Baiping Ren1,2, Mingzhen Zhang1, Rundong Hu1, Hong Chen1, Manli Wang3, Yufeng Lin3, Yan Sun4, Lingyun Jia2, Guizhao Liang1,5, Jie Zheng1. 1. Department of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering, The University of Akron, Akron, Ohio 44325, United States. 2. School of Life Science and Biotechnology, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China. 3. Mingyuan Staff-Worker Hospital of Xinjiang Oil Field Company, 789 Youhao Beilu, Urumqi, Xinjiang 830000, China. 4. Department of Biochemical Engineering and Key Laboratory of Systems Bioengineering of the Ministry of Education, School of Chemical Engineering and Technology, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China. 5. Key Laboratory of Biorheological Science and Technology, Ministry of Education, School of Bioengineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China.
Abstract
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) have a mutual cause-and-effect relationship, and they share some common risk factors. Although numerous Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs have been developed for CVD treatment, no drugs are clinically available for AD treatment. Given the common disease-causing factors and links between the two diseases and the well-demonstrated drugs for CVD, we propose to re-examine the new potential of the existing CVD drugs as amyloid-β (Aβ) inhibitors. 3-Morpholinosydnonimine hydrochloride (SIN-1) is an FDA-approved drug for inhibiting platelet aggregation in CVD. Herein, we examine the inhibition activity of SIN-1 on the aggregation and toxicity of Aβ1-42 using combined experimental and computational approaches. Collective experimental data from ThT, circular dichroism, and atomic force microscopy demonstrate that SIN-1 can effectively inhibit amyloid formation at every stage of Aβ aggregation by prolonging lag phase, slowing down aggregation rate, and reducing final fibril formation. The cell viability assay also shows that SIN-1 enables the protection of SH-SY5Y cells from Aβ-induced cell toxicity. Such an inhibition effect is attributed to interference with the structural transition of Aβ toward a β-sheet structure by SIN-1. Furthermore, molecular dynamic simulations confirm that SIN-1 preferentially binds to the C-terminal β-sheet grooves of an Aβ oligomer and consequently disrupts the β-sheet structure of Aβ and Aβ-Aβ association, explaining experimental observations. This work discovers a new function of SIN-1, making it a promising compound with dual protective roles in inhibiting both platelet and Aβ aggregations against CVD and AD.
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) have a mutual cause-and-effect relationship, and they share some common risk factors. Although numerous Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs have been developed for CVD treatment, no drugs are clinically available for AD treatment. Given the common disease-causing factors and links between the two diseases and the well-demonstrated drugs for CVD, we propose to re-examine the new potential of the existing CVD drugs as amyloid-β (Aβ) inhibitors. 3-Morpholinosydnonimine hydrochloride (SIN-1) is an FDA-approved drug for inhibiting platelet aggregation in CVD. Herein, we examine the inhibition activity of SIN-1 on the aggregation and toxicity of Aβ1-42 using combined experimental and computational approaches. Collective experimental data from ThT, circular dichroism, and atomic force microscopy demonstrate that SIN-1 can effectively inhibit amyloid formation at every stage of Aβ aggregation by prolonging lag phase, slowing down aggregation rate, and reducing final fibril formation. The cell viability assay also shows that SIN-1 enables the protection of SH-SY5Y cells from Aβ-induced cell toxicity. Such an inhibition effect is attributed to interference with the structural transition of Aβ toward a β-sheet structure by SIN-1. Furthermore, molecular dynamic simulations confirm that SIN-1 preferentially binds to the C-terminal β-sheet grooves of an Aβ oligomer and consequently disrupts the β-sheet structure of Aβ and Aβ-Aβ association, explaining experimental observations. This work discovers a new function of SIN-1, making it a promising compound with dual protective roles in inhibiting both platelet and Aβ aggregations against CVD and AD.
Growing evidence indicates that cardiovascular
disease (CVD) and
its risk factors are often associated with the increased risk of Alzheimer’s
disease (AD) and its cognitive decline.[1−3] Both clinical and subclinical
data have shown that patients with AD have pathological amyloid-β
(Aβ) plaques being found in both brain parenchymal tissues and
cerebral blood vessels with adhesive or aggregated platelets.[4] In the blood vessels, Aβ aggregates cause
vascular dysfunction and cerebral amyloid angiopathy, which contribute
to AD progression. Meanwhile, vascular damages in the brain may also
contribute to the production/aggregation/deposition of Aβ, which
is one of pathological hallmarks of AD.[3,5−7] Parallel lines of evidence further showed that several cerebrovascular
factors[8] such as microvascular ischaemic
lesions, periventricular white matter lesions, carotid artery wall
thickness, and ankle/arm index were all closely related to Alzheimer
lesions.[9−11]The aggregation and accumulation of Aβ
peptides in the human
brain contribute to neuron cell death in AD. Development of effective
drugs to prevent or delay Aβ aggregation and the associated
AD progression remains a significant challenge. Currently, the conventional
drug-development strategy is a very time-consuming, expensive, and
laborious and tedious process. Although the exact connection between
CVD and AD still remains unclear, the two diseases share some common
risk factors including high blood pressure, high low-density lipoprotein
cholesterol, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and even diabetes.
Given these common disease-causing factors and links between two different
diseases, it is possible that pharmacological intervention of one
disease will also hold promise for reducing the risk of the other.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved numerous drugs for
CVD treatment.[12−16] These CVD drugs have demonstrated safety, biocompatibility, and
blood–brain barrier (BBB) crossing and targeting abilities.
To avoid reinventing the wheel, we propose to re-examine the new potential
of the existing CVD drugs as Aβ inhibitors. The misfolding and
aggregation of Aβ are considered to be the key pathogenic event
in the onset of AD.[17−19] During the early aggregation stage, Aβ forms
soluble oligomers, which are the primary toxic species responsible
for neuronal injury and cell death in AD. The oligomer-induced toxicity
mechanisms are far more complex and still under debate, and they could
link to ion-channel formation,[20,21] oxidative stress,[22,23] metal binding,[24] and membrane receptor dysfunction.[25−27] Regardless of the exact amyloid toxicity mechanisms, prevention
of oligomer formation and further aggregation appears to be the first
and important step toward therapeutic strategies for AD treatment.
Previous research has proposed many inhibitors of different categories
against Aβ aggregation, such as small organic molecules (epigallocatechin
gallate (EGCG),[28] curcumin,[29] gallic acid,[30] and
polyphenols[31]), nanoparticles (NiPAM/BAM,[32] AuNPs,[33] CdTe NPs,[34] and SA-GNPs[35]), and
peptide-based inhibitors (Aβ fragments 31–42, 39–42, 16–20, and
17–21[36−40] and β-sheet breaker peptides[41]).
Most of these inhibitors have not passed large-scale clinical trials,[42] and only EGCG is currently undergoing phase
III clinical trials against early stages of AD.[43] Different hypotheses have been proposed to explain the
clinical failures of these inhibitors, including the loss of specific
binding between drugs and Aβ in vivo and less efficiency at
phospholipid interfaces than in bulk solution.[44] The major failure possibility for these inhibitors is the
low permeability to the BBB.[45,46]Herein, we proposed
a design strategy of Aβ aggregation inhibitors
by searching potential candidates among FDA-approved CVD drugs simply
because these CVD drugs have already been extensively tested for their
excellent low toxicity and BBB permeability.
We have simple selection criteria for potential Aβ inhibitors:
the inhibitor candidates should be commercially available, demonstrate
their safety through an FDA approval, have a structure similar to
the existing Aβ inhibitors (e.g., EGCG) with a balance between
aromatic rings and hydrophilic groups, and possess biological functions
that are potentially linked to some aspects of Aβ aggregation.
Among these CVD drugs, 3-morpholinosydnonimine hydrochloride (namely,
linsidomine or SIN-1) is a widely used vasodilator for inhibiting
platelet aggregation.[47] Platelet activation
was also found to contribute to Aβ overproduction[48] and aggregation.[49] Therefore, it is expected that targeting blood platelets may provide
a new avenue for anti-AD therapy. As compared with other small organic
molecules as Aβ inhibitors, we envision that the planar portion
of SIN-1 and its aromatic ring should be able to interfere with the
formation of the β-sheet structures of Aβ1–42 through intercalation and π–π interactions, thus
inhibiting Aβ aggregation. To test this hypothesis, we conducted
thioflavin T (ThT) fluorescence, atomic force microscopy (AFM), circular
dichroism (CD), cell viability assays, and molecular dynamics (MD)
simulations to examine SIN-1-induced Aβ aggregation kinetics,
fibril morphologies, secondary-structure transition, cell toxicity,
and SIN-1/Aβ interactions. Our collective data showed that SIN-1
can effectively inhibit the Aβ fibrillation process by changing
the fibrillogenesis pathways to form many innocuous amorphous aggregates,
which in turn reduce Aβ-induced cell toxicity. MD simulations
further confirmed that SIN-1 can strongly bind to C-terminal residues
of Aβ, and such a binding tended to peel off the edge peptide
from Aβ oligomers and thus greatly disrupted the ordered β-sheet
structures of Aβ. Both computational and experimental findings
not only support the inhibitory effect of SIN-1 on Aβ aggregation
but also imply that SIN-1 possesses dual functions for inhibiting
both platelet and Aβ aggregation in CVD and AD.
Results and Discussion
SIN-1
Inhibits Aβ42 Fibrillization and Modulates
Its Structural Transition
3-Morpholinosydnonimine hydrochloride
(Scheme ), also termed
as linsidomine or SIN-1, is a vasodilator that can release NO, superoxide,
and peroxynitrite under physiological conditions. It is a mesoionic
heterocyclic aromatic chemical compound, with a sydonon imine group
and a morpholine group connected by the nitrogen–nitrogen bond.
First, ThT fluorescence assays were used to examine the ability of
SIN-1 to modulate Aβ aggregation kinetics. Figure shows the Aβ42 (25 μm) aggregation profiles in the absence (control) and
presence of SIN-1 at different molar ratios of Aβ/SIN-1 (1:1,
1:2, and 1:5). First, pure SIN-1 did not produce any ThT signal, eliminating
the possibility of aberrant interactions between SIN-1 and ThT. Second,
pure Aβ aggregation showed a typical nucleation–polymerization
aggregation profile, starting with a very short lag phase of ∼1
h, followed by a rapid growth from 2 to 20 h, and ending at a stable
plateau after 20 h, where a final ThT fluorescence plateau reached ∼98,
consistent with our previous work.[50,51] When incubating
the freshly prepared Aβ with SIN-1 at these three concentrations,
all cases demonstrated the inhibitory effect of SIN-1 on Aβ
aggregation in a dose-dependent manner. In all cases, SIN-1 imposed
its inhibition on every stage of Aβ aggregation, as evidenced
by the increase in lag time (∼5 h) and the decrease in aggregation
rate and final fluorescence intensity (i.e., final Aβ fibril
formation). SIN-1 reduced the amount of Aβ fibrils by ∼70,
65, and 40% at the molar ratios of Aβ/SIN-1 of 1:5, 1:2, and
1:1, respectively. Thus, the Aβ inhibition effect generally
increased as the SIN-1 concentration increased, but when SIN-1 concentrations
reached or crossed 125 μM, the Aβ inhibition effect was
similar, indicating that saturation of the inhibitory effect was achieved.
Scheme 1
Structure of SIN-1
Figure 1
Time-dependent
ThT fluorescence profiles for Aβ aggregation
of 25 μM in the absence (control) and presence of SIN-1 at different
molar ratios of Aβ/SIN-1 (1:1, 1:2, and 1:5). Error bars represent
the average of three replicate experiments.
Time-dependent
ThT fluorescence profiles for Aβ aggregation
of 25 μM in the absence (control) and presence of SIN-1 at different
molar ratios of Aβ/SIN-1 (1:1, 1:2, and 1:5). Error bars represent
the average of three replicate experiments.AFM and far-UV CD spectroscopy were performed in conjunction
with
ThT fluorescence measurements to confirm the SIN-1-induced structural
transition and fibrillar inhibition of Aβ42. Figure shows the AFM images
during the time course of Aβ (25 μM) aggregation in the
absence and presence of SIN-1 at the Aβ/SIN-1 molar ratios of
1:1, 1:2, and 1:5, respectively. As the control, pure Aβ quickly
formed large, globular aggregates and short, thick protofibrils after
5 h incubation, consistent with the lag phase as shown in Figure . After 5 h, denser
and thicker protofibrils were produced, and after 24 h, mature Aβ
fibrils dominated. However, upon the addition of SIN-1 to Aβ
solution, the morphologies of Aβ42 aggregates (Figure , second to fourth
row) were dramatically different from those of pure Aβ42 (Figure , first
row). In all cases of Aβ/SIN-1 mixtures, within 10 h, spherical
aggregates with sizes of 3–5 nm were predominant, and after
20 h, only a few thin fibrils were detected. Consistent with ThT data,
higher SIN-1 concentrations significantly slowed down Aβ fibrillization
at the three different aggregation stages and eventually produced
much less fibrils. Further AFM characterization of Aβ fibrils
in the absence and presence of SIN-1 showed that the SIN-1-mediated
Aβ fibrils showed the average width of 41.0 ± 1.65 nm and
height of 4.5 ± 0.66 nm, which were much thinner than pure Aβ
fibrils with the average width of 87.3 ± 5.25 nm and height of
13.4 ± 1.41 nm (Figure ). This observation suggests that SIN-1 molecules incorporate
Aβ oligomers to prevent them from further growing into mature
fibrils.
Figure 2
AFM images
for pure Aβ peptides (25 μM) and mixed Aβ–SIN-1
at different molar ratios of Aβ/SIN-1 (1:1, 1:2, and 1:5) at
5, 10, and 20 h.
Figure 3
Sizes of Aβ fibrils
in the (a) absence and (b) presence of
SIN-1 with Aβ/SIN-1 ratio of 1:5 at 20 h. W and H (nm) denote the width and height of the fibers,
respectively.
AFM images
for pure Aβ peptides (25 μM) and mixed Aβ–SIN-1
at different molar ratios of Aβ/SIN-1 (1:1, 1:2, and 1:5) at
5, 10, and 20 h.Sizes of Aβ fibrils
in the (a) absence and (b) presence of
SIN-1 with Aβ/SIN-1 ratio of 1:5 at 20 h. W and H (nm) denote the width and height of the fibers,
respectively.Next, we used CD spectroscopy
to monitor conformational changes
in Aβ solution during 20 h of incubation without and with SIN-1
at different concentrations. In Figure , all CD data were recorded at 0, 5, 10, and 20 h,
the same time points used in ThT and AFM measurements, and such a
timescale should be able to cover the lag, growth, and equilibrium
phases of the entire Aβ aggregation process. In all tested samples,
CD profiles did not show any characteristic peak at the beginning
of incubation (i.e., 0 h), suggesting that (i) Aβ42 did not adopt any structured conformation and (ii) SIN-1 did not
affect the initial conformation of Aβ42. As a control,
pure Aβ peptides started to misfold into certain secondary structures
at 5 h, as signified by the appearance of the two peaks at 195 and
215 nm, both of which corresponds to the β-sheet structure.
As incubation increased to 10 and 20 h, these two peaks continued
to increase in height, indicating that β-sheet-rich oligomers
and fibrils were produced. The final secondary structure content of
pure Aβ at 20 h was 55% of β-sheet, 25% of α-helix,
and 20% of random coils, respectively, indicating that pure Aβ
experiences a typical structural transition from the initial random
coil to the β-sheet structure.[50] In
contrast to pure Aβ aggregation, addition of SIN-1 molecules
into Aβ greatly interfered with the structural transition of
Aβ to the β-sheet-rich structure. During 20 h of incubation,
all sample mixtures presented only a single peak at 215 nm, without
observing any peak at 195 nm. Moreover, the peak heights at 215 nm
were greatly reduced by ∼39 and 60% at Aβ/SIN-1 = 1:2
and 1:5, respectively. So, the final β-sheet contents for Aβ
with SIN-1 at the molar ratios of 1:1, 1:2, and 1:5 were reduced to
33, 30, and 28%, respectively. CD data are again consistent with ThT
and AFM results, confirming that SIN-1 is effective in inhibiting
Aβ fibrillation by preventing its structural transition toward
the β-sheet structures.
Figure 4
Time-dependent far-UV CD spectra for pure Aβ
at 25 μM
and mixed Aβ–SIN-1 at different molar ratios of 1:1,
1:2, and 1:5 during 20 h of aggregation.
Time-dependent far-UV CD spectra for pure Aβ
at 25 μM
and mixed Aβ–SIN-1 at different molar ratios of 1:1,
1:2, and 1:5 during 20 h of aggregation.
SIN-1 Reduced Aβ42-Induced Cytotoxicity
We further investigated whether SIN-1 can also protect neuronal cells
from Aβ-induced toxicity using both 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium
bromide (MTT) assay (Figure a) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) assay (Figure b) with SH-SY5Y cell lines.
To set up a baseline, absorbance of the cell media containing SH-SY5Y
cells was measured, and the value was regarded as 100% of cells being
viable. Then, two control experiments were conducted: pure SIN-1 (125
μm) presented very low cytotoxicity to cells, as evidenced by
∼92% cell viability during 48 h of cell culture using MTT assay
and ∼7% cell apoptosis using LDH assay. SIN-1 is a precursor
of vincristine whose side effects have been noted in cancer chemotherapy.
As a control, pure Aβ42 (25 μM) presented high
toxicity to the cells. MTT assay showed that Aβ-induced cell
viability was greatly reduced to 69% at 24 h and 57% at 48 h (Figure a). Consistently,
LDH assay showed that the Aβ-induced apoptosis rate was increased
to 30% at 24 h and 43% at 48 h (Figure b). However, when Aβ (25 μM) was coincubated
with SIN-1 in the cultured cell media for 24 h, the cell viability
was 72, 75, and 93% at Aβ/SIN-1 ratios of 1:1, 1:2, and 1:5,
all of which were higher than 69% of cell viability induced by Aβ
alone. Consistent with MTT results, cell apoptosis was 22, 20, and
5% at Aβ/SIN-1 ratios of 1:1, 1:2, and 1:5, respectively, all
of which were much lower than 30% of cell apoptosis induced by Aβ
alone. Further increase in incubation time to 48 h led to minor decreases
in cell viability (70, 72, and 90% at 1:1, 1:2, and 1:5 Aβ/SIN-1
ratios, respectively) and minor increases in cell apoptosis (30, 25,
and 10% at 1:1, 1:2, and 1:5 Aβ/SIN-1 ratios, respectively),
suggesting that SIN-1 can retain its long-term neuroprotection against
Aβ-induced toxicity in SH-SY5Y cells. In line with the data
from aggregation kinetics (ThT, Figure ) and structural characterizations (AFM and CD, Figures –34), Aβ/SIN-1 mixtures
at 1:5 molar ratio provide the best cell protection effects from Aβ-induced
toxicity.
Figure 5
(a) MTT assay for cell viability and (b) LDH assay for cell apoptosis
in the presence of pure Aβ peptide and Aβ–SIN-1
mixtures at Aβ/SIN-1 molar ratios of 1:1, 1:2, and 1:5 after
24 and 48 h incubation.
(a) MTT assay for cell viability and (b) LDH assay for cell apoptosis
in the presence of pure Aβ peptide and Aβ–SIN-1
mixtures at Aβ/SIN-1 molar ratios of 1:1, 1:2, and 1:5 after
24 and 48 h incubation.
Binding Modes of SIN-1 to Aβ Oligomers
To better
understand the underlying Aβ inhibition mechanism by SIN-1,
we performed all-atom MD simulations to study the interactions between
SIN-1 molecules and an Aβ42 pentamer. The Aβ42 pentamer was selected as a binding target simply because
Aβ42 pentamers are one of the most abundant soluble
oligomers and their toxicity is one of the highest.[52−54] Two independent
100 ns MD simulations were conducted to study the interaction of Aβ42 pentamers with and without SIN-1 molecules in explicit solvent
environments. For the Aβ/SIN-1 system, 10 SIN-1 molecules were
randomly placed around the Aβ pentamer at the beginning of MD
simulations, with a separation distance to ensure no initial interactions
between SIN-1 and Aβ. The initial Aβ pentamer adopts a
U-bend conformation with both N- and C-terminal β-strands being
well-packed together in a register way. Figure a,b shows the final snapshot for pure Aβ42 pentamer alone and Aβ42 pentamer in the
presence of SIN-1 molecules. A visual inspection clearly showed that
upon SIN-1 binding to Aβ pentamers, the Aβ pentamer essentially
lost its initial structural integrity, particularly its β-sheet
structure. The comparison of root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) profiles
of Aβ pentamers in the absence and presence of SIN-1 also confirmed
the SIN-1-induced structural instability of Aβ pentamers. Without
SIN-1, Aβ pentamers exhibited very high structural stability,
with the RMSD values fluctuating around ∼4.6 Å (Figure c). The parallel
in-register β-strands and the U-shaped peptide topology in Aβ
pentamers were well-maintained, with a typical twist between adjacent
β-strands. However, when SIN-1 bound to the Aβ pentamer,
the parallel, in-registered β-sheets of Aβ pentamers were
disrupted greatly, as evidenced by the large and continuously increased
RMSD values (∼8.8 Å). We also calculated RMSD values for
three different domains of C-terminal β-sheet, U-turn, and N-terminal
β-sheet for both pure Aβ pentamer and Aβ/SIN-1 systems.
It can be clearly seen that for pure Aβ pentamer, N-terminal
β-sheet region had smaller RMSD values than C-terminal β-sheet
region and U-turn regions, indicating that the N-terminal β-sheet
region is more stable than the other two regions (Figure d). However, when SIN-1 molecules
were introduced to an Aβ pentamer, strong SIN-1/Aβ interactions
disrupted the structural integrity of Aβ, leading to larger
RMSD values in all three regions. Particularly, C-terminal β-sheet
region suffered from the larger SIN-1-induced structural deviation
(Figure e).
Figure 6
MD snapshots
of (a) pure Aβ pentamer and (b) Aβ pentamer
with preferential binding distribution of SIN-1. Red and blue balls
indicate the C-terminus and N-terminus of Aβ in (a) and (b),
respectively. (c) Time-dependent RMSD profiles for pure Aβ pentamer
(black line) and Aβ pentamer with SIN-1 (red line). Time-dependent
RMSD profiles for C-terminal β-sheet, U-turn, and N-terminal
β-sheet of Aβ (d) without SIN-1 and (e) with SIN-1.
MD snapshots
of (a) pure Aβ pentamer and (b) Aβ pentamer
with preferential binding distribution of SIN-1. Red and blue balls
indicate the C-terminus and N-terminus of Aβ in (a) and (b),
respectively. (c) Time-dependent RMSD profiles for pure Aβ pentamer
(black line) and Aβ pentamer with SIN-1 (red line). Time-dependent
RMSD profiles for C-terminal β-sheet, U-turn, and N-terminal
β-sheet of Aβ (d) without SIN-1 and (e) with SIN-1.In Figure b, SIN-1
shows some preferential binding positions around Aβ pentamers.
To better identify the possible binding sites of Aβ pentamers
by SIN-1, we calculated the averaged contact probabilities between
each Aβ residue and SIN-1 (Figure ), where a residue contact is defined as
a residue within 6.5 Å of SIN-1 molecules. Heterogeneous contact
probability between SIN-1 and Aβ residues clearly indicates
that SIN-1 has more favorable interactions with C-terminal residues
(Ile[31]–Ala[42]) than with N-terminal residues (Leu[17]-Val[24]). Using 5% of contact probability
as a threshold value, SIN-1 exhibited strong preferential interactions
with isoleucine[31] (7.7%), isoleucine[32] (6.6%), glycine[33] (7.2%), leucine[34] (7.0%), methionine[35] (8.3%), and valine[39] (6.9%), and most of these residues were hydrophobic residues initially
located in the C-terminal β-strand region. Such a strong binding
not only peels off the C-terminal strand of chain A from the Aβ
pentamer but also folds the extended β-strand conformation into
the disordered one. Ile[31]–Met[35] residues in the middle of C-terminal β-sheet
form a wide hydrophobic groove, which acts as a basic motif for amyloid
growth via either monomer attachment for elongation or lateral stacking.
Thus, disruption of this β-sheet region via strong SIN-1 binding
enables the prevention of the lateral association of Aβ aggregates
and thus inhibition of the fibril growth. Simulation results confirm
the inhibitory capacity of SIN-1 on Aβ aggregation through experiments.
Figure 7
Residue
contacting probability of SIN-1 molecules toward Aβ
peptides.
Residue
contacting probability of SIN-1 molecules toward Aβ
peptides.
Conclusions
Growing
evidence supports a likely causal link between CVD and
AD. Although there are no clinically approved inhibitors of Aβ
amyloidosis, we proposed a design strategy of Aβ aggregation
inhibitors by searching potential candidates among FDA-approved drugs
for CVD simply because these CVD drugs have already been extensively
tested for their excellent low toxicity and BBB permeability. We selected
and tested the inhibition effects of SIN-1 on Aβ aggregations
and Aβ-induced cytotoxicity by combining experimental and computational
approaches. Collective experimental data confirmed that SIN-1 can
effectively inhibit Aβ misfolding and aggregation at different
stages of aggregation and reduce Aβ-induced cell toxicity in
a dose-dependent manner. The SIN-1-induced Aβ inhibition effect
increased as the SIN-1 concentration increased. At Aβ/SIN-1
molar ratio of 1:5, SIN-1 reduced Aβ fibril formation by 70%
and Aβ-induced cell toxicity by 35%. Computationally, MD simulations
support our biophysical measurements and provide insights into SIN-1/Aβ
interaction at the molecular level. SIN-1 shows a strong tendency
to bind and disrupt the C-terminal β-sheet of Aβ, specifically
hydrophobic residues of I31–M35. Therefore, disruption of this
β-sheet region via a strong SIN-1 binding enables the prevention
of the lateral association of Aβ aggregates and thus inhibition
of the fibril growth, explaining the experimentally observed inhibition
effect of SIN-1. This work not only demonstrates a new function of
SIN-1 as an Aβ inhibitor but also hint that pharmacological
interventions of CVD may also hold promise for reducing the risk of
AD.
Materials and Methods
Materials
Aβ peptides (Aβ1–42) with more than 95% purity were purchased from
Bachem AG (Bubendorf
Switzerland). 3-Moropholinosydnonimine hydrochloride (SIN-1) with
purity 98%, 10 mM phosphate-bufferedsaline (PBS) buffer (pH = 7.4),
1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoro-2-propanol (HFIP) with purity ≥ 99.9%,
dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) with purity ≥ 99.9%, and ThT with
more than 98% purity were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis,
MO). A humanneuroblastomaSH-SY5Y cell line and Eagle’s minimum
essential medium (EMEM) were purchased from ATCC (Manassas, VA). All
chemicals used in this work were of analytical grade.
Peptide Preparation
Aβ1–42 peptide
was stored at −20 °C immediately after arrival, following
the manufacturer’s instructions. The Aβ1–42 peptide monomer was prepared by dissolving 1.0 mg of the prepackaged
peptide into 1 mL of HFIP (1 mg/mL) followed by 30 min of ultrasonic
treatment and 30 min of centrifugation at 14 000 rpm and 4
°C to remove the pre-existing aggregates and seeds. Eighty percentage
of the supernatant was extracted, subpackaged, frozen in the refrigerator
at −80 °C, and then lyophilized using freeze dryer. DMSO
(30 μL) was used to dissolve 0.2 mg of the subpackaged Aβ
peptide. The aggregation of the Aβ (25 μM) peptide was
induced by mixing 30 μL of DMSO–Aβ solution with
2 mL of PBS buffer of 10 mM.
ThT Fluorescence Assay
ThT powder
(0.033 g) was first
dissolved into 50 mL of DI water to a concentration of 2 mM and then
stored in dark place at room temperature. The stock solution was then
diluted in Tris-buffer to the concentration of 10 μM. The ThT
assay was performed by mixing 60 μL of Aβ1–42/SIN-1/Aβ1–42-3MH solutions with 3 mL of
10 μM ThT–Tris solution. An LS-55 fluorescence spectrometer
(Perkin-Elmer Corp., Waltham, MA) was used to obtain the fluorescence
spectra. An excitation wavelength of 450 nm was applied, and the emission
wavelengths were recorded between 470 and 500 nm. All of the ThT fluorescence
experiments were repeated at least three times.
CD Spectroscopy
CD spectroscopy with a J-1500 spectropolarimeter
(Jasco Inc, Japan) using a continuous scanning mode at room temperature
was applied to measure the conformation changes associated with fibril
formation. Solutions (150 μL each) of Aβ1–42/SIN-1/Aβ1–42–SIN-1 that were incubated
for 0, 5, 10, and 20 h were individually extracted and placed in a
1 mm quartz cuvette for measurements. The spectra were scanned between
190 and 250 nm at a 0.5 nm resolution and 50 nm/min scan rate. The
obtained spectra were corrected by subtracting only the buffer and/or
the absorbance from SIN-1 without Aβ1–42.
The secondary structure contents were calculated from the CD spectra
using the self-consistent method (CDSSTR program) in the CDPro analysis
software.
Tapping-Mode AFM
The morphology changes in Aβ1–42 peptides mediated by SIN-1 molecules at different
incubation periods over 20 h were evaluated using a Nanoscope III
multimode scanning probe microscope (Veeco Corp., Santa Barbara, CA).
Aliquots (20 μL) from each incubated sample at different time
points was deposited on a piece of freshly cleaved mica for 1 min,
rinsed three times with 50 mL of DI water to remove salts and loosely
bound peptides, dried using compressed air for 5 min, and imaged using
AFM. All images were recorded at the 512 × 512 pixel resolution
at a typical scan rate of 1.0–2.0 Hz and the vertical tip oscillation
frequency of 250–350 kHz. At least six different locations
on the mica surface were scanned and recorded. The representative
images were selected for comparisons.
Cell Culture
SH-SY5Yhumanneuroblastoma cells were
cultured in the medium prepared by mixing the sterile-filtered EMEM
with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) and 1% penicillin/streptomycin at
37 °C with 5% CO2. The cells were cultured in a T75
flask until they covered the available surface area. Before carrying
out the MTT experiment, the cells were harvested using 3 mL of trypsin
and then resuspended in 7 mL of PBS. The cells were then plated in
a 96-well cell culture plate with a density of 104 cells
per well.
MTT Assay
Cell viability was determined using the MTT
assay. SH-SY5Y cells were incubated in a 96-well plate at 37 °C
with a density of 104 cells per well. After removing the
medium, the cells were washed using PBS two times. Then, Aβ1–42, SIN-1, and Aβ1–42–SIN-1
solutions were individually added into the wells, which were then
incubated for another 24 and 48 h. In the procedure of MTT assay,
the culture medium was removed followed by adding 100 μL of
a fresh medium and 20 μL of the MTT solution (5 mg/mL) and incubated
for 4 h.
After that, the culture medium was removed, and the formazan crystals
were dissolved in 150 μL of DMSO. The absorbance intensity was
measured using a microplate reader (Bio-Rad 680, USA) at the wavelength
of 570 nm. All experiments were performed in sextuplicate, and the
relative cell viability was normalized by the control (cells cultured
alone).
LDH Assay
Neuronal apoptosis induced by Aβ and
mediated by SIN-1 was quantitatively assessed using the LDH release
assay. SH-SY5Y cells were incubated in a 96-well plate at 37 °C
for 24 h with a density of 104 cells per well. After replacing
the culture medium with an FBS-free medium, 10 μL of Aβ,
SIN-1, and Aβ/SIN-1 solutions were added into different wells.
For the spontaneous LDH activity control group, 10 μL of sterile
and ultrapure water was added into the wells. The plates were then
incubated at 37 °C for 24 and 48 h. Before the assay, 10 μL
of lysis buffer (10×) was added to the maximum LDH activity control
group for an additional incubation of 45 min. Extracellular LDH leakage
was evaluated using the assay kit (Thermo, USA). The absorbance intensity
was measured using a microplate reader (Bio-Rad 680, USA) at the wavelength
of 490 and 680 nm. All experiments were performed in sextuplicate.
MD Simulation
The initial structure of Aβ pentamers
was obtained from the protein data bank (PDBID: 2BEG). The coordinate
of SIN-1 molecules was generated using the GaussView program, whose
force fields were developed in a CHARMM-CGenFF compatible manner.[55] Each system was solvated in the explicit solvent
box with a minimal margin of 15 Å from any edge of water box
to any solute atom. The simulated systems were neutralized and mimicked
∼150 mM ion strength using Na+ and Cl– ions. The simulations were conducted with the NAMD program using
the CHARMM27 force field. Langevin method was used to maintain the
temperature of 300 K and pressure of 1 atm in the NPT simulation systems.
Long- and short-range nonbond interactions were described using the
force-shifted method with 14 Å cutoff and the switch method with
12 and 14 Å cutoffs. The trajectories were saved every 2 ps for
the analysis. All analyses were performed using the CHARMM scripts,
VMD, and in-house Tcl codes.
Authors: Anja Mähler; Silvia Mandel; Mario Lorenz; Urs Ruegg; Erich E Wanker; Michael Boschmann; Friedemann Paul Journal: EPMA J Date: 2013-02-18 Impact factor: 6.543