Tight Junctions of the Blood–Brain Barrier

1. The blood–brain barrier is essential for the maintainance and regulation of the neural microenvironment. The blood–brain barrier endothelial cells comprise an extremely low rate of transcytotic vesicles and a restrictive paracellular diffusion barrier. The latter is realized by the tight junctions between the endothelial cells of the brain microvasculature, which are subject of this review. Morphologically, blood–brain barrier-tight junctions are more similar to epithelial tight junctions than to endothelial tight junctions in peripheral blood vessels.2. Although blood–brain barrier-tight junctions share many characteristics with epithelial tight junctions, there are also essential differences. However, in contrast to tight junctions in epithelial systems, structural and functional characteristics of tight junctions in endothelial cells are highly sensitive to ambient factors.3. Many ubiquitous molecular constituents of tight junctions have been identified and characterized including claudins, occludin, ZO-1, ZO-2, ZO-3, cingulin, and 7H6. Signaling pathways involved in tight junction regulation comprise, among others, G-proteins, serine, threonine, and tyrosine kinases, extra- and intracellular calcium levels, cAMP levels, proteases, and TNF. Common to most of these pathways is the modulation of cytoskeletal elements which may define blood–brain barrier characteristics. Additionally, cross-talk between components of the tight junction– and the cadherin–catenin system suggests a close functional interdependence of the two cell–cell contact systems.4. Recent studies were able to elucidate crucial aspects of the molecular basis of tight junction regulation. An integration of new results into previous morphological work is the central intention of this review.     

The Blood–Brain Barrier and Bilirubin Encephalopathy

1. The pathogenesis of bilirubin encephalopathy is multifactorial, involving the transport of bilirubin or albumin/bilirubin across the blood–brain barrier and delivering bilirubin to target neurons.2. The relative importance of the blood–brain barrier, unconjugated bilirubin levels, serum binding, and tissue susceptibility in this process is only partially understood. Even at dangerously high serum levels, bilirubin traverses the intact blood–brain barrier slowly, requiring time for encephalopathy to occur, although deposition of bilirubin can be rapid if a surge in plasma unbound bilirubin is produced by administering a drug which competes with bilirubin for binding to albumin.3. There may be maturational changes in permeability both in the fetus and postnatally which protect the brain from bilirubin.4. Disruption or partial disruption of the blood–brain barrier by disease or hypoxic ischemic injury will facilitate transport of bilirubin/albumin into brain, but the relative affinities of albumin and target neurons will determine whether the tissue bilirubin load is sufficient for toxicity to occur.     

Cation Transport Specificity at the Blood–Brain Barrier

The molecular identification, expression and cloning of membrane-bound organic cation transporters are being completed in isolated in vitro membranes. In vivo studies, where cation specificity overlaps, need to complement this work. Method: Cross-inhibition of [³H]choline and [³H]thiamine brain uptake by in situ rat brain perfusion. Results: [³H]Choline brain uptake was not inhibited by thiamine at physiologic concentrations (100 nM). However, choline ranging from 100 nM to 250 M inhibited [³H]thiamine brain uptake, though not below levels observed at thiamine concentrations of 100 nM. Conclusion: (1) The molecular family of the blood–brain barrier (BBB) choline transporter may be elucidated in vitro by its interaction with physiologic thiamine levels, and (2) two cationic transporters at the BBB may be responsible for thiamine brain uptake.     

Neural Induction of the Blood–Brain Barrier: Still an Enigma

1. The study of the blood–brain barrier and its various realms offers a myriad of opportunities for scientific exploration. This review focuses on two of these areas in particular: the induction of the blood–brain barrier and the molecular mechanisms underlying this developmental process.2. The creation of the blood–brain barrier is considered a specific step in the differentiation of cerebral capillary endothelial cells, resulting in a number of biochemical and functional alterations. Although the specific endothelial properties which maintain the homeostasis in the central nervous system necessary for neuronal function have been well described, the inductive mechanisms which trigger blood–brain barrier establishment in capillary endothelial cells are unknown.3. The timetable of blood–brain barrier formation is still a matter of debate, caused largely by the use of varying experimental systems and by the general difficulty of quantitatively measuring the degree of blood–brain barrier tightness. However, there is a general consensus that a gradual formation of the blood–brain barrier starts shortly after intraneural neovascularization and that the neural microenvironment (neurons and/or astrocytes) plays a key role in inducing blood–brain barrier function in capillary endothelial cells. This view stems from numerous in vitro experiments using mostly cocultures of capillary endothelial cells and astrocytes and assays for easily measurable blood–brain barrier markers. In vivo, there are great difficulties in proving the inductive influence of the neuronal environment. Also dealt with in this article are brain tumors, the least understood in vivo systems, and the induction or noninduction of barrier function in the newly established tumor vascularization.4. Finally, this review tries to elucidate the question concerning the nature of the inductive signal eliciting blood–brain barrier formation in the cerebral microvasculature.     

Inflammatory Mediators and Modulation of Blood–Brain Barrier Permeability

1. Unlike some interfaces between the blood and the nervous system (e.g., nerve perineurium), the brain endothelium forming the blood–brain barrier can be modulated by a range of inflammatory mediators. The mechanisms underlying this modulation are reviewed, and the implications for therapy of the brain discussed.2. Methods for measuring blood–brain barrier permeability in situ include the use of radiolabeled tracers in parenchymal vessels and measurements of transendothelial resistance and rate of loss of fluorescent dye in single pial microvessels. In vitro studies on culture models provide details of the signal transduction mechanisms involved.3. Routes for penetration of polar solutes across the brain endothelium include the paracellular tight junctional pathway (usually very tight) and vesicular mechanisms. Inflammatory mediators have been reported to influence both pathways, but the clearest evidence is for modulation of tight junctions.4. In addition to the brain endothelium, cell types involved in inflammatory reactions include several closely associated cells including pericytes, astrocytes, smooth muscle, microglia, mast cells, and neurons. In situ it is often difficult to identify the site of action of a vasoactive agent. In vitro models of brain endothelium are experimentally simpler but may also lack important features generated in situ by cell:cell interaction (e.g. induction, signaling).5. Many inflammatory agents increase both endothelial permeability and vessel diameter, together contributing to significant leak across the blood–brain barrier and cerebral edema. This review concentrates on changes in endothelial permeability by focusing on studies in which changes in vessel diameter are minimized.6. Bradykinin (Bk)² increases blood–brain barrier permeability by acting on B₂ receptors. The downstream events reported include elevation of [Ca²⁺]_i, activation of phospholipase A₂, release of arachidonic acid, and production of free radicals, with evidence that IL-1 potentiates the actions of Bk in ischemia.7. Serotonin (5HT) has been reported to increase blood–brain barrier permeability in some but not all studies. Where barrier opening was seen, there was evidence for activation of 5-HT₂ receptors and a calcium-dependent permeability increase.8. Histamine is one of the few central nervous system neurotransmitters found to cause consistent blood–brain barrier opening. The earlier literature was unclear, but studies of pial vessels and cultured endothelium reveal increased permeability mediated by H₂ receptors and elevation of [Ca²⁺]_i and an H₁ receptor-mediated reduction in permeability coupled to an elevation of cAMP.9. Brain endothelial cells express nucleotide receptors for ATP, UTP, and ADP, with activation causing increased blood–brain barrier permeability. The effects are mediated predominantly via a P_2U (P2Y₂) G-protein-coupled receptor causing an elevation of [Ca²⁺]_i; a P2Y₁ receptor acting via inhibition of adenyl cyclase has been reported in some in vitro preparations.10. Arachidonic acid is elevated in some neural pathologies and causes gross opening of the blood–brain barrier to large molecules including proteins. There is evidence that arachidonic acid acts via generation of free radicals in the course of its metabolism by cyclooxygenase and lipoxygenase pathways.11. The mechanisms described reveal a range of interrelated pathways by which influences from the brain side or the blood side can modulate blood–brain barrier permeability. Knowledge of the mechanisms is already being exploited for deliberate opening of the blood–brain barrier for drug delivery to the brain, and the pathways capable of reducing permeability hold promise for therapeutic treatment of inflammation and cerebral edema.     

The Gut–Brain Axis and Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors in the Regulation of Epileptogenesis

Journal of Evolutionary Biochemistry and Physiology - A large proportion of patients with epilepsy suffer from pharmacoresistant forms of the disease, and this makes the search for new treatments...     

Astrocyte–Endotheliocyte Axis in the Regulation of the Blood–Brain Barrier

Neurochemical Research - The evolution of blood–brain barrier paralleled centralisation of the nervous system: emergence of neuronal masses required control over composition of the...     

Osmotic Opening of the Blood–Brain Barrier: Principles, Mechanism, and Therapeutic Applications

1. Osmotic opening of the blood–brain barrier by intracarotid infusion of a hypertonic arabinose or mannitol solution is mediated by vasodilatation and shrinkage of cerebrovascular endothelial cells, with widening of the interendothelial tight junctions to an estimated radius of 200 Å. The effect may be facilitated by calcium-mediated contraction of the endothelial cytoskeleton.2. The marked increase in apparent blood–brain barrier permeability to intravascular substances (10-fold for small molecules) following the osmotic procedure is due to both increased diffusion and bulk fluid flow across the tight junctions. The permeability effect is largely reversed within 10 min.3. In experimental animals, the osmotic method has been used to grant wide access to the brain of water-soluble drugs, peptides, antibodies, boron compounds for neutron capture therapy, and viral vectors for gene therapy. The method also has been used together with anticancer drugs to treat patients with metastatic or primary brain tumors, with some success and minimal morbidity.     

Mechanisms of the Blood–Brain Barrier Disruption in HIV-1 Infection

Summary 1. Alterations of brain microvasculature and the disruption of the blood–brain barrier (BBB) integrity are commonly associated with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection. These changes are most frequently found in human immunodeficiency virus-related encephalitis (HIVE) and in human immunodeficiency virus-associated dementia (HAD).2. It has been hypothesized that the disruption of the BBB occurs early in the course of HIV-1 infection and can be responsible for HIV-1 entry into the CNS.3. The current review discusses the mechanisms of injury to brain endothelial cells and alterations of the BBB integrity in HIV-infection with focus on the vascular effects of HIV Tat protein. In addition, this review describes the mechanisms of the BBB disruption due to HIV-1 or Tat protein interaction with selected risk factors for HIV infection, such as substance abuse and aging.This revised article was published online in May 2005 with a February 2005 cover date.     

The Effects of Zinc Treatment on the Blood–Brain Barrier Permeability and Brain Element Levels During Convulsions

We evaluated the effect of zinc treatment on the blood–brain barrier (BBB) permeability and the levels of zinc (Zn), natrium (Na), magnesium (Mg), and copper (Cu) in the brain tissue during epileptic seizures. The Wistar albino rats were divided into four groups, each as follows: (1) control group, (2) pentylenetetrazole (PTZ) group: rats treated with PTZ to induce seizures, (3) Zn group: rats treated with ZnCl₂ added to drinking water for 2 months, and (4) Zn?+?PTZ group. The brains were divided into left, right hemispheres, and cerebellum?+?brain stem regions. Evans blue was used as BBB tracer. Element concentrations were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy. The BBB permeability has been found to be increased in all experimental groups (p?<?0.05). Zn concentrations in all brain regions in Zn-supplemented groups (p?<?0.05) showed an increase. BBB permeability and Zn level in cerebellum?+?brain stem region were significantly high compared to cerebral hemispheres (p?<?0.05). In all experimental groups, Cu concentration decreased, whereas Na concentrations showed an increase (p?<?0.05). Mg content in all the brain regions decreased in the Zn group and Zn?+?PTZ groups compared to other groups (p?<?0.001). We also found that all elements’ levels showed hemispheric differences in all groups. During convulsions, Zn treatment did not show any protective effect on BBB permeability. Chronic Zn treatment decreased Mg and Cu concentration and increased Na levels in the brain tissue. Our results indicated that Zn treatment showed proconvulsant activity and increased BBB permeability, possibly changing prooxidant/antioxidant balance and neuronal excitability during seizures.     

Adrenomedullin Improves the Blood–Brain Barrier Function Through the Expression of Claudin-5

Summary 1. Aims: Brain vascular endothelial cells secret Adrenomedullin (AM) has multifunctional biological properties. AM affects cerebral blood flow and blood–brain barrier (BBB) function. We studied the role of AM on the permeability and tight junction proteins of brain microvascular endothelial cells (BMEC).2. Methods: BMEC were isolated from rats and a BBB in vitro model was generated. The barrier functions were studied by measuring the transendothelial electrical resistance (TEER) and the permeability of sodium fluorescein and Evans’ blue albumin. The expressions of tight junction proteins were analyzed using immunocytochemistry and immunoblotting.3. Results: AM increased TEER of BMEC monolayer dose-dependently. Immunocytochemistry revealed that AM enhanced the claudin-5 expression at a cell–cell contact site in a dose-dependent manner. Immunoblotting also showed an overexpression of claudin-5 in AM exposure.4.Conclusions: AM therefore inhibits the paracellular transport in a BBB in vitro model through claudin-5 overexpression.     

Endothelial Vesicles in the Blood–Brain Barrier: Are They Related to Permeability?

1. Macromolecules cross capillary walls via large vascular pores that are thought to be formed by plasmalemmal vesicles. Early hypotheses suggested that vesicles transferred plasma constituents across the endothelial wall either by a shuttle mechanism or by fusing to form transient patent channels for diffusion. Recent evidence shows that the transcytotic pathway involves both movement of vesicles within the cell and a series of fusions and fissions of the vesicular and cellular membranes.2. The transfer of macromolecules across the capillary wall is highly specific and is mediated by receptors incorporated into specific membrane domains. Therefore, despite their morphological similarity, endothelial vesicles form heterogeneous populations in which the predominant receptor proteins incorporated in their membranes define the functions of individual vesicles.3. Blood–brain barrier capillaries have very low permeabilities to most hydrophilic molecules. Their low permeability to macromolecules has been presumed to be due to an inhibition of the transcytotic mechanism, resulting in a low density of endothelial vesicles.4. A comparison of vesicular densities and protein permeabilities in a number of vascular beds shows only a very weak correlation, therefore vesicle numbers alone cannot be used to predict permeability to macromolecules.5. Blood–brain barrier capillaries are fully capable of transcytosing specific proteins, for example, insulin and transferrin, although the details are still somewhat controversial.6. It has recently been shown that the albumin binding protein gp60 (also known as albondin), which facilitates the transcytosis of native albumin in other vascular beds, is virtually absent in brain capillaries.7. It seems likely that the low blood–brain barrier permeability to macromolecules may be due to a low level of expression of specific receptors, rather than to an inhibition of the transcytosis mechanism.     

Peroxynitrite Mediates Nitric Oxide–Induced Blood–Brain Barrier Damage

Using the in vitro blood-brain barrier (BBB) model ECV304/C6, which consists of cocultures of human umbilical vein endothelial-like cells (ECV304) and rat glioma cells (C6), the role of peroxynitrite (OONO-) in nitric oxide (NO*)-mediated BBB disruption was evaluated. Endothelial cell cultures were exposed to NO* gas, in the presence or absence of the OONO- blocker FeTPPS. Separate exposure to NO* and OONO- resulted in endothelial cell cytotoxicity and a decline in barrier integrity. Unfortunately, FeTPPS induced significant detrimental effects on model BBB integrity at a concentration of 300 microM and above. At 250 microM (the highest concentration usable), FeTPPS displayed a trend toward prevention of NO* elicited perturbation of barrier integrity. Dichlorofluorescein diacetate is oxidized to fluorescent dichlorofluorescein by OONO- but only marginally by NO* or O2*-. We observed large and rapid increases in fluorescence in ECV304 preloaded cells following NO* exposure, which were blocked by FeTPPS. Furthermore, using an antinitrotyrosine antibody we detected the nitration of endothelial cell proteins following NO* exposure and conclude that NO*-mediated BBB dysfunction is predominantly elicited by OONO- and not NO*. Proposed mechanisms of NO*-mediated OONO- elicited barrier dysfunction and damage are discussed.     

Peptide-Based Delivery of Oligonucleotides Across Blood–Brain Barrier Model

Delivery of pharmaceutical agents across a blood–brain barrier (BBB) is a challenge for brain cancer therapy. In this study, an in vitro BBB model was utilized to study the delivery of oligonucleotides across brain endothelial cells targeting to glioma cells in a Transwell? setup. A series of novel peptides were synthesized by covalent conjugation of cell-penetrating peptides with targeting peptides for delivery of gene-based therapeutics. These peptides were screened for passage across the Transwell? and we found the most efficient peptide PepFect32 from originating PepFect 14 coupled with the targeting peptide angiopep-2. PepFect32/pDNA nanocomplexes exhibited high transcytosis across the BBB in vitro model and the highest transfection efficiency to glioma cells. In conclusion, PepFect32 revealed the most efficient peptide-based vector for pDNA delivery across in vitro BBB model.