| Literature DB >> 26912519 |
Susan E Tomlinson1, S Veronica Tan2, David Burke3, Robyn W Labrum4, Andrea Haworth4, Vaneesha S Gibbons4, Mary G Sweeney4, Robert C Griggs5, Dimitri M Kullmann6, Hugh Bostock2, Michael G Hanna6.
Abstract
Ion channel dysfunction causes a range of neurological disorders by altering transmembrane ion fluxes, neuronal or muscle excitability, and neurotransmitter release. Genetic neuronal channelopathies affecting peripheral axons provide a unique opportunity to examine the impact of dysfunction of a single channel subtype in detail in vivo. Episodic ataxia type 2 is caused by mutations in CACNA1A, which encodes the pore-forming subunit of the neuronal voltage-gated calcium channel Cav2.1. In peripheral motor axons, this channel is highly expressed at the presynaptic neuromuscular junction where it contributes to action potential-evoked neurotransmitter release, but it is not expressed mid-axon or thought to contribute to action potential generation. Eight patients from five families with genetically confirmed episodic ataxia type 2 underwent neurophysiological assessment to determine whether axonal excitability was normal and, if not, whether changes could be explained by Cav2.1 dysfunction. New mutations in the CACNA1A gene were identified in two families. Nerve conduction studies were normal, but increased jitter in single-fibre EMG studies indicated unstable neuromuscular transmission in two patients. Excitability properties of median motor axons were compared with those in 30 age-matched healthy control subjects. All patients had similar excitability abnormalities, including a high electrical threshold and increased responses to hyperpolarizing (P < 0.00007) and depolarizing currents (P < 0.001) in threshold electrotonus. In the recovery cycle, refractoriness (P < 0.0002) and superexcitability (P < 0.006) were increased. Cav2.1 dysfunction in episodic ataxia type 2 thus has unexpected effects on axon excitability, which may reflect an indirect effect of abnormal calcium current fluxes during development.Entities:
Keywords: axonal excitability; channelopathy
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26912519 PMCID: PMC4795516 DOI: 10.1093/brain/awv380
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain ISSN: 0006-8950 Impact factor: 13.501
Comparison between nerve excitability measurements in EA2 and in normal controls
| Control | EA2 |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | |||
|
| ||||
| Stimulus (mA) for 50% maximal CMAP | 4.29 × /÷ 1.04 | 7.95 ×/÷ 1.19 | 3.49(7.59) | 0.0090** |
| Peak CMAP (mV) | 8.66 ×/÷ 1.04 | 8.57 ×/÷ 1.05 | 0.14(22.8) | 0.86 |
| Strength-duration time constant (ms) | 0.48 ± 0.018 | 0.45 ± 0.031 | 0.98(12.3) | 0.35 |
| Rheobase (mA) | 2.80 ×/÷ 1.04 | 5.33 ×/÷ 1.19 | 3.64(7.7) | 0.0070** |
|
| ||||
| TEd40(peak) (%) | 68.17 ± 0.70 | 72.28 ± 0.90 | 3.61(16.38) | 0.0023** |
| TEd40(90 − 100 ms) (%) | 43.96 ± 0.66 | 47.15 ± 1.16 | 2.39(12.01) | 0.033* |
| TEd20(peak) (%) | 38.19 ± 0.52 | 42.28 ± 0.82 | 4.21(13.41) | 0.0010** |
| TEh20(90−100 ms) (%) | −47.1 ± 1.0 | −56.7 ± 2.7 | 3.36(7.8) | 0.010* |
| TEh40(20−40 ms) (%) | −91.11 ± 1.25 | −100.2 ± 1.67 | 4.38(15.82) | 0.00053*** |
| TEh40(90−100 ms) (%) | −116.7 ± 2.77 | −138.6 ± 3.19 | 5.18(18.99) | 0.000068**** |
|
| ||||
| Resting I/V slope | 0.607 ± 0.014 | 0.54 ± 0.031 | 1.96(10.18) | 0.075 |
| Minimum I/V slope | 0.246 ± 0.008 | 0.224 ± 0.011 | 1.6(15.21) | 0.13 |
| Hyperpolarizing I/V slope | 0.341 ± 0.010 | 0.377 ± 0.024 | 1.35(9.77) | 0.21 |
|
| ||||
| RRP (ms) | 2.95 ×/÷ 1.02 | 2.58 ×/÷ 1.02 | 4.64(20.79) | 0.00017*** |
| Superexcitability (%) | −23.05 ± 0.93 | −30.39 ± 1.91 | 3.45(10.52) | 0.0057** |
| Subexcitability (%) | 14.4 ± 0.65 | 15.07 ± 0.76 | 0.66(18.76) | 0.52 |
|
| ||||
| Age (years) | 39.1 ± 2.4 (30) | 40.6 ± 4.5 (8) | 0.30 (11.23) | 0.76 |
| Sex (male = 1, female = 2) | 1.47 ± 0.09 (30) | 1.5 ± 0.19 (8) | 0.16(10.62) | 0.85 |
| Temperature | 33.25 ± 0.17 (30) | 33.86 ± 0.26 (8) | 1.95(13.41) | 0.070 |
For definition of excitability measurements see Glossary.
Values are mean ± SEM, except for four measurementsc.
a t and degrees of freedom for Welch’s unequal variance t-test.
b P indicates probability for two-tailed test *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001.
cValues were normalized by log conversion and given as geometric mean ×/÷ standard error expressed as a factor.
Clinical and genetic features of patients with EA2
| Family (mutation) | Subject | Age, sex | Family history | Clinical features |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1 | 39; M | Yes | Onset age 6. Up to 4 episodes/week. Subtle interictal cerebellar findings. |
| 2 | 39; F | Yes | Onset age 6. Up to 4 episodes a month. Normal interictal exam. | |
|
| 3 | 66; M | Yes | Onset age 7. Up to 4 episodes/week. Minor interictal cerebellar findings. Acetazolamide ceased due to renal calculi. |
| 4 | 40; M | Yes | Onset age 4. Up to 4 episodes/week. Normal exam. | |
| 5 | 34; F | Yes | Onset age 8. Up to 2 episodes/week. Normal exam. Acetazolamide ceased due to thrombocytopaenia. | |
|
| 6 | 37; F | Yes | Onset age 6. Up to 4 episodes/month. Minor interictal cerebellar findings. |
|
| 7 | 21; M | No | Onset age 5 when started sports. Up to 2 episodes/week. Requires 4-AP in addition to acetazolamide. |
|
| 8 | 48; F | Yes | Onset age 5. Normal interictal exam. Requires dichlorphenamide and topirimate in addition to acetazolamide. |
Figure 1Single-fibre EMG studies in EA2. (A–C) Increased jitter with blocking in Subject 5 (Family 2). (A) Superimposed traces of single fibre EMG during recordings during voluntary contraction demonstrating increased jitter, reflecting instability of the neuromuscular junction. (B and C) Same recording displayed in raster mode showing increased jitter and blocking. (D) Stimulation single-fibre EMG in EA2. Stimulation rates are 1, 2, 5, 10, 15 and 20 Hz. Maximal jitter is seen at 2–5 Hz stimulation, decreasing at higher rates, similar to the findings in Lambert-Eaton syndrome.
Figure 2Axonal excitability measurements in Subjects with EA2 compared to controls. (A) Strength–duration time constant is given by the negative intercept of the regression line on the x-axis (open arrow). Rheobase is given by the slope of the regression line (filled arrow). (B) Threshold electrotonus in patients with EA2 and control subjects. Each point is mean ± SEM. Filled circles = EA2 (n = 8). Open arrow indicates increase in TEd in patients with EA2. Black arrow indicates increase in TEh in patients with EA2. (C) The recovery cycle in EA2. The patients’ recordings are characterized by a 12% shorter relative refractory period (open arrow) and a 24% increase in superexcitability (closed arrow).
Figure 3Dot plots illustrating individual data points in EA2 subjects compared to controls. (A) Strength duration time constant. (B) Rheobase. (C) Peak threshold decrease with 20% depolarizing current. (D) Threshold electrotonus with 40% hyperpolarizing current. (E) Relative refractory period (RRP). (F) Peak superexcitability in recovery cycle. NC = normal controls; NS = not significant. Asterisks indicate level of significance by Welch unequal variance t-test, as in Table 2. Note logarithmic axes in B and E to help normalize distributions. Horizontal lines indicate means (solid) and means ± standard error (dotted).
Modelling possible explanations of altered nerve excitability properties in EA2.
| Model parameter | Control value | Best fit value | Units | Discrepancy | Discrepancy reduction (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barrett-Barrett conductance | 36.5 | 41.5 | nS | 0.311 | 73.0 |
| Resting potential (altered by applied current) | −82.3 | −83.4 | mV | 0.483 | 58.1 |
| Internodal leak conductance | 3.6 | 1.83 | nS | 0.503 | 56.3 |
| Nodal and internodal leak conductances (rel) | 1.0 | 0.61 | - | 0.504 | 56.3 |
| Nodal leak conductance | 1.08 | 0.17 | nS | 0.674 | 41.5 |
| HCN channel half-activation voltage | −103.1 | −109.9 | mV | 0.799 | 30.2 |
| Slow potassium conductances (rel) | 1.0 | 0.835 | - | 0.832 | 27.9 |
| Nodal slow potassium conductance | 50.8 | 42.3 | nS | 0.834 | 27.7 |
| Fast potassium conductances (rel) | 1.0 | 0.83 | - | 0.878 | 23.9 |
| Nodal fast potassium conductance | 19.9 | 15.7 | nS | 0.887 | 23.0 |
| Internodal fast potassium conductance | 100 | 62 | nS | 0.895 | 22.3 |
| Persistent sodium permeability (% transient) | 1.02 | 1.12 | % | 0.956 | 17.0 |
| HCN channel conductance | 5.15 | 3.5 | nS | 0.960 | 16.8 |
| Transient sodium permeability | 3.75 | 4.0 | cm3s−1.10−9 | 0.998 | 13.4 |
| Internodal slow potassium conductance | 0.33 | 0.40 | nS | 1.12 | 2.2 |
| Capacitance internodal axon | 0.273 | 0.257 | nF | 1.13 | 1.6 |
| Capacitance node | 0.50 | 0.53 | pF | 1.15 | 0.6 |
| Capacitance myelin | 1.55 | 1.55 | pF | 1.15 | 0.0 |
List of best fits to the EA2 patient nerve excitability data made by changing a single parameter in the model first fitted to the normal control data. For example, increasing the Barrett-Barrett conductance from 36.5 to 41.5 nS reduces the discrepancy between the model and the EA2 data from 1.15 to 0.311, a reduction of 73%. The parameters designated ‘(rel)’ are factors applied to both nodal and internodal conductances of the same type.
Figure 4Difference between control and EA2 nerve excitability modelled as an increase in Barrett-Barrett conductance. The control results are in grey and the patient results in black, with the recorded data shown in circles and the output of the model by continuous lines. For the patient data the modelled change was a 13.7% increase in the Barrett-Barrett conductance. (A) Threshold electrotonus. (B) Recovery cycle. (C) Current/threshold reduction curve. (D) I/V slope.