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.     

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.     

Focused Ultrasound-Induced Blood–Brain Barrier Opening to Enhance Temozolomide Delivery for Glioblastoma Treatment: A Preclinical Study

The purpose of this study is to assess the preclinical therapeutic efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-monitored focused ultrasound (FUS)-induced blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption to enhance Temozolomide (TMZ) delivery for improving Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM) treatment. MRI-monitored FUS with microbubbles was used to transcranially disrupt the BBB in brains of Fisher rats implanted with 9L glioma cells. FUS-BBB opening was spectrophotometrically determined by leakage of dyes into the brain, and TMZ was quantitated in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma by LC-MS\MS. The effects of treatment on tumor progression (by MRI), animal survival and brain tissue histology were investigated. Results demonstrated that FUS-BBB opening increased the local accumulation of dyes in brain parenchyma by 3.8-/2.1-fold in normal/tumor tissues. Compared to TMZ alone, combined FUS treatment increased the TMZ CSF/plasma ratio from 22.7% to 38.6%, reduced the 7-day tumor progression ratio from 24.03 to 5.06, and extended the median survival from 20 to 23 days. In conclusion, this study provided preclinical evidence that FUS BBB-opening increased the local concentration of TMZ to improve the control of tumor progression and animal survival, suggesting its clinical potential for improving current brain tumor treatment.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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 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.     

Mechanisms of Blood Brain Barrier Disruption by Different Types of Bacteria,and Bacterial–Host Interactions Facilitate the Bacterial Pathogen Invading the Brain

This review aims to elucidate the different mechanisms of blood brain barrier (BBB) disruption that may occur due to invasion by different types of bacteria, as well as to show the bacteria–host interactions that assist the bacterial pathogen in invading the brain. For example, platelet-activating factor receptor (PAFR) is responsible for brain invasion during the adhesion of pneumococci to brain endothelial cells, which might lead to brain invasion. Additionally, the major adhesin of the pneumococcal pilus-1, RrgA is able to bind the BBB endothelial receptors: polymeric immunoglobulin receptor (pIgR) and platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule (PECAM-1), thus leading to invasion of the brain. Moreover, Streptococcus pneumoniae choline binding protein A (CbpA) targets the common carboxy-terminal domain of the laminin receptor (LR) establishing initial contact with brain endothelium that might result in BBB invasion. Furthermore, BBB disruption may occur by S. pneumoniae penetration through increasing in pro-inflammatory markers and endothelial permeability. In contrast, adhesion, invasion, and translocation through or between endothelial cells can be done by S. pneumoniae without any disruption to the vascular endothelium, upon BBB penetration. Internalins (InlA and InlB) of Listeria monocytogenes interact with its cellular receptors E-cadherin and mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) to facilitate invading the brain. L. monocytogenes species activate NF-κB in endothelial cells, encouraging the expression of P- and E-selectin, intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM-1), and Vascular cell adhesion protein 1 (VCAM-1), as well as IL-6 and IL-8 and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), all these markers assist in BBB disruption. Bacillus anthracis species interrupt both adherens junctions (AJs) and tight junctions (TJs), leading to BBB disruption. Brain microvascular endothelial cells (BMECs) permeability and BBB disruption are induced via interendothelial junction proteins reduction as well as up-regulation of IL-1α, IL-1β, IL-6, TNF-α, MCP-1, macrophage inflammatory proteins-1 alpha (MIP1α) markers in Staphylococcus aureus species. Streptococcus agalactiae or Group B Streptococcus toxins (GBS) enhance IL-8 and ICAM-1 as well as nitric oxide (NO) production from endothelial cells via the expression of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) enhancement, resulting in BBB disruption. While Gram-negative bacteria, Haemophilus influenza OmpP2 is able to target the common carboxy-terminal domain of LR to start initial interaction with brain endothelium, then invade the brain. H. influenza type b (HiB), can induce BBB permeability through TJ disruption. LR and PAFR binding sites have been recognized as common routes of CNS entrance by Neisseria meningitidis. N. meningitidis species also initiate binding to BMECs and induces AJs deformation, as well as inducing specific cleavage of the TJ component occludin through the release of host MMP-8. Escherichia coli bind to BMECs through LR, resulting in IL-6 and IL-8 release and iNOS production, as well as resulting in disassembly of TJs between endothelial cells, facilitating BBB disruption. Therefore, obtaining knowledge of BBB disruption by different types of bacterial species will provide a picture of how the bacteria enter the central nervous system (CNS) which might support the discovery of therapeutic strategies for each bacteria to control and manage infection.     

Detachment of Brain Pericytes from the Basal Lamina is Involved in Disruption of the Blood–Brain Barrier Caused by Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Sepsis in Mice

The blood–brain barrier (BBB) is highly restrictive of the transport of substances between blood and the central nervous system. Brain pericytes are one of the important cellular constituents of the BBB and are multifunctional, polymorphic cells that lie within the microvessel basal lamina. The present study aimed to evaluate the role of pericytes in the mediation of BBB disruption using a lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced model of septic encephalopathy in mice. ICR mice were injected intraperitoneally with LPS or saline and were sacrificed at 1, 3, 6, and 24 h after injection. Sodium fluorescein accumulated with time in the hippocampus after LPS injection; this hyperpermeability was supported by detecting the extravasation of fibrinogen. Microglia were activated and the number of microglia increased with time after LPS injection. LPS-treated mice exhibited a broken basal lamina and pericyte detachment from the basal lamina at 6–24 h after LPS injection. The disorganization in the pericyte and basal lamina unit was well correlated with increased microglial activation and increased cerebrovascular permeability in LPS-treated mice. These findings suggest that pericyte detachment and microglial activation may be involved in the mediation of BBB disruption due to inflammatory responses in the damaged brain.     

The Protective Mechanism for the Blood–Brain Barrier Induced by Aminoguanidine in Surgical Brain Injury in Rats

This study was performed to investigate the mechanism of blood–brain barrier (BBB) permeability change, which was induced by aminoguanidine (AG) after surgical brain injury (SBI) in rats. Compared to control group, AG (150 mg/kg, i.p.) significantly reduced Evans blue extravasation into brain tissue at 24 h after surgical resection, it also induced a 32% decrease of malondialdehyde (MDA) values and a 1.1-fold increase of the glutathione (GSH) levels at 12 h after injury. The expression of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) reached the peak value at 24 h after SBI, which was significantly attenuated after AG treatment. In addition, ZO-1 protein was up-regulated by AG (150 mg/kg) treatment at 24 h after SBI. Our results indicated that AG could protect the BBB after SBI, which could be correlated with antioxidative property, the down-regulation of iNOS and up-regulation of tight junction protein expression.     

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.     

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.     

A New Function for the LDL Receptor: Transcytosis of LDL across the Blood–Brain Barrier

Lipoprotein transport across the blood–brain barrier (BBB) is of critical importance for the delivery of essential lipids to the brain cells. The occurrence of a low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptor on the BBB has recently been demonstrated. To examine further the function of this receptor, we have shown using an in vitro model of the BBB, that in contrast to acetylated LDL, which does not cross the BBB, LDL is specifically transcytosed across the monolayer. The C7 monoclonal antibody, known to interact with the LDL receptor-binding domain, totally blocked the transcytosis of LDL, suggesting that the transcytosis is mediated by the receptor. Furthermore, we have shown that cholesterol-depleted astrocytes upregulate the expression of the LDL receptor at the BBB. Under these conditions, we observed that the LDL transcytosis parallels the increase in the LDL receptor, indicating once more that the LDL is transcytosed by a receptor-mediated mechanism. The nondegradation of the LDL during the transcytosis indicates that the transcytotic pathway in brain capillary endothelial cells is different from the LDL receptor classical pathway. The switch between a recycling receptor to a transcytotic receptor cannot be explained by a modification of the internalization signals of the cytoplasmic domain of the receptor, since we have shown that LDL receptor messengers in growing brain capillary ECs (recycling LDL receptor) or differentiated cells (transcytotic receptor) are 100% identical, but we cannot exclude posttranslational modifications of the cytoplasmic domain, as demonstrated for the polymeric immunoglobulin receptor. Preliminary studies suggest that caveolae are likely to be involved in the potential transport of LDL from the blood to the brain.The maintenance of the homeostasis of brain interstitial fluid, which constitutes the special microenvironment for neurons, is established by the presence of the blood–brain barrier (BBB)¹ at the transition area from endothelial cells (ECs) to brain tissue. Of primary importance in the formation of a permeability barrier by these cells is the presence of continuous tight junctions that seal together the margins of the ECs and restrict the passage of substances from the blood to the brain. Furthermore, in contrast to ECs in many other organs, the brain capillary ECs contain no direct transendothelial passageways such as fenestrations or channels. But obviously, the BBB cannot be absolute. The brain is dependent upon the blood to deliver metabolic substrates and remove metabolic waste, and the BBB therefore facilitates the exchange of selected solutes. Carrier-mediated transport systems that facilitate the uptake of hexoses, amino acids, purine compounds, and mono-carboxylic acids have been revealed in the cerebral endothelium (Betz and Goldstein, 1978), but until now little information has come to light regarding the cerebral uptake of lipids.There is growing evidence that the brain is equipped with a relatively self-sufficient transport system for maintaining cholesterol and lipid homeostasis. The presence of a low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptor has been demonstrated by immunocytochemistry in rat and monkey brains; and apolipoprotein (apo) E and apo AI-containing particles have been detected in human cerebrospinal fluid (Pitas et al., 1987). Furthermore, enzymes involved in lipid metabolism have been located within the brain: LCAT mRNA has been shown to be expressed in rat brains and cholesteryl ester transfer protein, which plays a key role in cholesterol homeostasis, has been detected in human cerebrospinal fluid and seems to be synthesized in the brain (Albers et al., 1992). The distribution of the LDL receptor-related protein, a multifunctional receptor that binds apoE, is highly restricted and limited to the gray matter, primarily associated with neuronal cell population (Wolf et al., 1992). The difference in cellular expression of ligand (apoE) and receptor (LDL receptor-related protein) may provide a pathway for intracellular transport of apoE-containing lipoproteins in the central nervous system. All these data leave little doubt that the brain is equipped with a relatively self-sufficient transport system for cholesterol.Cholesterol could be derived from de novo synthesis within the brain and from plasma via the BBB. Malavolti et al. (1991) indicate the presence of unexpectedly close communications between extracerebral and brain cholesterol. Changes in the extracerebral cholesterol levels are readily sensed by the LDL receptor in the brain and promptly provoke appropriate modifications in its activity. Méresse et al. (1989a) provided direct evidence for the occurrence in vivo of an LDL receptor on the endothelium of brain capillaries. Furthermore, the fact that enzymes involved in the lipoprotein metabolism are present in the brain microvasculature (Brecher and Kuan, 1979) and that the entire fraction of the drug bound to lipoproteins is available for entry into the brain strongly suggest that this cerebral endothelial receptor plays a role in the interaction of plasma lipoproteins with brain capillaries. These results pinpoint the critical importance of the interactions between brain capillary ECs and lipoproteins. Owing to the fact that the neurological abnormalities that result from the inadequate absorption of dietary vitamin E can be improved by the oral administration of pharmacological doses of vitamin E, Traber and Kayden (1984) have suggested that LDL functions as a transport system for tocopherol to the brain. Furthermore, the trace amounts of apolipoprotein B that were detected by Salem et al. (1987) in cerebrospinal fluid from healthy patients using a very sensitive immunoblot technique confirm that, at most, small amounts of apolipoprotein B normally pass through the BBB. However, whether LDL is involved in the exchange is not known.Using an in vitro model of the BBB that imitates an in vivo situation by culturing capillary ECs and astrocytes on opposite sides of a filter (Dehouck et al., 1990a , 1992), we have demonstrated that in culture, like in vivo, in contrast to peripheral endothelium and in spite of the tight apposition of ECs and their contact with physiological concentrations of lipoproteins, brain capillary ECs express an LDL receptor (Méresse et al., 1991; Dehouck et al., 1994). The capacity of ECs to bind LDLs is greater when cocultured with astrocytes than in their absence. Futhermore, we have shown that the lipid requirement of astrocytes increases the expression of the LDL receptor on brain capillary ECs. Taken together, the presence of LDL receptors on brain capillary ECs and the modulation of the expression of these receptors by the lipid composition of astrocytes suggest that cholesterol used by cells in the central nervous system may be derived, at least in part, from the periphery via transport across the BBB.In the present study, we provide direct evidence that after binding to brain capillary ECs, there is a specific mechanism for the transport of LDL across the endothelial monolayer from the apical to the abluminal surface. This mechanism might be best explained by a process of receptor-mediated transcytosis. Preliminary results pinpoint the role of caveolae in the transcellular transport of LDL across the brain endothelium.     

Peroxisome Proliferator-activated Receptors and Alzheimer's Disease: Hitting the Blood–Brain Barrier

The blood–brain barrier (BBB) is often affected in several neurodegenerative disorders, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). Integrity and proper functionality of the neurovascular unit are recognized to be critical for maintenance of the BBB. Research has traditionally focused on structural integrity more than functionality, and BBB alteration has usually been explained more as a consequence than a cause. However, ongoing evidence suggests that at the early stages, the BBB of a diseased brain often shows distinct expression patterns of specific carriers such as members of the ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transport protein family, which alter BBB traffic. In AD, amyloid-β (Aβ) deposits are a pathological hallmark and, as recently highlighted by Cramer et al. (2012), Aβ clearance is quite fundamental and is a less studied approach. Current knowledge suggests that BBB traffic plays a more important role than previously believed and that pharmacological modulation of the BBB may offer new therapeutic alternatives for AD. Recent investigations carried out in our laboratory indicate that peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) agonists are able to prevent Aβ-induced neurotoxicity in hippocampal neurons and cognitive impairment in a double transgenic mouse model of AD. However, even when enough literature about PPAR agonists and neurodegenerative disorders is available, the problem of how they exert their functions and help to prevent and rescue Aβ-induced neurotoxicity is poorly understood. In this review, along with highlighting the main features of the BBB and its role in AD, we will discuss information regarding the modulation of BBB components, including the possible role of PPAR agonists as BBB traffic modulators.