀粉样蛋白的过量产生是阿尔茨海默病的病因基础。新范式的其他概念与旧范式的概念明显不同。阿尔茨海默病新范式理论的形成,是对在动物研究中表现出色的候选阿尔茨海默病药物的大量人体临床试验结果的分析所必需的。它们都在人体试验中失败了,就像它们在动物试验中成功一样。或者是真的吗?尽管它们确实没有显示出任何功效,但在它们的设计和目的范围内,它们表现得很好。例如,一种BACE抑制剂verubecestat穿透AD患者的大脑,极大地抑制βAPP的切割,并强烈抑制细胞外a β水平。在动物实验中,它毫无疑问地成功地减轻了疾病的症状。为什么它在人体临床试验中失败了?这次失败,在ACH的范围内显然是无法解释的,似乎是一个很好的机会来应用夏洛克·福尔摩斯的中心格言:“……当你排除了不可能,剩下的,无论多么不可能,都一定是真相。”在讨论的案例中,在排除了“不可能”因素,包括ACH的因素,并假设阿尔茨海默病确实是由a β的过量产生引起的,这一观点得到了实验数据的有力支持,那么与AD候选药物的人体临床试验结果一致的“然而不可能”是如下的。1. 除了βAPP蛋白水解/分泌过程外,在人类阿尔茨海默病中,Aβ也通过βAPP非依赖性途径产生。该通路仅在AD患者中活跃。它在动物和健康人身上不起作用。2. β - app不依赖的a- β生成途径的输出在神经元内保留,正是这种神经元内的β -淀粉样蛋白导致并维持阿尔茨海默病。这些概念构成了AD新范式理论的核心。有几种机制能够实现上述目标。它们包括:rna依赖性βAPP mRNA扩增,这一过程涉及哺乳动物细胞中特定蛋白质的过量生产;人βAPP基因的内部转录起始;βAPP mRNA内的裂解;βAPP mRNA翻译的内部启动。从概念上讲,在本文的背景下,独立于βAPP产生Aβ的机制的性质并不重要;在每一种情况下,都应采用相同的治疗策略。所有与β app无关的Aβ生成的潜在机制都有几个共同的特征。 (a)在每种情况下,激活特定机制所需的关键成分的表达都是由OMA1-DELE1- HRI信号通路引发的综合应激反应(ISR)诱导的,而OMA1-DELE1- HRI信号通路是由线粒体功能障碍激活的,而线粒体功能障碍是由βAPP衍生的β通过细胞摄取分泌的β而在细胞内积累的超过阈值水平,以及βAPP蛋白水解途径中产生的β -淀粉样蛋白的一部分的保留所触发的。(b)在与βAPP无关的Aβ生成的所有潜在机制中,翻译始于通常编码βAPP的Met671的AUG,并导致C100,即n端含met的C99,随后被γ分泌酶裂解生成Aβ(或Met-Aβ)。(c) C100的n端Met是在翻译后而不是共翻译时被去除的。因此,C100和可能的n端含met的a β稳态群体应该出现在具有激活的β不依赖于app的a β生产途径的人类神经元细胞中;它们的检测将为该途径的运作提供无可辩驳的证据。(d)每种潜在机制的Aβ(或Met-Aβ)输出在神经内保留。(e)一旦被激活,每一种潜在的不依赖于β app的机制都会通过产生神经元内保留的Aβ来维持线粒体功能障碍,并支持OMA1-DELE1-HRI信号通路的活性,而OMA1-DELE1-HRI信号通路反过来又会通过ISR的激发,促进β app不依赖于Aβ产生通路的运作。这些自我延续的{β app不依赖于细胞内保留的Aβ}/{线粒体功能障碍}相互反馈循环构成了驱动阿尔茨海默病的“引擎”。神经元内β app衍生的a β的终身积累达到临界水平,足以触发线粒体功能障碍,在使汽车发动机以自我可持续的方式运动中起着起动马达的作用。只有当AD“引擎”被激活时,疾病才会开始。因此,在新范式中,阿尔茨海默病是一种“快速”的疾病,可以在症状阶段进行治疗和治愈。本文提出了概念新颖的研究和治疗策略,并建议BACE激活(是的,激活!)可能是阿尔茨海默病治疗的有效方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信