Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Neural Plasticity
Volume 2017, Article ID 3270725, 12 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/3270725
Research Article

Pathological Role of Peptidyl-Prolyl Isomerase Pin1 in the Disruption of Synaptic Plasticity in Alzheimer’s Disease

1Jiangsu Key Laboratory for Functional Substance of Chinese Medicine, Department of Biopharmaceutics and Food Science, School of Pharmacy, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing 210023, China
2Department of Neurology, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19102, USA
3Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
4Sbarro Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Center for Biotechnology, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA
5Department of Molecular Science and Nanosystems, Ca’ Foscari Università di Venezia, Via Torino 155, 30172 Venezia-Mestre, Italy
6Department of Medicinal Chemistry, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 21009, China
7Department of Physiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA

Correspondence should be addressed to Carol F. Lippa; ude.demlexerd@appil.lorac and Yuesong Gong; nc.ude.mcujn@gnogy

Received 28 October 2016; Accepted 12 December 2016; Published 26 March 2017

Academic Editor: Jason Huang

Copyright © 2017 Lingyan Xu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. C. Haass and D. J. Selkoe, “Soluble protein oligomers in neurodegeneration: lessons from the Alzheimer's amyloid β-peptide,” Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 101–112, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. H. Braak and E. Braak, “Diagnostic criteria for neuropathologic assessment of Alzheimer's disease,” Neurobiology of Aging, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. S85–S88, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. E. Grober, D. Dickson, M. J. Sliwinski et al., “Memory and mental status correlates of modified Braak staging,” Neurobiology of Aging, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 573–579, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. T. E. Golde, “Alzheimer disease therapy: can the amyloid cascade be halted?” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 111, no. 1, pp. 11–18, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. D. J. Selkoe, “Alzheimer's disease is a synaptic failure,” Science, vol. 298, no. 5594, pp. 789–791, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. D. J. Selkoe, “Preventing alzheimer's disease,” Science, vol. 337, no. 6101, pp. 1488–1492, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. F. G. De Felice, P. T. Velasco, M. P. Lambert et al., “Aβ oligomers induce neuronal oxidative stress through an N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor-dependent mechanism that is blocked by the Alzheimer drug memantine,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 282, no. 15, pp. 11590–11601, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. R. Sultana, D. Boyd-Kimball, H. F. Poon et al., “Oxidative modification and down-regulation of Pin1 in Alzheimer's disease hippocampus: a redox proteomics analysis,” Neurobiology of Aging, vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 918–925, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. E. S. Yeh and A. R. Means, “PIN1, the cell cycle and cancer,” Nature Reviews Cancer, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 381–388, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. P.-J. Lu, G. Wulf, X. Z. Zhou, P. Davies, and K. P. Lu, “The prolyl isomerase Pin1 restores the function of Alzheimer-associated phosphorylated tau protein,” Nature, vol. 399, no. 6738, pp. 784–788, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. L. Pastorino, A. Sun, P. J. Lu et al., “The prolyl isomerase Pin1 regulates amyloid precursor protein processing and amyloid-beta production,” Nature, vol. 440, pp. 528–534, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  12. A. Maruszak, K. Safranow, K. Gustaw et al., “PIN1 gene variants in Alzheimer's disease,” BMC Medical Genetics, vol. 10, article 115, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. K. Nakamura, I. Kosugi, D. Y. Lee et al., “Prolyl isomerase pin1 regulates neuronal differentiation via β-catenin,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 32, no. 15, pp. 2966–2978, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. Y.-C. Liou, A. Sun, A. Ryo et al., “Role of the prolyl isomerase Pin1 in protecting against age-dependent neurodegeneration,” Nature, vol. 424, no. 6948, pp. 556–561, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. T. Kawarabayashi, M. Shoji, L. H. Younkin et al., “Dimeric amyloid β protein rapidly accumulates in lipid rafts followed by apolipoprotein E and phosphorylated tau accumulation in the Tg2576 mouse model of Alzheimer's disease,” Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 24, no. 15, pp. 3801–3809, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. R. M. Koffie, M. Meyer-Luehmann, T. Hashimoto et al., “Oligomeric amyloid β associates with postsynaptic densities and correlates with excitatory synapse loss near senile plaques,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 106, no. 10, pp. 4012–4017, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. M. P. Coba, A. J. Pocklington, M. O. Collins et al., “Neurotransmitters drive combinatorial multistate postsynaptic density networks,” Science Signaling, vol. 2, no. 68, p. ra19, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. J. C. Trinidad, C. G. Specht, A. Thalhammer, R. Schoepfer, and A. L. Burlingame, “Comprehensive identification of phosphorylation sites in postsynaptic density preparations,” Molecular and Cellular Proteomics, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 914–922, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. S. Okabe, H.-D. Kim, A. Miwa, T. Kuriu, and H. Okado, “Continual remodeling of postsynaptic density and its regulation by synaptic activity,” Nature Neuroscience, vol. 2, no. 9, pp. 804–811, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. G. Wulf, G. Finn, F. Suizu, and K. P. Lu, “Phosphorylation-specific prolyl isomerization: is there an underlying theme?” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 435–441, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. M. D. Ehlers, “Activity level controls postsynaptic composition and signaling via the ubiquitin-proteasome system,” Nature Neuroscience, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 231–242, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. D. Siepe and S. Jentsch, “Prolyl isomerase Pin1 acts as a switch to control the degree of substrate ubiquitylation,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 11, no. 8, pp. 967–972, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. T. M. Boeckers, “The postsynaptic density,” Cell and Tissue Research, vol. 326, no. 2, pp. 409–422, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. Á. Bayés, L. N. Van De Lagemaat, M. O. Collins et al., “Characterization of the proteome, diseases and evolution of the human postsynaptic density,” Nature Neuroscience, vol. 14, pp. 19–21, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. C. M. Durand, C. Betancur, T. M. Boeckers et al., “Mutations in the gene encoding the synaptic scaffolding protein SHANK3 are associated with autism spectrum disorders,” Nature Genetics, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 25–27, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. M. A. Bangash, J. M. Park, T. Melnikova et al., “Enhanced polyubiquitination of shank3 and NMDA receptor in a mouse model of autism,” Cell, vol. 145, no. 5, pp. 758–772, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. J. Peça, C. Feliciano, J. T. Ting et al., “Shank3 mutant mice display autistic-like behaviours and striatal dysfunction,” Nature, vol. 472, no. 7344, pp. 437–442, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. Y. Gong, C. F. Lippa, J. Zhu, Q. Lin, and A. L. Rosso, “Disruption of glutamate receptors at Shank-postsynaptic platform in Alzheimer's disease,” Brain Research, vol. 1292, pp. 191–198, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. E. Pham, L. Crews, K. Ubhi et al., “Progressive accumulation of amyloid-β oligomers in Alzheimer's disease and in amyloid precursor protein transgenic mice is accompanied by selective alterations in synaptic scaffold proteins,” FEBS Journal, vol. 277, no. 14, pp. 3051–3067, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. P. R. Westmark, C. J. Westmark, S. Wang et al., “Pin1 and PKMζ sequentially control dendritic protein synthesis,” Science Signaling, vol. 3, no. 112, article ra18, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. K.-O. Cho, C. A. Hunt, and M. B. Kennedy, “The rat brain postsynaptic density fraction contains a homolog of the drosophila discs-large tumor suppressor protein,” Neuron, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 929–942, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. D. E. Harrison, R. Strong, Z. D. Sharp et al., “Rapamycin fed late in life extends lifespan in genetically heterogeneous mice,” Nature, vol. 460, no. 7253, pp. 392–395, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. T. Uchida, M. Takamiya, M. Takahashi et al., “Pin1 and Par14 peptidyl prolyl isomerase inhibitors block cell proliferation,” Chemistry and Biology, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 15–24, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. M. Moretto-Zita, H. Jin, Z. Shen, T. Zhao, S. P. Briggs, and Y. Xu, “Phosphorylation stabilizes Nanog by promoting its interaction with Pin1,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 107, no. 30, pp. 13312–13317, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. T. Bresler, M. Shapira, T. Boeckers et al., “Postsynaptic density assembly is fundamentally different from presynaptic active zone assembly,” Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 1507–1520, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. F. X. Soriano, S. Papadia, F. Hofmann, N. R. Hardingham, H. Bading, and G. E. Hardingham, “Preconditioning doses of NMDA promote neuroprotection by enhancing neuronal excitability,” Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 26, no. 17, pp. 4509–4518, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. H.-S. V. Chen and S. A. Lipton, “Mechanism of memantine block of NMDA-activated channels in rat retinal ganglion cells: uncompetitive antagonism,” Journal of Physiology, vol. 499, no. 1, pp. 27–46, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. S. A. Lipton, “Paradigm shift in neuroprotection by NMDA receptor blockade: memantine and beyond,” Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 160–170, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. P. Xia, H.-S. V. Chen, D. Zhang, and S. A. Lipton, “Memantine preferentially blocks extrasynaptic over synaptic NMDA receptor currents in hippocampal autapses,” Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 30, no. 33, pp. 11246–11250, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. G. E. Hardingham and H. Bading, “Synaptic versus extrasynaptic NMDA receptor signalling: implications for neurodegenerative disorders,” Nature Reviews Neuroscience, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 682–696, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. G. Roussignol, F. Ango, S. Romorini et al., “Shank expression is sufficient to induce functional dendritic spine synapses in aspiny neurons,” Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 25, no. 14, pp. 3560–3570, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. K. P. Lu and X. Z. Zhou, “The prolyl isomerase PIN1: a pivotal new twist in phosphorylation signalling and disease,” Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, vol. 8, no. 11, pp. 904–916, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. D. A. Butterfield, H. M. Abdul, W. Opii et al., “Pin1 in Alzheimer's disease,” Journal of Neurochemistry, vol. 98, no. 6, pp. 1697–1706, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. G. Nyitrai, K. A. Kékesi, and G. Juhász, “Extracellular level of GABA and Glu: in vivo microdialysis-HPLC measurements,” Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 6, no. 10, pp. 935–940, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. M. A. Herman and C. E. Jahr, “Extracellular glutamate concentration in hippocampal slice,” Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 27, no. 36, pp. 9736–9741, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. M. Colledge, E. M. Snyder, R. A. Crozier et al., “Ubiquitination regulates PSD-95 degradation and AMPA receptor surface expression,” Neuron, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 595–607, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. Y. Gong and C. F. Lippa, “Disruption of the postsynaptic density in Alzheimer's disease and other neurodegenerative dementias,” American Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and other Dementias, vol. 25, no. 7, pp. 547–555, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. H. Jaffe, L. Vinade, and A. Dosemeci, “Identification of novel phosphorylation sites on postsynaptic density proteins,” Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, vol. 321, no. 1, pp. 210–218, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. S. Oh, H. S. Hong, E. Hwang et al., “Amyloid peptide attenuates the proteasome activity in neuronal cells,” Mechanisms of Ageing and Development, vol. 126, no. 12, pp. 1292–1299, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. Y. Gong, L. Chang, K. L. Viola et al., “Alzheimer's disease-affected brain: presence of oligomeric Aβ ligands (ADDLs) suggests a molecular basis for reversible memory loss,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 100, no. 18, pp. 10417–10422, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. P. N. Lacor, M. C. Buniel, P. W. Furlow et al., “Aβ oligomer-induced aberrations in synapse composition, shape, and density provide a molecular basis for loss of connectivity in Alzheimer's disease,” Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 796–807, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. T. Liu, Y. Huang, R. I. Likhotvorik, L. Keshvara, and D. G. Hoyt, “Protein never in mitosis gene A interacting-1 (PIN1) regulates degradation of inducible nitric oxide synthase in endothelial cells,” American Journal of Physiology—Cell Physiology, vol. 295, no. 3, pp. C819–C827, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. P. R. Dodd, J. A. Hardy, A. E. Oakley, J. A. Edwardson, E. K. Perry, and J.-P. Delaunoy, “A rapid method for preparing synaptosomes: comparison, with alternative procedures,” Brain Research, vol. 226, no. 1-2, pp. 107–118, 1981. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. T. Suzuki, J. Zhang, S. Miyazawa, Q. Liu, M. R. Farzan, and W.-D. Yao, “Association of membrane rafts and postsynaptic density: proteomics, biochemical, and ultrastructural analyses,” Journal of Neurochemistry, vol. 119, no. 1, pp. 64–77, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. M. P. Lambert, A. K. Barlow, B. A. Chromy et al., “Diffusible, nonfibrillar ligands derived from Aβ1–42 are potent central nervous system neurotoxins,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 95, no. 11, pp. 6448–6453, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. R. Kayed, E. Head, J. L. Thompson et al., “Common structure of soluble amyloid oligomers implies common mechanism of pathogenesis,” Science, vol. 300, no. 5618, pp. 486–489, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus