| Literature DB >> 26573292 |
Arthur A Bergen1,2, Sovann Kaing3, Jacoline B ten Brink4, Theo G Gorgels3,5, Sarah F Janssen3,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia. AD has a multifactorial disease etiology and is currently untreatable. Multiple genes and molecular mechanisms have been implicated in AD, including ß-amyloid deposition in the brain, neurofibrillary tangle accumulation of hyper-phosphorylated Tau, synaptic failure, oxidative stress and inflammation. Relatively little is known about the role of the blood-brain barriers, especially the blood-cerebrospinal fluid barrier (BCSFB), in AD. The BCSFB is involved in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) production, maintenance of brain homeostasis and neurodegenerative disorders.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26573292 PMCID: PMC4647590 DOI: 10.1186/s12864-015-2159-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genomics ISSN: 1471-2164 Impact factor: 3.969
The top 10 most down- , and the top 10 most up- regulated (expression of) genes in AD affected CPE versus healthy CPE
| Fold change | Symbol | Entrez gene name | Location |
|---|---|---|---|
| −18.03 | C6orf58 | Chromosome 6 open reading frame 58 | Cytoplasm |
| −8.09 | BRCA2 | Breast cancer 2, early onset | Nucleus |
| −7.71 | FABP4 | Fatty acid binding protein 4, adipocyte | Cytoplasm |
| −7.18 | RPS4Y1 | Ribosomal protein S4, Y-linked 1 | Cytoplasm |
| −6.57 | PRND | Prion protein 2 (dublet) | Pl. Membr. |
| −6.27 | LRRC74B | Leucine rich repeat containing 74B | Other |
| −6.26 | C10orf107 | Chromosome 10 open reading frame 107 | Other |
| −5.76 | NEBL-AS1 | NEBL antisense RNA 1 | Other |
| −5.66 | RBM3 | RNA binding motif (RNP1, RRM) protein 3 | Cytoplasm |
| −5.39 | TXLNGY | Taxilin gamma pseudogene, Y-linked | Other |
| 11.37 | LSMEM1 | Leucine-rich single-pass membrane protein 1 | Cytoplasm |
| 9.45 | ETNPPL | Ethanolamine-phosphate phospho-lyase | Other |
| 9.15 | HSPA1A/HSPA1B | Heat shock 70kDa protein 1A | Cytoplasm |
| 7.04 | HSPA6 | Heat shock 70kDa protein 6 (HSP70B’) | Nucleus |
| 6.56 | LHFPL3-AS2 | LHFPL3 antisense RNA 2 | Other |
| 6.24 | CELSR1 | Cadherin, EGF LAG seven-pass G-type receptor 1 | Pl. Membr. |
| 5.72 | RCC1 | Regulator of chromosome condensation 1 | Cytoplasm |
| 5.55 | DNAJB1 | DnaJ (Hsp40) homolog, subfamily B, member 1 | Nucleus |
| 5.42 | SERPINC1 | Serpin peptidase inhibitor, clade C (antithrombin), member 1 | Extracell. Sp. |
| 5.1 | ZBTB1 | Zinc finger and BTB domain containing 1 | Nucleus |
Names of the genes are abbreviated according to Genbank. For potential relationship with AD according to the scientific literature, see description in the main text
Fig. 1Cluster analysis of mean expression values for the up-regulated genes in AD (Br5–6) choroid plexus compared to healthy control choroid plexus (Br0–1). Cluster analysis was performed using GENE-E (version 3.0.204; analysis performed on 10/10/2015) with the “one minus Pearson correlation” and the “Average linkage method”. See also http://www.broadinstitute.org/cancer/software/GENE-E/. On the Y-axis gene names are shown, on the X-axis the individual samples. Blue and red colors indicate, respectively, relatively low and high numerical expression values. The dendograms at the top and the left side denote the (close) relationships between, respectively, the samples and the genes. Analysis parameter values are given below the figure. Both the AD and control samples cluster nicely together. Please use your PDF zoom function to evaluate details.
Fig. 2Graph of the most significant over-represented and upregulated biological pathways in (Br5-6) AD CPE. The height of the bars indicates the level of statistical significance. The straight horizontal yellow line represents the cut off value of statistical significance. The yellow line jumping up and down indicates the ratio of the number of genes present in the experimental dataset, divided by the theoretical number of genes that together would make up the functionality
Fig. 3Upregulation of the over-represented unfolded protein response in AD affected CPE. In the schematic drawing all regulated potential molecular players of the unfolded protein response are presented. The filled (red) symbols represent the entries which are actually statistically significantly upregulated in AD affected CPE (Br5–6) in our data set(s). Other entries may also be expressed by the CPE, but are not regulated between healthy and AD-affected CPE
Fig. 4Cluster analysis of mean expression values for the down-regulated genes in AD (Br5–6) choroid plexus compared to healthy control choroid plexus (Br0–1). Cluster analysis was performed using GENE-E (version 3.0.204; analysis performed on 10/10/2015) with “one minus Pearson correlation” and “Average linkage method” http://www.broadinstitute.org/cancer/software/GENE-E/. On the Y-axis the gene symbols are shown, on the X-axis the individual samples. Blue and red colors indicate, respectively relatively low and high numerical expression values. The dendograms at the top and the left side denote the (close) relationships between, respectively, the samples and the genes. Analysis parameter values are given below the figure. Both the AD and control samples cluster nicely together. To view details, please use your PDF zoom function.
Validation of microarray analysis by RT-PCR (three independent repeats) of 17 selected genes
| RT-PCR#1 | RT-PCR#2 | RT-PCR#3 | RT-PCR | Microarray | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gene | F.C. | P value | F.C. | P value | F.C. | P value | Mean F.C. | Mean F.C.a | P value* |
|
| 21.19 | 0.003 | 17.36 | 0.010 | 15.57 | 0.005 | 18.04 | 9.45 | 0.001 |
|
| 5.92 | 0.004 | 6.59 | 0.002 | 8.09 | 0.001 | 6.87 | 4.16 | 0.040 |
|
| 3.21 | 0.004 | 3.20 | 0.026 | 3.33 | 0.011 | 3.25 | 3.43 | 0.002 |
|
| 2.17 | 0.022 | 7.22 | 0.001 | 3.51 | 0.001 | 4.30 | 3.39 | 0.008 |
|
| 1.16 | 0.731 | 1.16 | 3.39 | 0.001 | ||||
|
| 2.26 | 0.002 | 1.81 | 0.007 | 2.16 | 0.026 | 2.08 | 3.1 | 0.003 |
|
| 4.43 | 0.051 | 4.58 | 0.002 | 4.41 | 0.011 | 4.47 | 2.98 | 0.003 |
|
| 2.64 | 0.002 | 2.94 | 0.001 | 3.04 | 0.001 | 2.87 | 2.87 | 0.004 |
|
| 2.41 | 0.038 | 2.25 | 0.011 | 2.58 | 0.007 | 2.41 | 2.45 | 0.002 |
|
| 5.42 | 0.038 | 4.63 | 0.011 | 4.65 | 0.011 | 4.90 | 2.15 | 0.021 |
|
| 2.31 | 0.004 | 2.56 | 0.002 | 2.07 | 0.011 | 2.32 | 2.04 | 0.003 |
|
| 3.66 | 0.001 | 3.47 | 0.002 | 3.47 | 0.001 | 3.53 | 1.93 | 0.008 |
|
| −2.39 | 0.002 | −3.15 | 0.001 | −2.99 | 0.001 | −2.84 | −2.52 | 0.033 |
|
| −3.81 | 0.001 | −2.28 | 0.001 | −2.45 | 0.001 | −2.85 | −2.53 | 0.007 |
|
| −2.82 | 0.004 | −2.56 | 0.007 | −2.86 | 0.002 | −2.75 | −2.54 | 0.018 |
|
| −4.72 | 0.002 | −7.12 | 0.001 | −6.84 | 0.001 | −6.23 | −2.72 | 0.003 |
|
| −8.80 | 0.001 | −5.49 | 0.001 | −4.99 | 0.001 | −6.43 | −3.1 | 0.004 |
|
| −3.82 | 0.002 | −3.81 | 0.001 | −4.22 | 0.001 | −3.95 | −3.3 | 0.002 |
|
| −6.50 | 0.002 | −4.17 | 0.001 | −3.90 | 0.001 | −4.86 | −3.62 | 0.004 |
Individual gene expression (and validation). In order to assess the validity of the RNA expression data obtained by microarray, we performed RT-PCR analysis on cDNA prepared from laser-dissected CPE of the same healthy control (Br0–1) and late stage AD samples (Br5–6) as used for the microarray. We essentially followed the procedure of van Soest SS et al. (2007) [33]: In short, RT-PCR validation was done, in triplicate, on a selection of 17 genes. These genes were chosen on the basis of high expression level (>90%), significantly different expression between late stage AD and healthy control (p < 0.05) and high fold change (FC). Next, we searched for unique and efficient primers in the last 1 kb of the 3′ region the mRNA, as this area was used for the design of the oligo’s on the microarray and the microarray amplification procedure employed the poly a tail. We measured three times the expression levels of the resulting set of 17 genes by RT-PCR and calculated three times the FC and the relevant p values. Table 2 summarizes the findings and compares RT-PCRs with the outcome of the microarray. The significant difference as indicated by the microarray was confirmed for 16 of these genes, whereas the 17th gene did not amplify well in our hands in the RT-PCR, and showed unexpectedly a very low expression, perhaps due to limitations in primer design. Pearson’s correlation coefficient of the FC’s was remarkably high (r = 0.95) and significant (p < 0.01), confirming the gene expression results of the microarray. F C: Fold change in mRNA expression of CPE of AD (Braak 5,6) vs. healthy (Braak 0,1) donors. Pearson’s correlation coefficient between F.C. of micoarray and RT-PCR was significant (r = 0.95, p < 0.01). RT-PCR#1, RT-PCR#2, RT-PCR#3 denote three independent RT-PCRs on 7 human control samples and 7 and AD affected samples. *Some genes are represented with multiple probes on the array. If so, the value shown is the lowest P value. aSome genes are represented with multiple probes on the array. If so, the value shown is the mean F.C. bOur RT-PCR showed for this gene unexpectedly a very low expression, perhaps due to primer design
Fig. 5Decreased CLDN5 immunostaining in AD affected CPE. In the healthy CP (a), choroid plexus epithelial (CPE) cells stained positive for CLDN5 (red color). In the AD tissue (b) the strings of CPE cells stain much less intensely for CLDN5. Note that in the same AD tissue, CLDN5 is clearly present in the blood vessel wall (arrow). Immunohistochemistry for CLDN5 on (6 μm thick) cryo-sections of CP from a healthy donor (A, Br0) and a donor diagnosed with AD (Br6). CLDN5 was visualized with Cy3 coupled secondary antibodies after labelling with anti-claudin 5 antibody ab53765 (Abcam). Cy3 fluorescence is shown in red. Nuclei are stained with DAPI (blue). The green color shows the autofluorescence that is detected in the FITC channel. This channel was added to reveal autofluorescence possibly overlapping with the Cy3 fluorescence marking the presence of CLDN5. Bar is 20 μm