Transthyretin Protects against A-Beta Peptide Toxicity by Proteolytic Cleavage of the Peptide: A Mechanism Sensitive to the Kunitz Protease Inhibitor

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by the deposition of amyloid β-peptide (A-Beta) in the brain. Transthyretin (TTR) is a tetrameric protein of about 55 kDa mainly produced in the liver and choroid plexus of the brain. The known physiological functions of TTR are the transport of thyroid hormone T4 and retinol, through binding to the retinol binding protein. TTR has also been established as a cryptic protease able to cleave ApoA-I in vitro. It has been described that TTR is involved in preventing A-Beta fibrilization, both by inhibiting and disrupting A-Beta fibrils, with consequent abrogation of toxicity. We further characterized the nature of the TTR/A-Beta interaction and found that TTR, both recombinant or isolated from human sera, was able to proteolytically process A-Beta, cleaving the peptide after aminoacid residues 1, 2, 3, 10, 13, 14,16, 19 and 27, as determined by mass spectrometry, and reversed phase chromatography followed by N-terminal sequencing. A-Beta peptides (1–14) and (15–42) showed lower amyloidogenic potential than the full length counterpart, as assessed by thioflavin binding assay and ultrastructural analysis by transmission electron microscopy. A-Beta cleavage by TTR was inhibited in the presence of an αAPP peptide containing the Kunitz Protease Inhibitor (KPI) domain but not in the presence of the secreted αAPP derived from the APP isoform 695 without the KPI domain. TTR was also able to degrade aggregated forms of A-Beta peptide. Our results confirmed TTR as a protective molecule in AD, and prompted A-Beta proteolysis by TTR as a protective mechanism in this disease. TTR may prove to be a useful therapeutic agent for preventing or retarding the cerebral amyloid plaque formation implicated in AD pathology

Alzheimer disease models and human neuropathology: similarities and differences

Animal models aim to replicate the symptoms, the lesions or the cause(s) of Alzheimer disease. Numerous mouse transgenic lines have now succeeded in partially reproducing its lesions: the extracellular deposits of Aβ peptide and the intracellular accumulation of tau protein. Mutated human APP transgenes result in the deposition of Aβ peptide, similar but not identical to the Aβ peptide of human senile plaque. Amyloid angiopathy is common. Besides the deposition of Aβ, axon dystrophy and alteration of dendrites have been observed. All of the mutations cause an increase in Aβ 42 levels, except for the Arctic mutation, which alters the Aβ sequence itself. Overexpressing wild-type APP alone (as in the murine models of human trisomy 21) causes no Aβ deposition in most mouse lines. Doubly (APP × mutated PS1) transgenic mice develop the lesions earlier. Transgenic mice in which BACE1 has been knocked out or overexpressed have been produced, as well as lines with altered expression of neprilysin, the main degrading enzyme of Aβ. The APP transgenic mice have raised new questions concerning the mechanisms of neuronal loss, the accumulation of Aβ in the cell body of the neurons, inflammation and gliosis, and the dendritic alterations. They have allowed some insight to be gained into the kinetics of the changes. The connection between the symptoms, the lesions and the increase in Aβ oligomers has been found to be difficult to unravel. Neurofibrillary tangles are only found in mouse lines that overexpress mutated tau or human tau on a murine tau −/− background. A triply transgenic model (mutated APP, PS1 and tau) recapitulates the alterations seen in AD but its physiological relevance may be discussed. A number of modulators of Aβ or of tau accumulation have been tested. A transgenic model may be analyzed at three levels at least (symptoms, lesions, cause of the disease), and a reading key is proposed to summarize this analysis

Effect of company size on potential for REACH compliance and selection of safer chemicals

REACH represents a global paradigm shift in chemical regulation, and it has introduced a new, complex regulatory process to which chemical producers and users throughout supply chains must adapt. This paper presents results of survey research to illustrate whether and how the business members of a large Scandinavian trade organization understand and comply with REACH. It also explores how these businesses obtain information about the chemicals they use in their products, and whether they feel that the information they have is sufficient to meet their needs. In addition, the paper describes how business size affects these issues. The survey results show that, at the time of this study, many small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and a number of larger firms were unaware of REACH. Survey results consistently showed that the size of a company is an important factor in both understanding of and compliance with REACH, with respondents from large firms having a better grasp of REACH and its implications than smaller companies. An effective implementation of REACH will require, at the most basic level, more attention to educating EU companies, especially smaller ones, on how and why REACH applies to them. Survey respondents who were aware of REACH and its applicability to their firms also reported the types of support they needed in order to better understand and comply with the regulation, with nearly 40% of all respondents expressing a need for help with data systems or tools to manage REACH requirements and communicate REACH requirements to suppliers and customers. Many companies reported needing more information from their suppliers on chemical composition and related health impacts of materials and products. Ensuring that this information is readily available throughout supply chains is essential to reducing the negative impacts of chemicals and products on human health and the environment

Breast cancer risk and serum levels of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances: a case-control study nested in the California Teachers Study

Abstract Background Per- and poly- fluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) are a large family of synthetic chemicals, some of which are mammary toxicants and endocrine disruptors. Their potential as breast carcinogens is unclear. Our objective was to evaluate the risk of breast cancer associated with serum PFAS concentrations in a nested case-control study within the California Teachers Study. Methods Participants were 902 women with invasive breast cancer (cases) and 858 with no such diagnosis (controls) who provided 10 mL of blood and were interviewed during 2011–2015, an average of 35 months after case diagnosis. PFASs were measured using automated online SPE-HPLC-MS/MS methods. Statistical analyses were restricted to six PFASs with detection frequencies ≥ 95%: PFOA (Perfluorooctanoic acid), PFNA (Perfluorononanoic acid), PFUnDA (Perfluoroundecanoic acid), PFHxS (Perfluorohexane sulfonic acid), PFOS (Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid), and MeFOSAA (2-(N-Methyl-perfluorooctane sulfonamido) acetic acid. Unconditional logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (ORs), estimating the breast cancer risk associated with each PFAS. Results For all cases of invasive breast cancer, none of the adjusted ORs were statistically significant but marginally significant ORs < 1.0 were observed for PFUnDA and PFHxS (p-trend = 0.08). Adjusted ORs < 1.0 for PFUnDA and PFHxS were statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) among the 107 cases with hormone-negative tumors but not the 743 with hormone-positive tumors. Conclusion Overall, these findings do not provide evidence that serum PFAS levels measured after diagnosis are related to breast cancer risk. The few inverse associations found may be due to chance or may be artifacts of study design. Future studies should incorporate information about genetic susceptibility, endogenous estrogen levels, and measurements of PFASs prior to diagnosis and treatment