Search

Abstract The molecular chaperone Clusterin (CLU) impacts the amyloid pathway in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) but its role in tau pathology is unknown. We observed CLU co-localization with tau aggregates in AD and primary tauopathies and CLU levels were upregulated in response to tau accumulation. To further elucidate the effect of CLU on tau pathology, we utilized a gene delivery approach in CLU knock-out (CLU KO) mice to drive expression of tau bearing the P301L mutation. We found that loss of CLU was associated with exacerbated tau pathology and anxiety-like behaviors in our mouse model of tauopathy. Additionally, we found that CLU dramatically inhibited tau fibrilization using an in vitro assay. Together, these results demonstrate that CLU plays a major role in both amyloid and tau pathologies in AD.

Abstract Background Accumulation of amyloid-β (Aβ) peptide in the brain is a pathological hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The clusterin (CLU) gene confers a risk for AD and CLU is highly upregulated in AD patients, with the common non-coding, protective CLU variants associated with increased expression. Although there is strong evidence implicating CLU in amyloid metabolism, the exact mechanism underlying the CLU involvement in AD is not fully understood or whether physiologic alterations of CLU levels in the brain would be protective. Results We used a gene delivery approach to overexpress CLU in astrocytes, the major source of CLU expression in the brain. We found that CLU overexpression resulted in a significant reduction of total and fibrillar amyloid in both cortex and hippocampus in the APP/PS1 mouse model of AD amyloidosis. CLU overexpression also ameliorated amyloid-associated neurotoxicity and gliosis. To complement these overexpression studies, we also analyzed the effects of haploinsufficiency of Clu using heterozygous (Clu +/− ) mice and control littermates in the APP/PS1 model. CLU reduction led to a substantial increase in the amyloid plaque load in both cortex and hippocampus in APP/PS1; Clu +/− mice compared to wild-type (APP/PS1; Clu +/+ ) littermate controls, with a concomitant increase in neuritic dystrophy and gliosis. Conclusions Thus, both physiologic ~ 30% overexpression or ~ 50% reduction in CLU have substantial impacts on amyloid load and associated pathologies. Our results demonstrate that CLU plays a major role in Aβ accumulation in the brain and suggest that efforts aimed at CLU upregulation via pharmacological or gene delivery approaches offer a promising therapeutic strategy to regulate amyloid pathology.

Abstract Background Self-assembly of the amyloid-β (Aβ) peptide into aggregates, from small oligomers to amyloid fibrils, is fundamentally linked with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However, it is clear that not all forms of Aβ are equally harmful and that linking a specific aggregate to toxicity also depends on the assays and model systems used (Haass et al., J Biol. Chem 269:17741–17748, 1994; Borchelt et al., Neuron 17:1005–1013, 1996). Though a central postulate of the amyloid cascade hypothesis, there remain many gaps in our understanding regarding the links between Aβ deposition and neurodegeneration. Methods In this study, we examined familial mutations of Aβ that increase aggregation and oligomerization, E22G and ΔE22, and induce cerebral amyloid angiopathy, E22Q and D23N. We also investigated synthetic mutations that stabilize dimerization, S26C, and a phospho-mimetic, S8E, and non-phospho-mimetic, S8A. To that end, we utilized BRI2-Aβ fusion technology and rAAV2/1-based somatic brain transgenesis in mice to selectively express individual mutant Aβ species in vivo. In parallel, we generated PhiC31-based transgenic Drosophila melanogaster expressing wild-type (WT) and Aβ40 and Aβ42 mutants, fused to the Argos signal peptide to assess the extent of Aβ42-induced toxicity as well as to interrogate the combined effect of different Aβ40 and Aβ42 species. Results When expressed in the mouse brain for 6 months, Aβ42 E22G, Aβ42 E22Q/D23N, and Aβ42WT formed amyloid aggregates consisting of some diffuse material as well as cored plaques, whereas other mutants formed predominantly diffuse amyloid deposits. Moreover, while Aβ40WT showed no distinctive phenotype, Aβ40 E22G and E22Q/D23N formed unique aggregates that accumulated in mouse brains. This is the first evidence that mutant Aβ40 overexpression leads to deposition under certain conditions. Interestingly, we found that mutant Aβ42 E22G, E22Q, and S26C, but not Aβ40, were toxic to the eye of Drosophila. In contrast, flies expressing a copy of Aβ40 (WT or mutants), in addition to Aβ42WT, showed improved phenotypes, suggesting possible protective qualities for Aβ40. Conclusions These studies suggest that while some Aβ40 mutants form unique amyloid aggregates in mouse brains, they do not exacerbate Aβ42 toxicity in Drosophila, which highlights the significance of using different systems for a better understanding of AD pathogenicity and more accurate screening for new potential therapies.