There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
Dysfunction of cell bioenergetics is a common feature of neurodegenerative diseases,
the most common of which is Alzheimer's disease (AD). Disrupted energy utilization
implicates mitochondria at its nexus. This review summarizes some of the evidence
that points to faulty mitochondrial function in AD and highlights past and current
therapeutic development efforts. Classical neuropathological hallmarks of disease
(β‐amyloid and τ) and sporadic AD risk genes ( APOE ) may trigger mitochondrial disturbance,
yet mitochondrial dysfunction may incite pathology. Preclinical and clinical efforts
have overwhelmingly centred on the amyloid pathway, but clinical trials have yet to
reveal clear‐cut benefits. AD therapies aimed at mitochondrial dysfunction are few
and concentrate on reversing oxidative stress and cell death pathways. Novel research
efforts aimed at boosting mitochondrial and bioenergetic function offer an alternative
treatment strategy. Enhancing cell bioenergetics in preclinical models may yield widespread
favourable effects that could benefit persons with AD. This article is part of a themed
section on Therapeutics for Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease: New Directions for Precision
Medicine. To view the other articles in this section visit http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.v176.18/issuetoc
Mitochondrial dysfunction is a prominent feature of Alzheimer's disease (AD) neurons. In this study, we explored the involvement of an abnormal mitochondrial dynamics by investigating the changes in the expression of mitochondrial fission and fusion proteins in AD brain and the potential cause and consequence of these changes in neuronal cells. We found that mitochondria were redistributed away from axons in the pyramidal neurons of AD brain. Immunoblot analysis revealed that levels of DLP1 (also referred to as Drp1), OPA1, Mfn1, and Mfn2 were significantly reduced whereas levels of Fis1 were significantly increased in AD. Despite their differential effects on mitochondrial morphology, manipulations of these mitochondrial fission and fusion proteins in neuronal cells to mimic their expressional changes in AD caused a similar abnormal mitochondrial distribution pattern, such that mitochondrial density was reduced in the cell periphery of M17 cells or neuronal process of primary neurons and correlated with reduced spine density in the neurite. Interestingly, oligomeric amyloid-beta-derived diffusible ligands (ADDLs) caused mitochondrial fragmentation and reduced mitochondrial density in neuronal processes. More importantly, ADDL-induced synaptic change (i.e., loss of dendritic spine and postsynaptic density protein 95 puncta) correlated with abnormal mitochondrial distribution. DLP1 overexpression, likely through repopulation of neuronal processes with mitochondria, prevented ADDL-induced synaptic loss, suggesting that abnormal mitochondrial dynamics plays an important role in ADDL-induced synaptic abnormalities. Based on these findings, we suggest that an altered balance in mitochondrial fission and fusion is likely an important mechanism leading to mitochondrial and neuronal dysfunction in AD brain.
Since the introduction of the first cholinesterase inhibitor (ChEI) in 1997, most clinicians and probably most patients would consider the cholinergic drugs, donepezil, galantamine and rivastigmine, to be the first line pharmacotherapy for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease.The drugs have slightly different pharmacological properties, but they all work by inhibiting the breakdown of acetylcholine, an important neurotransmitter associated with memory, by blocking the enzyme acetylcholinesterase. The most that these drugs could achieve is to modify the manifestations of Alzheimer's disease. Cochrane reviews of each ChEI for Alzheimer's disease have been completed (Birks 2005, Birks 2005b and Loy 2005). Despite the evidence from the clinical studies and the intervening clinical experience the debate on whether ChEIs are effective continues. To assess the effects of donepezil, galantamine and rivastigmine in people with mild, moderate or severe dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. The Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialized Register was searched using the terms 'donepezil', 'E2020' , 'Aricept' , galanthamin* galantamin* reminyl, rivastigmine, exelon, "ENA 713" and ENA-713 on 12 June 2005. This Register contains up-to-date records of all major health care databases and many ongoing trial databases. All unconfounded, blinded, randomized trials in which treatment with a ChEI was compared with placebo or another ChEI for patients with mild, moderate or severe dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. Data were extracted by one reviewer (JSB), pooled where appropriate and possible, and the pooled treatment effects, or the risks and benefits of treatment estimated. The results of 13 randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trials demonstrate that treatment for periods of 6 months and one year, with donepezil, galantamine or rivastigmine at the recommended dose for people with mild, moderate or severe dementia due to Alzheimer's disease produced improvements in cognitive function, on average -2.7 points (95%CI -3.0 to -2.3), in the midrange of the 70 point ADAS-Cog Scale. Study clinicians blind to other measures rated global clinical state more positively in treated patients. Benefits of treatment were also seen on measures of activities of daily living and behaviour. None of these treatment effects are large. There is nothing to suggest the effects are less for patients with severe dementia or mild dementia, although there is very little evidence for other than mild to moderate dementia.More patients leave ChEI treatment groups, approximately 29 %, on account of adverse events than leave the placebo groups (18%). There is evidence of more adverse events in total in the patients treated with a ChEI than with placebo. Although many types of adverse event were reported, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, were significantly more frequent in the ChEI groups than in placebo. There are four studies, all supported by one of the pharmaceutical companies, in which two ChEIs were compared, two studies of donepezil compared with galantamine, and two of donepezil compared with rivastigmine. In three studies the patients were not blinded to treatment, only the fourth, DON vs RIV/Bullock is double blind. Two of the studies provide little evidence, they are of 12 weeks duration, which is barely long enough to complete the drug titration. There is no evidence from DON vs GAL/Wilcock of a treatment difference between donepezil and galantamine at 52 weeks for cognition, activities of daily living, the numbers who leave the trial before the end of treatment, the number who suffer any adverse event, or any specific adverse event. There is no evidence from DON vs RIV/Bullock of a difference between donepezil and rivastigmine for cognitive function, activities of daily living and behavioural disturbance at two years. Fewer patients suffer adverse events on donepezil than rivastigmine. The three cholinesterase inhibitors are efficacious for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. It is not possible to identify those who will respond to treatment prior to treatment. There is no evidence that treatment with a ChEI is not cost effective. Despite the slight variations in the mode of action of the three cholinesterase inhibitors there is no evidence of any differences between them with respect to efficacy. There appears to be less adverse effects associated with donepezil compared with rivastigmine. It may be that galantamine and rivastigmine match donepezil in tolerability if a careful and gradual titration routine over more than three months is used. Titration with donepezil is more straightforward and the lower dose may be worth consideration.
Exercise induces beneficial responses in the brain, which is accompanied by an increase in BDNF, a trophic factor associated with cognitive improvement and the alleviation of depression and anxiety. However, the exact mechanisms whereby physical exercise produces an induction in brain Bdnf gene expression are not well understood. While pharmacological doses of HDAC inhibitors exert positive effects on Bdnf gene transcription, the inhibitors represent small molecules that do not occur in vivo. Here, we report that an endogenous molecule released after exercise is capable of inducing key promoters of the Mus musculus Bdnf gene. The metabolite β-hydroxybutyrate, which increases after prolonged exercise, induces the activities of Bdnf promoters, particularly promoter I, which is activity-dependent. We have discovered that the action of β-hydroxybutyrate is specifically upon HDAC2 and HDAC3, which act upon selective Bdnf promoters. Moreover, the effects upon hippocampal Bdnf expression were observed after direct ventricular application of β-hydroxybutyrate. Electrophysiological measurements indicate that β-hydroxybutyrate causes an increase in neurotransmitter release, which is dependent upon the TrkB receptor. These results reveal an endogenous mechanism to explain how physical exercise leads to the induction of BDNF. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.15092.001
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.