Silencing microRNA-134 produces neuroprotective and prolonged seizure-suppressive effects

Temporal lobe epilepsy is a common, chronic neurological disorder characterized by recurrent spontaneous seizures. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small, noncoding RNAs that regulate post-transcriptional expression of protein-coding mRNAs, which may have key roles in the pathogenesis of neurological disorders. In experimental models of prolonged, injurious seizures (status epilepticus) and in human epilepsy, we found upregulation of miR-134, a brain-specific, activity-regulated miRNA that has been implicated in the control of dendritic spine morphology. Silencing of miR-134 expression in vivo using antagomirs reduced hippocampal CA3 pyramidal neuron dendrite spine density by 21% and rendered mice refractory to seizures and hippocampal injury caused by status epilepticus. Depletion of miR-134 after status epilepticus in mice reduced the later occurrence of spontaneous seizures by over 90% and mitigated the attendant pathological features of temporal lobe epilepsy. Thus, silencing miR-134 exerts prolonged seizure-suppressant and neuroprotective actions; determining whether these are anticonvulsant effects or are truly antiepileptogenic effects requires additional experimentation

The role of the complement system in traumatic brain injury: a review

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is an important cause of disability and mortality in the western world. While the initial injury sustained results in damage, it is the subsequent secondary cascade that is thought to be the significant determinant of subsequent outcomes. The changes associated with the secondary injury do not become irreversible until some time after the start of the cascade. This may present a window of opportunity for therapeutic interventions aiming to improve outcomes subsequent to TBI. A prominent contributor to the secondary injury is a multifaceted inflammatory reaction. The complement system plays a notable role in this inflammatory reaction; however, it has often been overlooked in the context of TBI secondary injury. The complement system has homeostatic functions in the uninjured central nervous system (CNS), playing a part in neurodevelopment as well as having protective functions in the fully developed CNS, including protection from infection and inflammation. In the context of CNS injury, it can have a number of deleterious effects, evidence for which primarily comes not only from animal models but also, to a lesser extent, from human post-mortem studies. In stark contrast to this, complement may also promote neurogenesis and plasticity subsequent to CNS injury. This review aims to explore the role of the complement system in TBI secondary injury, by examining evidence from both clinical and animal studies. We examine whether specific complement activation pathways play more prominent roles in TBI than others. We also explore the potential role of complement in post-TBI neuroprotection and CNS repair/regeneration. Finally, we highlight the therapeutic potential of targeting the complement system in the context of TBI and point out certain areas on which future research is needed

Neuroprotection by adenosine in the brain: From A1 receptor activation to A2A receptor blockade

Adenosine is a neuromodulator that operates via the most abundant inhibitory adenosine A1 receptors (A1Rs) and the less abundant, but widespread, facilitatory A2ARs. It is commonly assumed that A1Rs play a key role in neuroprotection since they decrease glutamate release and hyperpolarize neurons. In fact, A1R activation at the onset of neuronal injury attenuates brain damage, whereas its blockade exacerbates damage in adult animals. However, there is a down-regulation of central A1Rs in chronic noxious situations. In contrast, A2ARs are up-regulated in noxious brain conditions and their blockade confers robust brain neuroprotection in adult animals. The brain neuroprotective effect of A2AR antagonists is maintained in chronic noxious brain conditions without observable peripheral effects, thus justifying the interest of A2AR antagonists as novel protective agents in neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease, ischemic brain damage and epilepsy. The greater interest of A2AR blockade compared to A1R activation does not mean that A1R activation is irrelevant for a neuroprotective strategy. In fact, it is proposed that coupling A2AR antagonists with strategies aimed at bursting the levels of extracellular adenosine (by inhibiting adenosine kinase) to activate A1Rs might constitute the more robust brain neuroprotective strategy based on the adenosine neuromodulatory system. This strategy should be useful in adult animals and especially in the elderly (where brain pathologies are prevalent) but is not valid for fetus or newborns where the impact of adenosine receptors on brain damage is different