This study aimed to investigate the therapeutic effects of N-acetyl-D-mannosamine (ManNAc) on age-related cognitive dysfunction in dogs. ManNAc was administered to 5 dogs with low cognitive levels for 2 months, and the cognitive ability and active-resting cycle were periodically assessed for improvement. ManNAc treatment significantly reduced the number of error trials in the place-learning test, especially in the first month of administration. Three ManNAc-treated dogs also showed improvement in the active-resting cycle. In conclusion, ManNAc treatment appears to alleviate age-related cognitive dysfunction.
This study aimed to investigate the therapeutic effects of N-acetyl-D-mannosamine (ManNAc) on age-related cognitive dysfunction in dogs. ManNAc was administered to 5 dogs with low cognitive levels for 2 months, and the cognitive ability and active-resting cycle were periodically assessed for improvement. ManNAc treatment significantly reduced the number of error trials in the place-learning test, especially in the first month of administration. Three ManNAc-treated dogs also showed improvement in the active-resting cycle. In conclusion, ManNAc treatment appears to alleviate age-related cognitive dysfunction.
Dogs are generally considered “seniors” when they reach 7 years of age or greater with a risk
for cognitive dysfunction [14] with impairments in any
of the 4 behavioral categories: orientation in the immediate environment, social interactions
with human family members, learning and memory and the active-resting cycle [8]. Furthermore, aged dogs display a wide range of
individual variability in cognitive functioning and also display age-related neuropathologies
similar to those of humans, such as amyloid plaque deposition, and thus, dogs are regarded as
a model for age-related cognitive decline in humans [1].
Progression of age-related cognitive dysfunction is becoming important as the dog population
ages, and we recently developed a convenient cognitive test, which can be performed within a
day for simple detection of cognitive decline [6].The neural mechanisms responsible for the various cognitive abilities are not fully
understood. Recent studies have demonstrated that newly generated neurons in the hippocampus
play a pivotal role in spatial cognitive ability [3] and
have also revealed the biological roles of neurogenesis in the mouse and rat hippocampus in
the adult brain [9, 10, 13].
N-acetyl-D-mannosamine (ManNAc) is the isomer of
N-acetyl-d-glucosamine and the precursor of sialic acids, which are the most
abundant terminal monosaccharides on glycoconjugates on eukaryotic cell surfaces and are
involved in a variety of cellular functions [12]. We
revealed in mice that 4 weeks of ManNAc treatment alleviated the age-related decline in
learning ability and memory in the place-recognition task with an increase of neurogenesis in
the hippocampus [4]. ManNAc was also reported to
increase the duration of rapid eye movement (REM) sleep and improve the active-resting cycle
after a few days of administration [12]. Therefore,
ManNAc is a potential therapeutic agent for improving not only cognitive function but also
quality of life (QOL), as correction of impaired active-resting cycles is important for
maintaining QOL in aged humans [2]. Therefore, this
study aimed to investigate the ability of ManNAc treatment to improve age-related cognitive
dysfunction in dogs.The subjects were 5 Labrador Retrievers (1 male and 4 females, aged 93.60 ± 11.98 months;
Table 1) that lived at the Japan Guide Dog Association facility (Fujinomiya, Japan).
They were among the older dogs in the facility and, being retired or used only for
demonstrations, were able to remain in the facility throughout the experiment. Each dog was
fed twice a day (7:30, 17:00) and was cared for by the facility staff. The retired dogs took a
walk and light exercise about an hour twice a day. The dogs for demonstrations were trained
about an hour twice a day. All dogs underwent medical examination, including blood tests, and
were found to be in good health.
Table 1.
Subjects’ characteristics and the number of error trials in the baseline
sessions
Name
Age (months)
Sex
Status
Number of error trialsin the baseline
sessions
ManNac
Glucose
Bart
129
Male, Neutered
Retired
23
28
Kayla
114
Female, Spayed
Retired
23
24
Biscay
84
Female, Spayed
For demo
24
19
Vila
75
Female, Spayed
For demo
44
34
Ink
66
Female, Spayed
For demo
–
–
The subjects of this study received 2-month courses of treatment with both ManNAc and glucose
(control, an equivalent calorie value) in a crossover design with a 1-month washout period.
One capsule containing 250 mg ManNAc or glucose was administered orally to each subject once a
day for 2 months. Place-learning tests were performed 6 times on each subject. Tests were
conducted just before the first and second treatments to obtain baseline data and were
repeated once after the first month and again after the second month of each treatment. Motor
activity was measured on all days from 1 week before the first treatment until the end of the
second treatment.The tests were conducted in a kennel (2 × 3 m) at the Japan Guide Dog Association facility.
We adopted the method previously developed for dogs [6].
All tests were recorded using a digital video recorder. One experimenter and 1 handler
participated in each study. Three stainless-steel bowls (17 × 6 cm) with flaps were placed 30 cm apart. A string 2 m) was attached to the rim of each flap for opening the flap. A commercial dog
treat (approximately 1 cm2) was used as a reward stimulus. The handler had the dog
sit and wait 1.5 m away from the bowls (the standby position) before presenting the food
reward. Each place-learning test consisted of a pre-training session and 2 test sessions
(Fig. 1). During the interval between the 2 test sessions (approximately 1 hr), the dog was
removed from the experimental kennel and returned to its own kennel.
Fig. 1.
The place-learning test procedure. The pre-training period continued until the dog
spontaneously approached or touched a bowl’s flap. In the first session, the first 3
trials were used for correction, if the dog selected a wrong bowl. The first session
ended when the dog selected the correct bowl in 4 consecutive trials. The second session
was conducted the same way. C: correct selection; W: wrong selection. This figure was
adapted from [6].
The place-learning test procedure. The pre-training period continued until the dog
spontaneously approached or touched a bowl’s flap. In the first session, the first 3
trials were used for correction, if the dog selected a wrong bowl. The first session
ended when the dog selected the correct bowl in 4 consecutive trials. The second session
was conducted the same way. C: correct selection; W: wrong selection. This figure was
adapted from [6].Pre-training: This step was conducted to teach the dogs that the bowls could
contain reward stimuli. The handler placed a piece of food in each bowl. When a subject
spontaneously approached or touched a bowl flap, the handler immediately gave the dog a verbal
reward (such as “Good!”), and the experimenter rewarded the dog by opening the flap. The first
session began as soon as the dogs learned how to obtain the food.Testing: The testing consisted of 2 sessions. The first session began at
approximately 11 AM and the second at 1 PM. In each session, the food stimuli were placed in
all bowls (1 piece/bowl) while the dog watched in the standby position, and the bowl flaps
were closed. The dog was then released and allowed to select a bowl spontaneously (1 trial).
In both sessions, the dog was allowed to eat only the food in a specific bowl (the “correct
bowl”), which the experimenter chose randomly, and the position of the correct bowl was
changed in the second session. As a general rule of scoring, if the dog directly approached or
touched the correct bowl, the trial was scored as correct. The handler immediately gave a
verbal reward, and the experimenter quickly opened the bowl flap and allowed the dog to eat
the food. If the dog did not immediately select the correct bowl, the trial was scored as
wrong. The handler quickly returned the dog to the standby position and commanded it to stay
until the next trial (20 sec). The criterion for finishing the session was a correct score in
4 consecutive trials. The administration study analyzed the values obtained by subtracting the
sum of baseline of each treatment from the sums of the error trials conducted 1 and 2 months
after the start of corresponding treatment (the index of error trials).An acceleration meter (MSR145 Modular Signal Recorder, MSR Electronics GmbH, Seuzach,
Switzerland) was attached to each dog’s collar to monitor its motor activity. Triaxial motor
activity data were recorded at 4-sec intervals and were summed with an application (MSR 4.16).
Data were calculated as the variation from the resting values. The 4-sec data points were
summed over each 15-min interval. These data were divided into daytime (7:00–19:00) and
nighttime (19:00–7:00) data due to the facility’s schedule. The ratio of the daytime activity
to nighttime activity in each day was calculated and averaged over each week (as the index of
active-resting amplitude) for comparison with a higher index of active-resting amplitude
indicating a better active-resting cycle.Statistical analyses for cognitive ability and motor activity were performed by 2-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures; if a significant difference was found,
the Bonferroni method was used for post-hoc analysis. As the sample size was limited (n=4 or
5), the level of statistical significance was set at 10%.To compare the index of error trials, we analyzed the first and second sessions separately
using 2-way ANOVA with repeated measures on the factors “administration” (ManNAc and glucose)
and “times” (baseline, 1st month and 2nd month) and found a significant main effect of
“administration” (f (1)=29.66, P=0.01) for the first session. The post-hoc
test showed that the index of error trials in the first session was significantly lower during
ManNAc treatment than during glucose treatment (1st month: P=0.05, 2nd month:
P=0.02; Fig. 2a). The treatment had no significant effect on the result for the second session (Fig. 2b). Next, 2-way ANOVA with repeated measures was
conducted on the total of the index of error trials and showed a statistically significant
main effect of “administration” (f (1)=8.16, P=0.07). The post-hoc Bonferroni
test found the significant difference between ManNAc and glucose treatment
(P=0.06, Fig. 2c). The data for
each dog are shown in Fig. 2 panels d, e and f. All
dogs showed a tendency towards decreased index of error trials values in the second session
during the first month of ManNAc treatment, although 1 dog (Kayla) showed an increased index
of error trials in the first session (Fig. 2d and
2e). We also examined the order effect and variability over time in the baseline scores
and found no significant difference in both. Overall, the index of error trials values of all
dogs decreased during ManNAc treatment (Fig.
2f).
Fig. 2.
Changes in the index of error trials during treatment. The average of the index of
error trials values for the first session (a) and overall (c) declined significantly
during ManNAc treatment. For Biscay and Villa, the index of error trials values was
clearly lower than the baseline throughout ManNAc treatment, especially for the first
session (d, f). For the second session, all dogs showed lower index of error trials
values after the first month of ManNAc treatment, although the index values of 2 dogs
returned to near-baseline after the second month (e).
Changes in the index of error trials during treatment. The average of the index of
error trials values for the first session (a) and overall (c) declined significantly
during ManNAc treatment. For Biscay and Villa, the index of error trials values was
clearly lower than the baseline throughout ManNAc treatment, especially for the first
session (d, f). For the second session, all dogs showed lower index of error trials
values after the first month of ManNAc treatment, although the index values of 2 dogs
returned to near-baseline after the second month (e).A 2-way ANOVA with repeated measures was conducted for the factors “administration” (ManNAc
and glucose) and “weeks” (baseline, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th and 8th week) on the index of
active-resting amplitude and showed a statistically significant main effect of
“administration” (f (1)=8.75, P<0.01). The post-hoc Bonferroni method
found that the index of motor activity was significantly higher during ManNAc treatment than
during glucose treatment (P<0.01) and was also significantly higher during
the 2nd, 3rd and 4th individual weeks of ManNAc treatment than during the corresponding weeks
of glucose treatment (P=0.06, 0.05 and 0.07, respectively; Fig. 3a).
Fig. 3.
Changes in the index of active resting amplitude during treatment. The average of the
index of active resting amplitude values was significantly higher during ManNAc
treatment than during glucose treatment (a). Bart, Villa, Kayla and Ink showed
significantly higher values throughout ManNAc treatment than during glucose treatment.
By the post-hoc test, 4 dogs showed significantly higher index of active-resting
amplitude values during the following weeks of ManNAc treatment: Bart: weeks 1
(P=0.05), 3 (P=0.05) and 4
(P<0.01); Kayla: weeks 1 (P=0.09) and 2
(P=0.04); Villa: weeks 3 (P<0.01) and 6
(P=0.02); Ink: weeks 1 (P=0.04), 2
(P=0.07) and 6 (P<0.01). In Biscay, the index was
lower during ManNAc treatment than during glucose treatment in weeks 1
(P=0.02), 2 (P=0.04), 3 (P=0.09)
and 4 (P=0.02). Black marks indicate significant differences between
ManNAc and glucose treatment according to the post-hoc test (b).
Changes in the index of active resting amplitude during treatment. The average of the
index of active resting amplitude values was significantly higher during ManNAc
treatment than during glucose treatment (a). Bart, Villa, Kayla and Ink showed
significantly higher values throughout ManNAc treatment than during glucose treatment.
By the post-hoc test, 4 dogs showed significantly higher index of active-resting
amplitude values during the following weeks of ManNAc treatment: Bart: weeks 1
(P=0.05), 3 (P=0.05) and 4
(P<0.01); Kayla: weeks 1 (P=0.09) and 2
(P=0.04); Villa: weeks 3 (P<0.01) and 6
(P=0.02); Ink: weeks 1 (P=0.04), 2
(P=0.07) and 6 (P<0.01). In Biscay, the index was
lower during ManNAc treatment than during glucose treatment in weeks 1
(P=0.02), 2 (P=0.04), 3 (P=0.09)
and 4 (P=0.02). Black marks indicate significant differences between
ManNAc and glucose treatment according to the post-hoc test (b).We also conducted within-subject comparison for each dog using 2-way ANOVA with repeated
measures and found that 3 dogs showed significantly higher index values during ManNAc
administration than during glucose administration (Bart: administration f (1)=65.54,
P<0.01, administration * week f (8)=2.333, P=0.037;
Villa: administration f (1)=10.98, P=0.02; Ink: administration f (1)=24.119,
P=0.004; Fig. 3b). One dog showed
a significant main effect of “week” (Kayla; week f (7)=2.31, P=0.05). Only
Biscay showed the opposite tendency with a higher index of motor activity during glucose
treatment than during ManNAc treatment (administration f (1)=110.65,
P<0.01).The most remarkable finding of the present study is that the number of error trials in dogs
that had demonstrated age-related declines in cognitive ability temporarily but significantly
decreased during ManNAc treatment. The present results are consistent with those of studies in
mice [4, 12] and
suggest the possibility that ManNAc may be a useful therapy for age-related cognitive decline
in dogs. ManNAc can rescue the sialylation of glycoproteins in GNE-knockout embryonic stem
cells [11] and induce neural proliferation and dendrite
outgrowth in vitro [5]. ManNAc
treatment decreased the number of total error trials by Biscay, Kayla and Villa throughout the
2-month treatment period, and this effect was most pronounced in Biscay and Villa. On the
other hand, the effect of ManNAc was only temporary in Bart, as his number of error trials
decreased after 1 month but returned to baseline after 2 months. These individual differences
in the response to ManNAc require a further study of parameters including metabolic function
and metabolic clearance ability. We also did not find the noticeable effects of ManNAc in the
2nd session, especially in the 2nd month. The 2nd session was more difficult than the 1st one,
because of the need for reverse learning; therefore, the beneficial effects of ManNAc might
appear only in the easier session. These results might be because of insufficient
pharmacological properties of ManNAc to show strong therapeutic benefits or of the shortage of
dosage. The other possibility is the drug tolerance as a cause of decline of beneficial effect
over the time.The daytime motor activity was more than twice the nighttime activity in all dogs regardless
of the treatment. The ratio of active-resting cycle disorders increased significantly in dogs
aged ≥13 years [7]. The subjects of the present study
were younger (5–10 years old) than the dogs in the previous studies. Therefore, signs of the
active-resting cycle disorder might not have been apparent in the subjects of the present
study; however, 4 of them (all except Biscay) showed a significant higher index of
active-resting amplitude during ManNAc treatment. In this study, we could not determine
whether ManNAc improved age-related dysfunction, because we did not detect clear dysregulation
of active-resting cycle. The findings of the present study suggest that age-related cognitive
dysfunction might precede disturbances in the active-resting cycle in dogs and that the
quality of sleep might be improved by ManNAc treatment regardless of age, as in the previous
study in rodents [12]. The relationship between the
effects of ManNAc on cognitive ability and on nighttime motor activity would be an interesting
topic for a future study.In conclusion, although further investigation with a larger sample size is needed, ManNAc
alleviated age-related cognitive dysfunction at least temporarily in all dogs examined.
Authors: Martina Schwarzkopf; Klaus-Peter Knobeloch; Elvira Rohde; Stephan Hinderlich; Nicola Wiechens; Lothar Lucka; Ivan Horak; Werner Reutter; Rüdiger Horstkorte Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2002-04-02 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Michael D Saxe; Fortunato Battaglia; Jing-Wen Wang; Gael Malleret; Denis J David; James E Monckton; A Denise R Garcia; Michael V Sofroniew; Eric R Kandel; Luca Santarelli; René Hen; Michael R Drew Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-11-06 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Amar Sahay; Kimberly N Scobie; Alexis S Hill; Colin M O'Carroll; Mazen A Kheirbek; Nesha S Burghardt; André A Fenton; Alex Dranovsky; René Hen Journal: Nature Date: 2011-04-03 Impact factor: 49.962