Neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory effects of linoleic acid in models of parkinson’s disease: the implication of lipid droplets and lipophagy

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is the second most prevalent neurodegenerative disease after Alzheimer’s disease. The principal pathological feature of PD is the progressive loss of dopaminergic neurons in the ventral midbrain. This pathology involves several cellular alterations: oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, loss of proteostasis, and autophagy impairment. Moreover, in recent years, lipid metabolism alterations have become relevant in PD pathogeny. The modification of lipid metabolism has become a possible way to treat the disease. Because of this, we analyzed the effect and possible mechanism of action of linoleic acid (LA) on an SH-SY5Y PD cell line model and a PD mouse model, both induced by 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA) treatment. The results show that LA acts as a potent neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory agent in these PD models. We also observed that LA stimulates the biogenesis of lipid droplets and improves the autophagy/lipophagy flux, which resulted in an antioxidant effect in the in vitro PD model. In summary, we confirmed the neuroprotective effect of LA in vitro and in vivo against PD. We also obtained some clues about the novel neuroprotective mechanism of LA against PD through the regulation of lipid droplet dynamics.This research was supported by the Health Institute “Carlos III”-CIBERNED (CB06/05/0041 and 2015/03), “MINECO” (SAF2014-52940-R, SAF2017-85199-P and SAF 2016-78666-R), “Comunidadde Madrid” (PEJ-2019-AI/SAL-12877), “Erasmus+ funding programme”, UCM-Santander (PR44/21-29931 to J.A.M.-G.), and partially supported by “Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional” (FEDER) from the European Union

Mitochondrial impairment increases FL-PINK1 levels by calcium-dependent gene expression.

Mutations of the PTEN-induced kinase 1 (PINK1) gene are a cause of autosomal recessive Parkinson's disease (PD). This gene encodes a mitochondrial serine/threonine kinase, which is partly localized to mitochondria, and has been shown to play a role in protecting neuronal cells from oxidative stress and cell death, perhaps related to its role in mitochondrial dynamics and mitophagy. In this study, we report that increased mitochondrial PINK1 levels observed in human neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells after carbonyl cyanide m-chlorophelyhydrazone (CCCP) treatment were due to de novo protein synthesis, and not just increased stabilization of full length PINK1 (FL-PINK1). PINK1 mRNA levels were significantly increased by 4-fold after 24h. FL-PINK1 protein levels at this time point were significantly higher than vehicle-treated, or cells treated with CCCP for 3h, despite mitochondrial content being decreased by 29%. We have also shown that CCCP dissipated the mitochondrial membrane potential (Δψm) and induced entry of extracellular calcium through L/N-type calcium channels. The calcium chelating agent BAPTA-AM impaired the CCCP-induced PINK1 mRNA and protein expression. Furthermore, CCCP treatment activated the transcription factor c-Fos in a calcium-dependent manner. These data indicate that PINK1 expression is significantly increased upon CCCP-induced mitophagy in a calcium-dependent manner. This increase in expression continues after peak Parkin mitochondrial translocation, suggesting a role for PINK1 in mitophagy that is downstream of ubiquitination of mitochondrial substrates. This sensitivity to intracellular calcium levels supports the hypothesis that PINK1 may also play a role in cellular calcium homeostasis and neuroprotection

Changes in Liver Lipidomic Profile in G2019S- LRRK2 Mouse Model of Parkinson's Disease

15 páginas, 4 figurasThe identification of Parkinson's disease (PD) biomarkers has become a main goal for the diagnosis of this neurodegenerative disorder. PD has not only been intrinsically related to neurological problems, but also to a series of alterations in peripheral metabolism. The purpose of this study was to identify metabolic changes in the liver in mouse models of PD with the scope of finding new peripheral biomarkers for PD diagnosis. To achieve this goal, we used mass spectrometry technology to determine the complete metabolomic profile of liver and striatal tissue samples from WT mice, 6-hydroxydopamine-treated mice (idiopathic model) and mice affected by the G2019S-LRRK2 mutation in LRRK2/PARK8 gene (genetic model). This analysis revealed that the metabolism of carbohydrates, nucleotides and nucleosides was similarly altered in the liver from the two PD mouse models. However, long-chain fatty acids, phosphatidylcholine and other related lipid metabolites were only altered in hepatocytes from G2019S-LRRK2 mice. In summary, these results reveal specific differences, mainly in lipid metabolism, between idiopathic and genetic PD models in peripheral tissues and open up new possibilities to better understand the etiology of this neurological disorder.This research was supported by “Instituto de Salud Carlos III”, “Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias” (PI15/0034), “CIBERNED-ISCIII” (CB06/05/0041 and 2015/03), and partially supported by “European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)” from the European Union. J.M.B.-S.P. is funded by “Ramon y Cajal Program” (RYC-2018-025099-I) and supported by Spain’s Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (PID2019-108827RA-I00). Y.C.N. and L.M.G. are funded by Community of Madrid (CT5/21/PEJ-2020-TL/BMD-17685 and CT36/22-41-UCM-INV respectively). S.M.S.Y.-D. was supported by CIBERNED-ISCIII. P.M.-C. is funded by the MINECO Spanish Ministry (FPI grant, PRE2020-092668). M.N.-S. was funded by “Ramon y Cajal Program” (RYC-2016-20883). E.U.-C. and S.C.-C. were supported by an FPU predoctoral fellowship (FPU16/00684) and FPU19/04435), respectively, from “Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte”. M.P-B was funded by a University of Extremadura fellowship. E.A-C was supported by a Grant (IB18048) from Junta de Extremadura, Spain. J.M.F. received research support from the “Instituto de Salud Carlos III”; “Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias” (PI15/0034) and CIBERNED-ISCIII (CB06/05/0041 and 2015/03). A.P.-C. was supported by MINECO (SAF2014-52940-R and SAF2017-85199-P). J.P.-T. received funding from CIBERNED-ISCIII (CB06/05/1123 and 2015/03). G.K. is supported by the Ligue contre le Cancer (équipe labellisée); Agence National de la Recherche (ANR)—Projets blancs; ANR under the frame of E-Rare-2, the ERANet for Research on Rare Diseases; AMMICa US/CNRS UMS3655; Association pour la recherche sur le cancer (ARC); Association “Le Cancer du Sein, Parlons-en!”; Cancéropôle Ile de-France; Chancelerie des universités de Paris (Legs Poix), Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale (FRM); a donation by Elior; European Research Area Network on Cardiovascular Diseases (ERA-CVD, MINOTAUR); Gustave Roussy Odyssea, the European Union Horizon 2020 Project Oncobiome; Fondation Carrefour; High-end Foreign Expert Program in China (GDW20171100085), Institut National du Cancer (INCa); Inserm (HTE); Institut Universitaire de France; LeDucq Foundation; the LabEx Immuno-Oncology (ANR-18-IDEX-0001); the RHU Torino Lumière; the Seerave Foundation; the SIRIC Stratified Oncology Cell DNA Repair and Tumor Immune Elimination (SOCRATE); and the SIRIC Cancer Research and Personalized Medicine (CARPEM).Peer reviewe

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field