Japanese Encephalitis��A Pathological and Clinical Perspective

Japanese encephalitis (JE) is the leading form of viral encephalitis in Asia. It is caused by the JE virus (JEV), which belongs to the family Flaviviridae. JEV is endemic to many parts of Asia, where periodic outbreaks take hundreds of lives. Despite the catastrophes it causes, JE has remained a tropical disease uncommon in the West. With rapid globalization and climatic shift, JEV has started to emerge in areas where the threat was previously unknown. Scientific evidence predicts that JEV will soon become a global pathogen and cause of worldwide pandemics. Although some research documents JEV pathogenesis and drug discovery, worldwide awareness of the need for extensive research to deal with JE is still lacking. This review focuses on the exigency of developing a worldwide effort to acknowledge the prime importance of performing an extensive study of this thus far neglected tropical viral disease. This review also outlines the pathogenesis, the scientific efforts channeled into develop a therapy, and the outlook for a possible future breakthrough addressing this killer disease.     

Membrane Partitioning: ��Classical�� and ��Nonclassical�� Hydrophobic Effects

The free energy of transfer of nonpolar solutes from water to lipid bilayers is often dominated by a large negative enthalpy rather than the large positive entropy expected from the hydrophobic effect. This common observation has led to the idea that membrane partitioning is driven by the "nonclassical" hydrophobic effect. We examined this phenomenon by characterizing the partitioning of the well-studied peptide melittin using isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) and circular dichroism (CD). We studied the temperature dependence of the entropic (-TΔS) and enthalpic (ΔH) components of free energy (ΔG) of partitioning of melittin into lipid membranes made of various mixtures of zwitterionic and anionic lipids. We found significant variations of the entropic and enthalpic components with temperature, lipid composition and vesicle size but only small changes in ΔG (entropy-enthalpy compensation). The heat capacity associated with partitioning had a large negative value of about -0.5 kcal mol(-1) K(-1). This hallmark of the hydrophobic effect was found to be independent of lipid composition. The measured heat capacity values were used to calculate the hydrophobic-effect free energy ΔG (hΦ), which we found to dominate melittin partitioning regardless of lipid composition. In the case of anionic membranes, additional free energy comes from coulombic attraction, which is characterized by a small effective peptide charge due to the lack of additivity of hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions in membrane interfaces [Ladokhin and White J Mol Biol 309:543-552, 2001]. Our results suggest that there is no need for a special effect-the nonclassical hydrophobic effect-to describe partitioning into lipid bilayers.     

Structural polymorphism of Alzheimer A�� and other amyloid fibrils

Deposits of amyloid fibrils characterize a diverse group of human diseases that includes Alzheimer disease, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and type II diabetes. Amyloid fibrils formed from different polypeptides contain a common cross-β spine. Nevertheless, amyloid fibrils formed from the same polypeptide can occur in a range of structurally different morphologies. The heterogeneity of amyloid fibrils reflects different types of polymorphism: (1) variations in the protofilament number, (2) variations in the protofilament arrangement and (3) different polypeptide conformations. Amyloid fibril polymorphism implies that fibril formation can lead, for the same polypeptide sequence, to many different patterns of inter- or intra-residue interactions. This property differs significantly from native, monomeric protein folding reactions that produce, for one protein sequence, only one ordered conformation and only one set of inter-residue interactions.Key words: Alzheimer disease, aggregation, neurodegeneration, prion, protein folding     

A��42-to-A��40- and Angiotensin-converting Activities in Different Domains of Angiotensin-converting Enzyme

Amyloid β-protein 1–42 (Aβ42) is believed to play a causative role in the development of Alzheimer disease (AD), although it is a minor part of Aβ. In contrast, Aβ40 is the predominant secreted form of Aβ and recent studies have suggested that Aβ40 has neuroprotective effects and inhibits amyloid deposition. We have reported that angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) converts Aβ42 to Aβ40, and its inhibition enhances brain Aβ42 deposition (Zou, K., Yamaguchi, H., Akatsu, H., Sakamoto, T., Ko, M., Mizoguchi, K., Gong, J. S., Yu, W., Yamamoto, T., Kosaka, K., Yanagisawa, K., and Michikawa, M. (2007) J. Neurosci. 27, 8628–8635). ACE has two homologous domains, each having a functional active site. In the present study, we identified the domain of ACE, which is responsible for converting Aβ42 to Aβ40. Interestingly, Aβ42-to-Aβ40-converting activity is solely found in the N-domain of ACE and the angiotensin-converting activity is found predominantly in the C-domain of ACE. We also found that the N-linked glycosylation is essential for both Aβ42-to-Aβ40- and angiotensin-converting activities and that unglycosylated ACE rapidly degraded. The domain-specific converting activity of ACE suggests that ACE inhibitors could be designed to specifically target the angiotensin-converting C-domain, without inhibiting the Aβ42-to-Aβ40-converting activity of ACE or increasing neurotoxic Aβ42.     

Neurotoxicity of Alzheimer's disease A�� peptides is induced by small changes in the A��42 to A��40 ratio

The amyloid peptides Aβ₄₀ and Aβ₄₂ of Alzheimer's disease are thought to contribute differentially to the disease process. Although Aβ₄₂ seems more pathogenic than Aβ₄₀, the reason for this is not well understood. We show here that small alterations in the Aβ₄₂:Aβ₄₀ ratio dramatically affect the biophysical and biological properties of the Aβ mixtures reflected in their aggregation kinetics, the morphology of the resulting amyloid fibrils and synaptic function tested in vitro and in vivo. A minor increase in the Aβ₄₂:Aβ₄₀ ratio stabilizes toxic oligomeric species with intermediate conformations. The initial toxic impact of these Aβ species is synaptic in nature, but this can spread into the cells leading to neuronal cell death. The fact that the relative ratio of Aβ peptides is more crucial than the absolute amounts of peptides for the induction of neurotoxic conformations has important implications for anti‐amyloid therapy. Our work also suggests the dynamic nature of the equilibrium between toxic and non‐toxic intermediates.     

Cell Adhesion, the Backbone of the Synapse: ��Vertebrate�� and ��Invertebrate�� Perspectives

Synapses are asymmetric intercellular junctions that mediate neuronal communication. The number, type, and connectivity patterns of synapses determine the formation, maintenance, and function of neural circuitries. The complexity and specificity of synaptogenesis relies upon modulation of adhesive properties, which regulate contact initiation, synapse formation, maturation, and functional plasticity. Disruption of adhesion may result in structural and functional imbalance that may lead to neurodevelopmental diseases, such as autism, or neurodegeneration, such as Alzheimer''s disease. Therefore, understanding the roles of different adhesion protein families in synapse formation is crucial for unraveling the biology of neuronal circuit formation, as well as the pathogenesis of some brain disorders. The present review summarizes some of the knowledge that has been acquired in vertebrate and invertebrate genetic model organisms.Synapses are asymmetric, intercellular junctions that are the basic structural units of neuronal transmission. The correct development of synaptic specializations and the establishment of appropriate connectivity patterns are crucial for the assembly of functional neuronal circuits. Improper synapse formation and function may cause neurodevelopmental disorders, such as mental retardation (MsR) and autism spectrum disorders (ASD) (McAllister 2007; Sudhof 2008), and likely play a role in neurodegenerative disorders, such as Alzheimer''s disease (AD) (Haass and Selkoe 2007).At chemical synapses (reviewed in Sudhof 2004; Zhai and Bellen 2004; Waites et al. 2005; McAllister 2007; Jin and Garner 2008), the presynaptic compartment contains synaptic vesicles (SV), organized in functionally distinct subcellular pools. A subset of SVs docks to the presynaptic membrane around protein-dense release sites, named active zones (AZ). Upon the arrival of an action potential at the terminal, the docked and “primed” SVs fuse with the plasma membrane and release neurotransmitter molecules into the synaptic cleft. Depending on the type of synapse (i.e., excitatory vs. inhibitory synapses), neurotransmitters ultimately activate an appropriate set of postsynaptic receptors that are accurately apposed to the AZ.Synapse formation occurs in several steps (Fig. 1) (reviewed in Eaton and Davis 2003; Goda and Davis 2003; Waites et al. 2005; Garner et al. 2006; Gerrow and El-Husseini 2006; McAllister 2007). Spatiotemporal signals guide axons through heterogeneous cellular environments to contact appropriate postsynaptic targets. At their destination, axonal growth cones initiate synaptogenesis through adhesive interactions with target cells. In the mammalian central nervous system (CNS), immature postsynaptic dendritic spines initially protrude as thin, actin-rich filopodia on the surface of dendrites. Similarly, at the Drosophila neuromuscular junction (NMJ), myopodia develop from the muscles (Ritzenthaler et al. 2000). The stabilization of intercellular contacts and their elaboration into mature, functional synapses involves cytoskeletal arrangements and recruitment of pre- and postsynaptic components to contact sites in spines and boutons. Conversely, retraction of contacts results in synaptic elimination. Both stabilization and retraction sculpt a functional neuronal circuitry.Open in a separate windowFigure 1.(A–C) Different stages of synapse formation. (A) Target selection, (B) Synapse assembly, (C) Synapse maturation and stabilization. (D–F) The role of cell adhesion molecules in synapse formation is exemplified by the paradigm of N-cadherin and catenins in regulation of the morphology and strength of dendritic spine heads. (D) At an early stage the dendritic spines are elongated from motile structures “seeking” their synaptic partners. (E) The contacts between the presynaptic and postsynaptic compartments are stabilized by recruitment of additional cell adhesion molecules. Adhesional interactions activate downstream pathways that remodel the cytoskeleton and organize pre- and postsynaptic apparatuses. (F) Cell adhesion complexes, stabilized by increased synaptic activity, promote the expansion of the dendritic spine head and the maturation/ stabilization of the synapse. Retraction and expansion is dependent on synaptic plasticity.In addition to the plastic nature of synapse formation, the vast heterogeneity of synapses (in terms of target selection, morphology, and type of neurotransmitter released) greatly enhances the complexity of synaptogenesis (reviewed in Craig and Boudin 2001; Craig et al. 2006; Gerrow and El-Husseini 2006). The complexity and specificity of synaptogenesis relies upon the modulation of adhesion between the pre- and postsynaptic components (reviewed in Craig et al. 2006; Gerrow and El-Husseini 2006; Piechotta et al. 2006; Dalva et al. 2007; Shapiro et al. 2007; Yamada and Nelson 2007; Gottmann 2008). Cell adhesive interactions enable cell–cell recognition via extracellular domains and also mediate intracellular signaling cascades that affect synapse morphology and organize scaffolding complexes. Thus, cell adhesion molecules (CAMs) coordinate multiple synaptogenic steps.However, in vitro and in vivo studies of vertebrate CAMs are often at odds with each other. Indeed, there are no examples of mutants for synaptic CAMs that exhibit prominent defects in synapse formation. This apparent “resilience” of synapses is probably caused by functional redundancy or compensatory effects among different CAMs (Piechotta et al. 2006). Hence, studies using simpler organisms less riddled by redundancy, such as Caenorhabditis elegans and Drosophila, have aided in our understanding of the role that these molecules play in organizing synapses.In this survey, we discuss the roles of the best characterized CAM families of proteins involved in synaptogenesis. Our focus is to highlight the complex principles that govern the molecular basis of synapse formation and function from a comparative perspective. We will present results from cell culture studies as well as in vivo analyses in vertebrate systems and refer to invertebrate studies, mainly performed in Drosophila and C. elegans, when they have provided important insights into the role of particular CAM protein families. However, we do not discuss secreted factors, for which we refer the reader to numerous excellent reviews (as for example Washbourne et al. 2004; Salinas 2005; Piechotta et al. 2006; Shapiro et al. 2006; Dalva 2007; Yamada and Nelson 2007; Biederer and Stagi 2008; Salinas and Zou 2008).     

A comparison of the different helices adopted by ��- and ��-peptides suggests different reasons for their stability

The right‐handed α‐helix is the dominant helical fold of α‐peptides, whereas the left‐handed 3₁₄‐helix is the dominant helical fold of β‐peptides. Using molecular dynamics simulations, the properties of α‐helical α‐peptides and 3₁₄‐helical β‐peptides with different C‐terminal protonation states and in the solvents water and methanol are compared. The observed energetic and entropic differences can be traced to differences in the polarity of the solvent‐accessible surface area and, in particular, the solute dipole moments, suggesting different reasons for their stability.     

A Turn-like Structure ��KKPE�� Segment Mediates the Specific Binding of Viral Protein A27 to Heparin and Heparan Sulfate on Cell Surfaces

Vaccinia viral envelope protein A27 (110 amino acids) specifically interacts with heparin (HP) or heparan sulfate (HS) proteoglycans for cell surface attachment. To examine the binding mechanism, a truncated soluble form of A27 (sA27-aa; residues 21–84 of A27) with Cys⁷¹ and Cys⁷² mutated to Ala was used as the parent molecule. sA27-aa consists of two structurally distinct domains, a flexible Arg/Lys-rich heparin-binding site (HBS) (residues 21–32; ²¹STKAAKKPEAKR³²) and a rigid coiled-coil domain (residues 43–84), both essential for the specific binding. As shown by surface plasmon resonance (SPR), the binding affinity of sA27-aa for HP (K_A = 1.25 × 10⁸ m⁻¹) was approximately 3 orders of magnitude stronger than that for nonspecific binding, such as to chondroitin sulfate (K_A = 1.65 × 10⁵ m⁻¹). Using site-directed mutagenesis of HBS and solution NMR, we identified a “KKPE” segment with a turn-like conformation that mediates specific HP binding. In addition, a double mutant T22K/A25K in which the KKPE segment remained intact showed an extremely high affinity for HP (K_A = 1.9 × 10¹¹ m⁻¹). Importantly, T22K/A25K retained the binding specificity for HP and HS but not chondroitin sulfate, as shown by in vitro SPR and in vivo cell adhesion and competitive binding assays. Molecular modeling of the HBS was performed by dynamics simulations and provides an explanation of the specific binding mechanism in good agreement with the site-directed mutagenesis and SPR results. We conclude that a turn-like structure introduced by the KKPE segment in vaccinia viral envelope protein A27 is responsible for its specific binding to HP and to HS on cell surfaces.