Alzheimer's disease (AD), the most common cause of dementia in the elderly, is the sixth leading cause of death in the United States. We hypothesize that the impaired clearance of Aβ42 from the brain is partly responsible for the onset of sporadic AD. In this work, we evaluated the activity of insulin-degrading enzyme (IDE) toward Aβ42 in the presence of resveratrol, a polyphenol found in red wine and grape juice. By liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry, we identified initial cleavage sites in the absence and presence of resveratrol that carry biological relevance connected to the amyloidogenic properties of Aβ42. Incubation with resveratrol results in a substantial increase in Aβ42 fragmentation compared to the control, signifying that the polyphenol sustains IDE-dependent degradation of Aβ42 and its fragments. Our findings suggest that therapeutic and/or preventative approaches combining resveratrol and IDE may hold promise for sporadic AD.
Alzheimer's disease (AD), the most common cause of dementia in the elderly, is the sixth leading cause of death in the United States. We hypothesize that the impaired clearance of Aβ42 from the brain is partly responsible for the onset of sporadic AD. In this work, we evaluated the activity of insulin-degrading enzyme (IDE) toward Aβ42 in the presence of resveratrol, a polyphenol found in red wine and grape juice. By liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry, we identified initial cleavage sites in the absence and presence of resveratrol that carry biological relevance connected to the amyloidogenic properties of Aβ42. Incubation with resveratrol results in a substantial increase in Aβ42 fragmentation compared to the control, signifying that the polyphenol sustains IDE-dependent degradation of Aβ42 and its fragments. Our findings suggest that therapeutic and/or preventative approaches combining resveratrol and IDE may hold promise for sporadic AD.
Alzheimer’s
disease (AD) is the leading cause of dementia
in the aged. According to the Alzheimer’s Association, AD currently
affects 5.7 million Americans.[1] This statistic
is projected to increase to 14 million by 2050.[1] One popular target of basic science research and clinical
trials is amyloid-β(1–42) (Aβ42), which is hypothesized
to play an initiating role in AD.[2] Under
certain conditions, Aβ42 aggregates to form neurotoxic oligomers.[3] Researchers have long hypothesized that the increased
production of pathogenic Aβ42 causes AD, though this appears
to account for only 10% of AD cases.[2] About
90% of ADpatients have the sporadic form, which may instead arise
from impaired degradation or clearance of Aβ42 from the brain.[2]In this work, we propose the combination
of two key components
implicated in improving the efficiency of this process and preventing
Aβ42 accumulation. One component of interest is insulin-degrading
enzyme (IDE, EC No. 3.4.24.56), a 110 kDa, Zn2+ metalloprotease
that plays a significant role in the extracellular and intracellular
degradation of Aβ.[4,5] The unique structure
of IDE can accommodate a wide variety of monomeric substrates of similar
size (<80 amino acids), including Aβ, insulin, glucagon,
and amylin.[6] IDE consists of four domains
(labeled 1–4 in Figure ). The N-terminal half (IDEN, composed of domains
1 and 2) is attached by a flexible linker to the C-terminal half (IDEC, composed of domains 3 and 4). Biochemical,[7−10] crystallographic,[6,11] and cryogenic electron microscopic[12] studies have provided the basis for substrate
recognition by IDE. During its catalytic cycle, IDE exists in two
conformations: open IDE allows the entry of substrates into IDE’s
catalytic chamber and the release of products, whereas close IDE performs
the hydrolysis of peptide bonds. The negatively charged IDEN has a highly conserved exosite about 30 Å away from Zn2+ coordinated to H108 and H112, and a catalytically active
E111 (Figure ), whereas
the positively charged IDEC is hypothesized to permit initial
contact with substrates. One proposed mechanism by Guo and co-workers
states that IDE-dependent degradation occurs via E111-catalyzed hydrolysis
after the substrate anchors to IDE’s exosite by its N-terminus
and unfolds.[7] Although several enzymes
cleave Aβ,[13] evidence suggests that
IDE plays a key role in the maintenance of Aβ homeostasis.[5] Aβ accumulation has been observed in both
IDE-knockout mice[14,15] and individuals with early stages
of sporadic AD.[16] This implies that a decline
in IDE expression and/or activity with age may be a contributing factor
for increased aggregation of Aβ42 and formation of neurotoxic
oligomers. Therefore, the development of therapeutic strategies focusing
on IDE is warranted.
Figure 1
Insulin-degrading enzyme (4PES)[11] is
composed of four domains. The N-terminal half of IDE (IDEN, domains 1 and 2) is linked to the C-terminal half (IDEC, domains 3 and 4) by a flexible linker (purple). Domain 1 contains
Zn2+ coordinated to H108 and H112 and the catalytically
active residue (E111, mutated to a glutamine in 4PES). Domain 2 contains
a highly conserved exosite (red) that is hypothesized to be important
for the binding of substrates prior to degradation.
Insulin-degrading enzyme (4PES)[11] is
composed of four domains. The N-terminal half of IDE (IDEN, domains 1 and 2) is linked to the C-terminal half (IDEC, domains 3 and 4) by a flexible linker (purple). Domain 1 contains
Zn2+ coordinated to H108 and H112 and the catalytically
active residue (E111, mutated to a glutamine in 4PES). Domain 2 contains
a highly conserved exosite (red) that is hypothesized to be important
for the binding of substrates prior to degradation.To this end, we are curious about the therapeutic
potential of
simultaneously using IDE and polyphenols, a second component of interest,
to target Aβ42. Polyphenols are naturally occurring compounds,
many of which can cross the blood–brain barrier.[17] Mounting in vitro and in vivo evidence shows
that polyphenols are neuroprotective in that they diminish brain neuropathology
and ameliorate cognitive function in animal models of AD through several
mechanisms.[17,18] In this work, we chose resveratrol
(3,5,4′-trihydroxystilbene), a polyphenol found in red wine
and grape juice.[19] Resveratrol exists in
the cis- and trans-configurations (Figure ), but the latter is more stable and is known
to be responsible for the beneficial effects of the compound.[20] Moderate consumption of red wine has been associated
with a lower risk of dementia.[21] More recently,
Krikorian et al. found that dietary supplementation with grape juice
significantly improves the memory of subjects with mild cognitive
impairment.[22,23] Moderate consumption of red wine
reduces amyloid plaque pathology in a transgenic mice model of AD.[24] Vingtdeux et al. demonstrated that orally administered
resveratrol in mice reduces Aβ levels and deposition in the
cerebral cortex.[25] Porquet et al. reported
that dietary resveratrol reduces amyloid burden, tau hyperphosphorylation,
and cognitive impairment in SAMP8 mice, a model of age-related AD.[26] According to Ladiwala et al., resveratrol acts
by remodeling three conformers of Aβ42, including soluble oligomers,
fibrillar intermediates, and fibrils, into unstructured, nontoxic
aggregated species.[27] Fu and co-workers
probed the ability of resveratrol to interact with Aβ42 oligomers
using atomic force microscopy and NMR spectroscopy, and observed that
resveratrol binds to the N-terminus of Aβ monomers and limits
oligomer formation to low-molecular-weight oligomers.[28]
Figure 2
Resveratrol has two isomers. trans-Resveratrol
(left) is more stable and potent than cis-resveratrol
(right).
Resveratrol has two isomers. trans-Resveratrol
(left) is more stable and potent than cis-resveratrol
(right).Despite these findings supporting
resveratrol’s ability
to modulate Aβ aggregation and deposition, the direct effect
of the polyphenol on IDE-dependent degradation of Aβ is not
known. Marambaud et al. reported that although resveratrol promotes
clearance of Aβ40 and Aβ42 by the proteasome, Aβ
levels were not rescued when resveratrol-treated HEK293 cells were
pretreated with insulin, believed to be a competitive IDE inhibitor
by the authors.[29] This result led them
to conclude that resveratrol does not facilitate Aβ degradation
by IDE, among other enzymes.[29] In contrast,
Rege et al. demonstrated that a 2 h resveratrol pretreatment rescues
Aβ40-induced decline in IDE expression exhibited by rat hippocampal
neuronal cells, suggesting that resveratrol may aid degradation through
an indirect manner via increased IDE expression.[30] In this work, we used two in vitro systems, one comprised
of Aβ42 and IDE (control) and the other comprised of Aβ42,
resveratrol, and IDE, to directly examine the effect of resveratrol
on IDE-dependent degradation of Aβ42. Our results show that
IDE is active toward Aβ42 in the presence of resveratrol, and
that resveratrol sustains the activity of IDE toward the primary fragments
of Aβ42.
Results and Discussion
We first
pretreated Aβ42 and expressed and purified IDE using
procedures adapted from Fradinger et al.[31] and Farris et al.,[32] respectively. Thereafter,
IDE-dependent digestions of Aβ42 with and without resveratrol
were conducted using a substrate-to-enzyme molar ratio of 100:1 and
a digestion temperature of 4 °C. We used a temperature of 4 °C
for two important reasons: (1) to delay the onset of fibril formation[33] and (2) to control the proteolysis[34] so that we can unambiguously identify the primary
fragments resulting from initial cleavages in Aβ42. To characterize
the digests, we first used circular dichroism (CD). Aliquots of each
digestion were then removed at specific time points, and the reactions
were quenched by acidification to low pH (<2.0) and stored at −20
°C until analysis by liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry
(LC/MS).CD spectra of Aβ42 in 10 mM phosphate buffer
(pH 7.4) in
the absence (Figure S1A) and presence of
resveratrol (Figure S1B) at 4 °C show
minima below 200 nm, consistent with the dominant presence of unstructured
Aβ42 in the samples. This result together with the micromolar
concentration of Aβ42 (i.e., 25 μM) indicate that our
preparations contain a mixture of monomers and oligomers, as described
by Lazo et al.[35] We did not observe significant
changes in the spectra shown in Figure S1A and B over 6 days of incubation, indicating that Aβ42 remained
predominantly unstructured. CD spectra of digests at 4 °C in
the absence (Figure S2A) and presence (Figure S2B) of resveratrol recorded periodically
over the digestion period suggest the presence of random coil peptides.To evaluate the activity of IDE toward Aβ42 at pH 7.4 and
4 °C, we first identified the initial cleavage sites in the substrate
in the absence and presence of resveratrol. Figure A,B presents the mass spectra of fragments
of Aβ42 resulting from initial cleavages in the absence of resveratrol.
Fragments D1–F19 and D1–F20 were detected (Figure A and Table ), along with F20–A42
and A21–A42 (Figure B and Table ). These results indicate initial cleavages at the peptide bonds
between Phe19 and Phe20 and Phe20 and Ala21 (Figure C). Since IDE only degrades monomeric substrates,[6] our results provide unambiguous evidence for
Aβ42 monomers in dynamic equilibrium with Aβ42 oligomers,
which are then degraded by IDEComparison of the peptide maps shown in Figure C with those obtained
by others is difficult to make, primarily because they employed digestion
conditions that do not match ours. For example, Rogeberg et al. used
ratIDE, a digestion temperature of 37 °C and a higher amount
of IDE (substrate-to-enzyme ratio of 25:1).[36] Mukherjee et al. also used ratIDE to digest Aβ40 and Aβ42
at 37 °C at unspecified substrate-to-enzyme ratios.[37] Guo et al. investigated the digestion of Aβ40
by humanIDE at 37 °C and a substrate-to-enzyme ratio of 50:1.[7] Song et al. also studied the degradation of Aβ40
by ratIDE at 37 °C at unspecified substrate-to-enzyme ratios.[38] Hubin et al. found that at 37 °C, Aβ
can be cleaved by IDE at least twice, complicating the identification
of the initial cleavage sites.[39] Nonetheless,
we noted that the peptide maps of Aβ42 and Aβ40 presented
in these studies are similar to Figure C in that they also show the peptide bonds between
Phe19 and Phe20 and between Phe20 and Ala21 as initial cleavage sites.
Figure 3
Initial
cleavage sites in Aβ42 resulting from IDE-dependent
degradation in the absence of resveratrol. (A) Mass spectrum of the
primary N-terminal fragments (colored accordingly), which have retention
times of 26–31 min. The peak at 317.70 corresponds to A30–M35ox.
(B) Mass spectrum of the primary C-terminal fragments (colored accordingly),
which have retention times of 40–43 min. Peaks labeled with
asterisks correspond to Aβ42. (C) Peptide maps of Aβ42
depicting initial cleavages at the peptide bonds between Phe19 and
Phe20 and between Phe20 and Ala21, corresponding to the color-coded
fragments in (A) and (B). Residues in the central hydrophobic cluster
(CHC) and loop region are italicized and underlined, respectively.
Table 1
Fragments of Aβ42
Resulting
from Initial Cleavages by IDE at pH 7.4, 4 °C and Substrate-to-Enzyme
Molar Ratio of 100:1
fragments
observed m/z ratio
charge z
observed mass (Da)
theoretical mass (Da)
δ
(Da)a
initial cleavage
site
D1–F19
463.83
5
2314.15
2314.50
–0.35
Phe19–Phe20
579.53
4
2314.12
–0.38
772.37
3
2314.11
–0.39
F20–A42
740.07
3
2217.21
2217.61
–0.40
1109.60
2
2217.20
–0.41
D1–F20
493.24
5
2461.20
2461.68
–0.48
Phe20–Ala21
616.30
4
2461.20
–0.48
A21–A42
691.05
3
2070.15
2070.43
–0.28
1036.07
2
2070.14
–0.29
D1–K28b
653.31
5
3261.55
3262.50
–0.95
Lys28–Gly29
G29–A42b oxidizedc
643.38
2
1284.76
1285.75
–1.01
Observed mass–theoretical
mass.
Primary fragments
observed only
in the presence of resveratrol.
Met35 oxidized to a sulfoxide.
Initial
cleavage sites in Aβ42 resulting from IDE-dependent
degradation in the absence of resveratrol. (A) Mass spectrum of the
primary N-terminal fragments (colored accordingly), which have retention
times of 26–31 min. The peak at 317.70 corresponds to A30–M35ox.
(B) Mass spectrum of the primary C-terminal fragments (colored accordingly),
which have retention times of 40–43 min. Peaks labeled with
asterisks correspond to Aβ42. (C) Peptide maps of Aβ42
depicting initial cleavages at the peptide bonds between Phe19 and
Phe20 and between Phe20 and Ala21, corresponding to the color-coded
fragments in (A) and (B). Residues in the central hydrophobic cluster
(CHC) and loop region are italicized and underlined, respectively.Observed mass–theoretical
mass.Primary fragments
observed only
in the presence of resveratrol.Met35 oxidized to a sulfoxide.In the presence of resveratrol, fragments D1–F19,
D1–F20,
and D1–K28 were detected (Figure A and Table ) together with fragments F20–A42, A21–A42,
and G29–A42ox (Figure B and Table ). These data indicate that in addition to initial cleavages at the
peptide bonds between Phe19 and Phe20 and Phe20 and Ala21, the peptide
bond between Lys28 and Gly29 is also cleaved initially in the presence
of resveratrol (Figure C). Together, these results signify that IDE is active in the presence
of resveratrol.
Figure 4
Initial cleavage sites in Aβ42 resulting from IDE-dependent
degradation in the presence of resveratrol. (A) Mass spectrum of the
primary N-terminal fragments (colored accordingly), which have retention
times of 25–30 min. Peaks labeled in black correspond to secondary
fragments. (B) Mass spectrum of the primary C-terminal fragments (colored
accordingly), which have retention times of 40–43 min. Peaks
labeled with asterisks correspond to Aβ42. (C) Peptide maps
of Aβ42 depicting initial cleavages at the peptide bonds between
Phe19 and Phe20, between Phe20 and Ala21, and between Lys28 and Gly29,
corresponding to the color-coded fragments in (A) and (B). Residues
in the CHC and loop region are italicized and underlined, respectively.
Initial cleavage sites in Aβ42 resulting from IDE-dependent
degradation in the presence of resveratrol. (A) Mass spectrum of the
primary N-terminal fragments (colored accordingly), which have retention
times of 25–30 min. Peaks labeled in black correspond to secondary
fragments. (B) Mass spectrum of the primary C-terminal fragments (colored
accordingly), which have retention times of 40–43 min. Peaks
labeled with asterisks correspond to Aβ42. (C) Peptide maps
of Aβ42 depicting initial cleavages at the peptide bonds between
Phe19 and Phe20, between Phe20 and Ala21, and between Lys28 and Gly29,
corresponding to the color-coded fragments in (A) and (B). Residues
in the CHC and loop region are italicized and underlined, respectively.The two initial cleavages at the
peptide bonds between Phe19 and
Phe20 and Phe20 and Ala21 (Figures C and 4C) occur in L17VFFA21, known as the central hydrophobic cluster (CHC)
of Aβ42. This result correlates well to the detection of truncated
Aβ peptides, including Aβ(1–19) and Aβ(1–20)
in cerebrospinal fluid[40] and in plasma
from ADpatients and controls.[41] The mechanism
of IDE-dependent degradation of Aβ42 is not completely understood,
but the current working model speculating that the N-termini of substrates
interact with the negatively charged glutamate residues at or near
IDE’s exosite[7] appears to be consistent
with cleavages occurring in the CHC. Importantly, by cleaving in the
CHC, IDE prevents the intramolecular association of the cluster with
the hydrophobic segment A30IIGL34 of Aβ42,
a key interaction in the three-dimensional structure of a disease-relevant
Aβ42 fibril.[42]The additional
initial cleavage site in the presence of resveratrol,
i.e., at the peptide bond between Lys28 and Gly29, occurs in the putative
loop region of Aβ42, i.e., E22DVGSNKG29, which facilitates the interaction of the CHC with A30IIGL34.[42] Using a panel of
enzymes that includes chymotrypsin (EC No. 3.4.21.1), endoproteinase
Asp-N (EC No. 3.4.24.33), endoproteinase Glu-C (EC No. 3.4.21.19),
humanneutrophil elastase (EC No. 3.4.21.37), porcine pancreatic elastase
(EC No. 3.4.21.36), thermolysin (EC No. 3.4.24.27), and trypsin (EC
No. 3.4.21.4), Lazo et al. showed that E22DVGSNKG29 is protease-resistant.[35] By cleaving
a peptide bond in the loop region of Aβ42, IDE prevents the
association of the CHC and A30IIGL34 segment
implicated in the formation of the repeating Aβ42 fold in pathologic
Aβ42 fibrils.[42]Next, we determined
if resveratrol sustains the activity of IDE
toward the primary fragments of Aβ42. Figure presents the total mass spectra of the 2
and 6 h digests in the absence of resveratrol. We noted that the two
spectra are similar in terms of the number of peaks and intensities
of the major peaks, indicating that further degradation of the primary
N- and C-terminal fragments of Aβ42 did not occur significantly
over the 4 h time interval. We identified 19 and 22 secondary fragments
in the 2 and 6 h digests, respectively (Tables S1 and S2). Figure shows the total mass spectra of the 2 and 6 h digests in
the presence of resveratrol. In contrast to Figure , the spectra are more complex in that there
are more peaks corresponding to fragments produced by cleavages in
the primary fragments. We identified 31 secondary fragments at 2 h
and 33 secondary fragments at 6 h (Figure , Tables S3 and S4). Prominent peaks in the spectra in Figure that were not detected or of low intensities
in the control spectra (Figure ) included peaks at 398.18 (H14–N27), 432.45 (F20–V36),
497.75 (L17–G25), and 527.95 (Q15–K28) (Tables S3 and S4). We also observed significant
changes in the intensities of peaks in the mass spectra of the 2 and
6 h digests in the presence of resveratrol. For example, the intensity
of the peak at 317.70, corresponding to A30–M35ox, increased,
whereas the intensity of the peak at 616.30, corresponding to D1–F20,
decreased. Together, these results show that resveratrol sustains
the activity of IDE toward the primary fragments of Aβ42.
Figure 5
Primary fragments
of Aβ42 were not degraded significantly
by IDE at pH 7.4 and 4 °C. (A) Total mass spectrum of the 2 h
digest shows the dominant presence of peaks corresponding to Aβ42
fragments resulting from initial cleavages. (B) Total mass spectrum
of the 6 h digest is essentially similar to the spectrum of the 2
h digest. Dominant peaks in (A) and (B) are labeled by their m/z ratios (also detailed in Tables S1 and S2).
Figure 6
Primary fragments of Aβ42 were degraded significantly by
IDE in the presence of resveratrol at pH 7.4 and 4 °C. (A) Total
mass spectrum of the 2 h digest shows the presence of peaks due to
primary Aβ42 fragments resulting from initial cleavages and
peaks corresponding to secondary fragments resulting from further degradation of the primary fragments.
(B) Total mass spectrum of the 6 h digest shows significant changes
relative to the spectrum in (A), including alterations in peak intensities
and the appearance of new peaks. Dominant peaks in (A) and (B) are
identified by their m/z ratios (also
detailed in Tables S3 and S4).
Primary fragments
of Aβ42 were not degraded significantly
by IDE at pH 7.4 and 4 °C. (A) Total mass spectrum of the 2 h
digest shows the dominant presence of peaks corresponding to Aβ42
fragments resulting from initial cleavages. (B) Total mass spectrum
of the 6 h digest is essentially similar to the spectrum of the 2
h digest. Dominant peaks in (A) and (B) are labeled by their m/z ratios (also detailed in Tables S1 and S2).Primary fragments of Aβ42 were degraded significantly by
IDE in the presence of resveratrol at pH 7.4 and 4 °C. (A) Total
mass spectrum of the 2 h digest shows the presence of peaks due to
primary Aβ42 fragments resulting from initial cleavages and
peaks corresponding to secondary fragments resulting from further degradation of the primary fragments.
(B) Total mass spectrum of the 6 h digest shows significant changes
relative to the spectrum in (A), including alterations in peak intensities
and the appearance of new peaks. Dominant peaks in (A) and (B) are
identified by their m/z ratios (also
detailed in Tables S3 and S4).In summary, our work clearly shows that unstructured
Aβ42
monomers undergo proteolysis by IDE in the presence and absence of
resveratrol. The initial cleavage sites across samples are similar
and hold biological relevance in that they preclude the folding of
Aβ42 into a conformer implicated in the formation of pathologic
Aβ42 fibrils. However, the presence of resveratrol also renders
the putative loop region of Aβ42 susceptible to initial cleavage.
Additionally, our work shows that when resveratrol is present, the
fragmentation of the primary fragments of Aβ42 is significantly
increased. These unambiguous outcomes with resveratrol may arise from
two mechanisms. First, several studies have shown that the catalytic
activity of IDE is allosterically regulated. Such regulation can be
driven by ATP,[43,44] its substrate,[12] allosteric mutations in the enzyme,[10] anions,[45] small peptides, including
dynorphin[46] and somatostatin,[47] and small molecules.[48,49] Second, although resveratrol does not prevent oligomer formation,
it can selectively remodel soluble toxic Aβ42 oligomers into
off-pathway conformers[27] that may drive
the dynamic equilibrium discussed above to IDE-degradable monomers.
Both mechanisms likely contribute, but we speculate that one dominates
depending on whether the substrate is Aβ42 monomer or its primary
fragments. The detailed mechanism of the sustainment of the activity
of IDE by resveratrol awaits future structural studies of IDE in the
presence of resveratrol, Aβ42, and its primary fragments. Such
studies may be accomplished using cryoEM, which was recently applied
to IDE in the presence of insulin.[12]In conclusion, in addition to increasing hippocampal IDE expression
in vivo,[30] resveratrol also sustains the
activity of IDE toward Aβ42 monomer and its fragments. Interestingly,
we have produced kinetic data showing that resveratrol does not affect
the IDE-dependent degradation of insulin (Lazo et al., unpublished
results). These results imply that resveratrol may be specific to
Aβ and will not have off-target effects. If true, the combination
of resveratrol and IDE may address the impaired Aβ42 clearance
in the brain, which is thought to be primarily responsible for sporadic
cases of AD.
Experimental Section
Pretreatment of Aβ42
Aβ42 (≥95%
pure by HPLC, 21st Century Biochemicals, Marlborough MA) was pretreated
as 1 mg/mL solutions with 100% 1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoro-2-isopropanol
and then 2 mM NaOH using a protocol by Fradinger et al.[31] Pretreated Aβ42 was stored at −20
°C until experimentation.
Expression and Purification
of Human Insulin-Degrading Enzyme
Glutathione S-transferase-tagged
humaninsulin-degrading enzyme
(GST-IDE in pGEX-6p-1 vector, from Dr Malcolm A. Leissring) was overexpressed
and purified using procedures adapted from Farris et al.[32] Briefly, we transformed GST-IDE into Escherichia coli BL21-CodonPlus (DE3) competent cells.
Expression was initiated with 50 μM IPTG, and the cells were
grown overnight at 25 °C. Prior to lysing the cells, phenylmethylsulfonyl
fluoride nonmetalloprotease inhibitor was added. A 5 mL GST Trap Fast
Flow column (GE) on an ÄKTA Pure fast protein liquid chromatography
(FPLC, GE) was used to purify GST-IDE, which was eluted with phosphate-buffered
saline (PBS) and 10 mM glutathione. A HiLoad 16/600 Superdex S-200
pg gel filtration column connected to an ÄKTA Pure FPLC further
purified IDE. The molar extinction coefficient of IDE at 280 nm,[50] ε280 nm = 113570 M–1 cm–1, was used to determine purified
protein concentration. IDE aliquots with 1% glycerol (v/v) were flash-frozen
and stored at −80 °C in PBS (pH 7.4). We confirmed IDE
activity by CD/LC/MS using insulin as a positive control substrate.
Preparation of Stock Solutions
Pretreated Aβ42
(∼0.25 mg) was rehydrated in 10 mM phosphate buffer (pH 7.4)
to a concentration of 1 mg/mL. On ice, the pH of the Aβ42 stock
solution was adjusted to 7.4 with the addition of 1 M HCl. A stock
solution (0.5 mg/mL) of trans-resveratrol (>99%
pure
by GC, Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis MO) was prepared in 100% ethanol.
The concentrations of the stock solutions of Aβ42, resveratrol,
and IDE were determined by UV–vis spectroscopy, using the molar
extinction coefficients of ε275 nm = 1390 M–1 cm–1,[35] ε306 nm = 26800 M–1 cm–1,[51] and ε280 nm = 113570 M–1 cm–1,[50] respectively.
Circular Dichroism (CD)
Spectroscopy
Six samples, each
with a volume of 350 μL, were prepared for CD analysis: (1)
Aβ42 only (25 μM), (2) IDE only (0.25 μM), (3) Aβ42
plus IDE (25 μM Aβ42 + 0.25 μM IDE or 100:1 substrate-to-enzyme
molar ratio), (4) Aβ42 and resveratrol (25 μM Aβ42
+ 40 μM resveratrol), (5) IDE and resveratrol (0.25 μM
IDE + 40 μM resveratrol), and (6) Aβ42, resveratrol and
IDE (25 μM Aβ42 + 40 μM resveratrol + 0.25 μM
IDE). CD samples were incubated in quartz cuvettes (path length 1
mm) at 4 °C. Measurements were recorded on a Jasco J-815 spectrometer
from 260 to 198 nm at 4 °C with 1 nm steps and averaged over
eight accumulations. The Savitzsky–Golay method (convolution
width = 9) was used to smoothen all spectra.
Liquid Chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry (LC/MS)
Aliquots
(18 μL) of CD samples #3 (Aβ42 plus IDE) and #6 (Aβ42,
resveratrol and IDE) were removed periodically, and the reactions
were quenched with 8 μL of 1% trifluoroacetic acid in H2O. Quenched 2 and 6 h digestions were subjected to LC/MS at
the University of the Massachusetts Medical School’s Proteomics
and Mass Spectrometry Facility. Chromatography was accomplished using
a NanoAcquity (Waters, Milford MA) UPLC system equipped with a Michrom
Magic C18AQ column. Mass spectrometry was performed using an Orbitrap
Q Exactive hybrid mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher, Waltham MA). Spectra
were acquired from m/z 300 to 1750
at 70 000 resolution, and data-dependent acquisition chose
the top 10 most abundant precursor ions for tandem mass spectrometry
by higher-energy collisional dissociation fragmentation.
Authors: Robert Krikorian; Tiffany A Nash; Marcelle D Shidler; Barbara Shukitt-Hale; James A Joseph Journal: Br J Nutr Date: 2009-12-23 Impact factor: 3.718
Authors: Nicholas Noinaj; Eun Suk Song; Sonia Bhasin; Benjamin J Alper; Walter K Schmidt; Louis B Hersh; David W Rodgers Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2011-11-02 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Robert Krikorian; Erin L Boespflug; David E Fleck; Amanda L Stein; Jolynne D Wightman; Marcelle D Shidler; Sara Sadat-Hossieny Journal: J Agric Food Chem Date: 2012-04-09 Impact factor: 5.279
Authors: Valérie Vingtdeux; Luca Giliberto; Haitian Zhao; Pallavi Chandakkar; Qingli Wu; James E Simon; Elsa M Janle; Jessica Lobo; Mario G Ferruzzi; Peter Davies; Philippe Marambaud Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2010-01-14 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Wesley Farris; Stefan Mansourian; Yang Chang; Loren Lindsley; Elizabeth A Eckman; Matthew P Frosch; Christopher B Eckman; Rudolph E Tanzi; Dennis J Selkoe; Suzanne Guenette Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2003-03-12 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Qiuchen Zheng; Bethany Lee; Micheal T Kebede; Valerie A Ivancic; Merc M Kemeh; Henrique Lemos Brito; Donald E Spratt; Noel D Lazo Journal: ACS Omega Date: 2022-07-07
Authors: Qiuchen Zheng; Micheal T Kebede; Bethany Lee; Claire A Krasinski; Saadman Islam; Liliana A Wurfl; Merc M Kemeh; Valerie A Ivancic; Charles E Jakobsche; Donald E Spratt; Noel D Lazo Journal: Antioxidants (Basel) Date: 2021-08-25