The octapeptide repeats in mammalian prion protein constitute a pH-dependent folding and aggregation site

Structural studies of mammalian prion protein at pH values between 4.5 and 5.5 established that the N-terminal 100 residue domain is flexibly disordered. Here, we show that at pH values between 6.5 and 7.8, i.e. the pH at the cell membrane, the octapeptide repeats in recombinant human prion protein hPrP(23-230) encompassing the highly conserved amino acid sequence PHGGGWGQ are structured. The nuclear magnetic resonance solution structure of the octapeptide repeats at pH 6.2 reveals a new structural motif that causes a reversible pH-dependent PrP oligomerization. Within the aggregation motif the segments HGGGW and GWGQ adopt a loop conformation and a beta-turn-like structure, respectively. Comparison with the crystal structure of HGGGW-Cu(2+) indicates that the binding of copper ions induces a conformational transition that presumably modulates PrP aggregation. The knowledge that the cellular prion protein is immobilized on the cell surface along with our results suggests a functional role of aggregation in endocytosis or homophilic cell adhesion.     

Reversibility of scrapie-associated prion protein aggregation

During the course of the transmissible spongiform encephalopathy diseases, a protease-resistant ordered aggregate of scrapie prion protein (PrP(Sc)) accumulates in affected animals. From mechanistic and therapeutic points of view, it is relevant to determine the extent to which PrP(Sc) formation and aggregation are reversible. PrP(Sc) solubilized with 5 m guanidine hydrochloride (GdnHCl) was unfolded to a predominantly random coil conformation. Upon dilution of GdnHCl, PrP refolded into a conformation that was high in alpha-helix as measured by CD spectroscopy, similar to the normal cellular isoform of PrP (PrP(C)). This provided evidence that PrP(Sc) can be induced to revert to a PrP(C)-like conformation with a strong denaturant. To examine the reversibility of PrP(Sc) formation and aggregation under more physiological conditions, PrP(Sc) aggregates were washed and resuspended in buffers lacking GdnHCl and monitored over time for the appearance of soluble PrP. No dissociation of PrP from the PrP(Sc) aggregates was detected in aqueous buffers at pH 6 and 7.5. The effective solubility of PrP was <0.7 nm. Treatment of PrP(Sc) with proteinase K (PK) before the analysis did not enhance the dissociation of PrP from the PrP(Sc) aggregates. Treatment with 2.5 m GdnHCl, which partially and reversibly unfolds PrP(Sc), caused only limited dissociation of PrP from the aggregates. The PrP that dissociated from the aggregates over time was entirely PK-sensitive, like PrP(C), whereas all of the aggregated PrP was partially PK-resistant. PrP also dissociated from aggregates of protease-resistant PrP generated in a cell-free conversion reaction, but only if treated with GdnHCl. Overall, the results suggest that PrP aggregation is not appreciably reversible under physiological conditions, but dissociation and refolding can be enhanced by treatments with GdnHCl.     

Molecular evolution of the mammalian prion protein

Prion protein (PrP) sequences are until now available for only six of the 18 orders of placental mammals. A broader comparison of mammalian prions might help to understand the enigmatic functional and pathogenic properties of this protein. We therefore determined PrP coding sequences in 26 mammalian species to include all placental orders and major subordinal groups. Glycosylation sites, cysteines forming a disulfide bridge, and a hydrophobic transmembrane region are perfectly conserved. Also, the sequences responsible for secondary structure elements, for N- and C-terminal processing of the precursor protein, and for attachment of the glycosyl-phosphatidylinositol membrane anchor are well conserved. The N-terminal region of PrP generally contains five or six repeats of the sequence P(Q/H)GGG(G/-)WGQ, but alleles with two, four, and seven repeats were observed in some species. This suggests, together with the pattern of amino acid replacements in these repeats, the regular occurrence of repeat expansion and contraction. Histidines implicated in copper ion binding and a proline involved in 4-hydroxylation are lacking in some species, which questions their importance for normal functioning of cellular PrP. The finding in certain species of two or seven repeats, and of amino acid substitutions that have been related to human prion diseases, challenges the relevance of such mutations for prion pathology. The gene tree deduced from the PrP sequences largely agrees with the species tree, indicating that no major deviations occurred in the evolution of the prion gene in different placental lineages. In one species, the anteater, a prion pseudogene was present in addition to the active gene.     

Intriguing nucleic-acid-binding features of mammalian prion protein

In transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, the infectious material consists chiefly of a protein, the scrapie prion protein PrP(Sc), that carries no genetic coding material; however, prions are likely to have accomplices that chaperone their activity and promote the conversion of the cellular prion protein PrP(C) into the disease-causing isoform (PrP(Sc)). Recent studies from several laboratories indicate that PrP(C) recognizes many nucleic acids (NAs) with high affinities, and we correlate these findings with a possible pathophysiological role for this interaction. Thus, of the chaperones, NA is the most likely candidate for prions. The participation of NAs in prion propagation opens new avenues for developing new diagnostic tools and therapeutics to target prion diseases, as well as for understanding the function of PrP(C), probably as a NA chaperone.     

Putative aggregation initiation sites in prion protein

Misfolded prion protein, PrPSc, is believed to be the pathogenic agens in transmissible spongiform encephalopathies. Little is known about the autocatalytic misfolding process. Looking at the intrinsic properties of short sequence stretches, such as conformational flexibility and the tendency to populate extended conformers, we have examined the aggregation behaviour of various peptides within the region 106-157 of the sequence of human prion protein. We observed fast aggregation for the peptide containing residues I138-I-H-F141. This sequence, which is presented at the surface of cellular prion protein, PrPC, in an almost beta-sheet-like conformation, is therefore an ideal anchor-point for initial intermolecular contacts leading to oligomerization. We further report that the aggregation propensity of the neurotoxic peptide 106-126 appears to be centred in its termini and not in the central, alanine-rich sequence (A113-G-AAAA-G-A120).     

Copper alters aggregation behavior of prion protein and induces novel interactions between its N- and C-terminal regions

Copper is reported to promote and prevent aggregation of prion protein. Conformational and functional consequences of Cu(2+)-binding to prion protein (PrP) are not well understood largely because most of the Cu(2+)-binding studies have been performed on fragments and truncated variants of the prion protein. In this context, we set out to investigate the conformational consequences of Cu(2+)-binding to full-length prion protein (PrP) by isothermal calorimetry, NMR, and small angle x-ray scattering. In this study, we report altered aggregation behavior of full-length PrP upon binding to Cu(2+). At physiological temperature, Cu(2+) did not promote aggregation suggesting that Cu(2+) may not play a role in the aggregation of PrP at physiological temperature (37 °C). However, Cu(2+)-bound PrP aggregated at lower temperatures. This temperature-dependent process is reversible. Our results show two novel intra-protein interactions upon Cu(2+)-binding. The N-terminal region (residues 90-120 that contain the site His-96/His-111) becomes proximal to helix-1 (residues 144-147) and its nearby loop region (residues 139-143), which may be important in preventing amyloid fibril formation in the presence of Cu(2+). In addition, we observed another novel interaction between the N-terminal region comprising the octapeptide repeats (residues 60-91) and helix-2 (residues 174-185) of PrP. Small angle x-ray scattering studies of full-length PrP show significant compactness upon Cu(2+)-binding. Our results demonstrate novel long range inter-domain interactions of the N- and C-terminal regions of PrP upon Cu(2+)-binding, which might have physiological significance.     

Targeting prion protein interactions in cancer

ABSTRACT

In recent years, prion protein (PrP^C) has been considered as a promising target molecule for cancer therapies, due its direct or indirect participation in tumor growth, metastasis, and resistance to cell death induced by chemotherapy. PrP^C functions as a scaffold protein, forming multiprotein complexes on the plasma membrane, which elicits distinct signaling pathways involved in diverse biological phenomena and could be modulated depending on the cell type, complex composition, and organization. In addition, PrP^C and its partners participate in self-renewal of embryonic, tissue-specific stem cells and cancer stem cells, which are suggested to be responsible for the origin, maintenance, relapse, and dissemination of tumors. Interference with protein–protein interaction has been recognized as an important therapeutic strategy in cancer; indeed, the possible interference in PrP^C engagement with specific partners is a novel strategy. Recently, our group successfully used that approach to interfere with the interaction between PrP^C and HSP-90/70 organizing protein (HOP, also known as stress-inducible protein 1 - STI1) to control the growth of human glioblastoma in animal models. Thus, PrP^C-organized multicomplexes have emerged as feasible candidates for anti-tumor therapy, warranting further exploration.     

Copper-dependent degradation of recombinant ovine prion protein. Phosphatidylinositol stimulates aggregation and copper-driven disappearance of prion protein

Prion protein (PrP) plays an important role in cell protection from oxidative stress due to its action as copper-chelating protein. The present study demonstrates that PrP participates in reductions of Cu2+ to Cu+ ions, and that this process results in fragmentation of protein. The interaction with phosphatidylinositol, a natural phospholipid moiety bound to PrP, strongly enhances recombinant PrP aggregation and degradation. The copper-dependent PrP degradation could promote the formation of amyloid structures, destabilizing the PrP soluble form by the cleavage of the N-terminal part.     

Modulation of p53 and prion protein aggregation by RNA

Several RNA-binding proteins undergo reversible liquid-liquid phase transitions, which, in pathological conditions, might evolve into transitions to solid-state phases, giving rise to amyloid structures. Amyloidogenic and prion-like proteins, such as the tumor suppressor protein p53 and the mammalian prion protein (PrP), bind RNAs specifically or nonspecifically, resulting in changes in their propensity to undergo aggregation. Mutant p53 aggregation seems to play a crucial role in cancer through loss of function, negative dominance and gain of function. PrP conversion modulated by RNA results in highly toxic aggregates. Here, we review data on the modulatory action of RNAs on the aggregation of both proteins.     

The peculiar interaction between mammalian prion protein and RNA

In the past decade, the interaction between prions and nucleic acids has garnered significant attention from the scientific community. For many years, the participation of RNA and/or DNA in prion pathology has been largely ruled out by the "protein-only" hypothesis, but this is now being reconsidered. Experimental data now indicate that nucleic acids (particularly RNA), besides being carriers of genetic information, function as important key components during development, physiological responsiveness, and cellular signaling. This revelation has brought a new perspective to prion pathology. Here we discuss the role of RNA molecules in prion protein aggregation and the resulting cellular toxicity. We combine our most recent findings with existing literature to shed new light on this exciting field of research.     

DNA converts cellular prion protein into the beta-sheet conformation and inhibits prion peptide aggregation

The main hypothesis for prion diseases proposes that the cellular protein (PrP(C)) can be altered into a misfolded, beta-sheet-rich isoform (PrP(Sc)), which in most cases undergoes aggregation. In an organism infected with PrP(Sc), PrP(C) is converted into the beta-sheet form, generating more PrP(Sc). We find that sequence-specific DNA binding to recombinant murine prion protein (mPrP-(23-231)) converts it from an alpha-helical conformation (cellular isoform) into a soluble, beta-sheet isoform similar to that found in the fibrillar state. The recombinant murine prion protein and prion domains bind with high affinity to DNA sequences. Several double-stranded DNA sequences in molar excess above 2:1 (pH 4.0) or 0.5:1 (pH 5.0) completely inhibit aggregation of prion peptides, as measured by light scattering, fluorescence, and circular dichroism spectroscopy. However, at a high concentration, fibers (or peptide aggregates) can rescue the peptide bound to the DNA, converting it to the aggregating form. Our results indicate that a macromolecular complex of prion-DNA may act as an intermediate for the formation of the growing fiber. We propose that host nucleic acid may modulate the delicate balance between the cellular and the misfolded conformations by reducing the protein mobility and by making the protein-protein interactions more likely. In our model, the infectious material would act as a seed to rescue the protein bound to nucleic acid. Accordingly, DNA would act on the one hand as a guardian of the Sc conformation, preventing its propagation, but on the other hand may catalyze Sc conversion and aggregation if a threshold level is exceeded.     

Factors affecting interactions between prion protein isoforms

Interactions between normal, protease-sensitive prion protein (PrP-sen or PrP(C)) and its protease-resistant isoform (PrP-res or PrP(Sc)) are critical in transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) diseases. To investigate the propagation of PrP-res between cells we tested whether PrP-res in scrapie brain microsomes can induce the conversion of PrP-sen to PrP-res if the PrP-sen is bound to uninfected raft membranes. Surprisingly, no conversion was observed unless the microsomal and raft membranes were fused or PrP-sen was released from raft membranes. These results suggest that the propagation of infection between cells requires transfer of PrP-res into the membranes of the recipient cell. To assess potential cofactors in PrP conversion, we used cell-free PrP conversion assays to show that heparan sulphate can stimulate PrP-res formation, supporting the idea that endogenous sulphated glycosaminoglycans can act as important cofactors or modulators of PrP-res formation in vivo. In an effort to develop therapeutics, the antimalarial drug quinacrine was identified as an inhibitor of PrP-res formation in scrapie-infected cell cultures. Confirmation of the latter result by others has led to the initiation of human clinical trials as a treatment for Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. PrP-res formation can also be inhibited using a variety of other types of small molecule, specific synthetic PrP peptides, and an antiserum directed at the C-terminus of PrP-sen. The latter results help to localize the sites of interaction between PrP-sen and PrP-res. Disruption of those interactions with antibodies or peptidomimetic drugs may be an attractive therapeutic strategy. The likelihood that PrP-res inhibitors can rid TSE-infected tissues of PrP-res would presumably be enhanced if PrP-res formation were reversible. However, our attempts to measure dissociation of PrP-sen from PrP-res have failed under non-denaturing conditions. Finally, we have attempted to induce the spontaneous conversion of PrP-sen into PrP-res using low concentrations of detergents. A conformational conversion from alpha-helical monomers into high-beta-sheet aggregates and fibrils was induced by low concentrations of the detergent sarkosyl; however, the aggregates had neither infectivity nor the characteristic protease-resistance ofPrP-res.     

The role of the prion protein membrane anchor in prion infection

In transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE or prion diseases) such as sheep scrapie, bovine spongiform encephalopathy and human Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, normally soluble and protease-sensitive prion protein (PrP-sen or PrPC) is converted to an abnormal, insoluble and protease-resistant form termed PrP-res or PrPSc. PrP-res/PrPSc is believed to be the main component of the prion, the infectious agent of the TSE/prion diseases. Its precursor, PrP-sen, is anchored to the cell surface at the C-terminus by a co-translationally added glycophosphatidyl-inositol (GPI) membrane anchor which can be cleaved by the enzyme phosphatidyl-inositol specific phospholipase (PIPLC). The GPI anchor is also present in PrP-res, but is inaccessible to PIPLC digestion suggesting that conformational changes in PrP associated with PrP-res formation have blocked the PIPLC cleavage site. Although the GPI anchor is present in both PrP-sen and PrP-res, its precise role in TSE diseases remains unclear primarily because there are data to suggest that it both is and is not necessary for PrP-res formation and prion infection.     

The role of the prion protein membrane anchor in prion infection

Normal cellular and abnormal disease-associated forms of prion protein (PrP) contain a C-terminal glycophosphatidyl-inositol (GPI) membrane anchor. The importance of the GPI membrane anchor in prion diseases is unclear but there are data to suggest that it both is and is not required for abnormal prion protein formation and prion infection. Utilizing an in vitro model of prion infection we have recently demonstrated that, while the GPI anchor is not essential for the formation of abnormal prion protein in a cell, it is necessary for the establishment of persistent prion infection. In combination with previously published data, our results suggest that GPI anchored PrP is important in the amplification and spread of prion infectivity from cell to cell.Key words: prion, GPI anchor, PrP, prion spread, scrapieIn transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE or prion diseases) such as sheep scrapie, bovine spongiform encephalopathy and human Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, normally soluble and protease-sensitive prion protein (PrP-sen or PrP^C) is converted to an abnormal, insoluble and protease-resistant form termed PrP-res or PrP^Sc. PrP-res/PrP^Sc is believed to be the main component of the prion, the infectious agent of the TSE/prion diseases. Its precursor, PrP-sen, is anchored to the cell surface at the C-terminus by a co-translationally added glycophosphatidyl-inositol (GPI) membrane anchor which can be cleaved by the enzyme phosphatidyl-inositol specific phospholipase (PIPLC). The GPI anchor is also present in PrP-res, but is inaccessible to PIPLC digestion suggesting that conformational changes in PrP associated with PrP-res formation have blocked the PIPLC cleavage site.¹ Although the GPI anchor is present in both PrP-sen and PrP-res, its precise role in TSE diseases remains unclear primarily because there are data to suggest that it both is and is not necessary for PrP-res formation and prion infection.In tissue culture cells infected with mouse scrapie, PrP-res formation occurs at the cell surface and/or along the endocytic pathway^2–4 and may be dependent upon the membrane environment of PrP-sen. For example, localization via the GPI anchor to caveolae-like domains favors PrP-res formation⁵ while substitution of the GPI anchor addition site with carboxy termini favoring transmembrane anchored PrP-sen inhibits formation of PrP-res.^5,6 Other studies have shown that localization of both PrP-sen and PrP-res to lipid rafts, cholesterol and sphingolipid rich membrane microdomains where GPI anchored proteins can be located, is important in PrP-res formation.^6–9However, there are also data which suggest that such localization is not necessarily essential for PrP-res formation. Anchorless PrP-sen isolated from cells by immunoprecipitation or wild-type PrP-sen purified by immunoaffinity column followed by cation exchange chromatography are efficiently converted into PrP-res in cell-free systems.^10,11 Furthermore, recombinant PrP-sen derived from E. coli, which has no membrane anchor or glycosylation, can be induced to form protease-resistant PrP in vitro when reacted with prion-infected brain homogenates.^12–14 Finally, in at least one instance, protease-resistant recombinant PrP-res generated in the absence of infected brain homogenate was reported to cause disease when inoculated into transgenic mice.¹⁵The data concerning the role of the PrP-sen GPI anchor in susceptibility to TSE infection are similarly contradictory. Transgenic mice expressing anchorless mouse PrP-sen are susceptible to infection with mouse scrapie and accumulate both PrP-res and prion infectivity.¹⁶ Thus, the GPI anchor is clearly not needed for PrP-res formation or productive TSE infection in vivo. However, we recently published data demonstrating that, in vitro, anchored PrP-sen is in fact required to persistently infect cells.¹⁷ Given that anchorless PrP-sen is not present on the cell surface but is released into the cell medium, we speculated that the differences between the in vitro and in vivo data were related to the location of PrP-res formation. In the mice expressing anchorless PrP-sen, environments conducive to PrP-res formation are present in certain areas of the complex extracellular milieu of the brain where anchorless, secreted PrP-sen can accumulate and come into contact with PrP-res from the infectious inoculum. Since similar environments are missing in vitro, any PrP-res formation in cells expressing anchorless PrP-sen must be cell-associated. While this explanation addresses how extracellular PrP-res could be generated in an unusual transgenic mouse model of TSE infection, it does not really help to define how the GPI anchor is involved in normal prion infection of a cell.As with other infectious organisms such as viruses, TSE infection can be roughly divided into three steps: uptake, replication and spread. Over the last several years, data derived from new techniques as well as new cell lines susceptible to prion infection have increased our knowledge of some of the basic events that occur during each of these steps. In order to try to tease out the role of the GPI anchor in normal TSE pathogenesis, it is therefore useful to consider the process of TSE infection of a cell and how the GPI anchor might be involved in each stage.In a conventional viral infection, binding and uptake of the virus is essential to establish infection. Studying PrP-res uptake has been complicated by the lack of an antibody that can specifically distinguish PrP-res from PrP-sen in live cells and by the difficulty of detecting the input PrP-res from the PrP-res made de novo by the cell. Recently, however, several groups have been able to study PrP-res uptake using input PrP-res that was either fluorescently labeled^18–20 or tagged with the epitope to the monoclonal antibody 3F4,²¹ or cell lines that express little or no PrP-sen.^19,21–23 The data show that PrP-res uptake is independent of scrapie strain or cell type but is influenced by the PrP-res microenvironment as well as PrP-res aggregate size.²¹ Importantly, these studies demonstrated that PrP-sen expression was not required.^19,21–23 Given these data, it is clear that GPI anchored PrP-sen is not involved in the initial uptake of PrP-res into the cell.The next stage of prion infection involves replication of infectivity which is typically assayed by following cellular PrP-res formation. Once again, however, the issue of how to distinguish PrP-res in the inoculum from newly formed PrP-res in the cells has made it difficult to study the early stages of prion replication. To overcome this difficulty, we developed a murine tissue culture system that utilizes cells expressing mouse PrP-sen tagged with the epitope to the 3F4 antibody (Mo3F4 PrP-sen).²⁴ Wild-type mouse PrP does not have this epitope. As a result, following exposure to an infected mouse brain homogenate, de novo PrP-res formation can be followed by assaying for 3F4 positive PrP-res. Our studies showed that there were two stages of PrP-res formation: (1) an initial acute burst within the first 96 hours post-infection that was cell-type and scrapie strain independent and, (2) persistent PrP-res formation (i.e., formation of PrP-res over multiple cell passages) that was dependent on cell-type and scrapie strain and associated with long-term infection.²⁴ Acute PrP-res formation did not necessarily lead to persistent PrP-res formation suggesting that other cell-specific factors or processes are needed for PrP-res formation to persist.²⁴When cells expressing Mo3F4 PrP-sen without the GPI anchor (Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-sen) were exposed to mouse scrapie infected brain homogenates, GPI negative, 3F4 positive PrP-res (Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-res) was detected within 96 hours indicating that acute PrP-res formation had occurred.¹⁷ Thus, despite the fact that Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-sen is not expressed on the cell surface¹⁶ (Fig. 1A), it was still available for conversion to PrP-res. These results are consistent with data from cell-free systems and demonstrate that, at least acutely, membrane anchored PrP is not necessary for PrP-res formation in a cell.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Persistent infection of cells in vitro requires the expression of GPI-anchored cell surface PrP-sen. PrP knockout cells (CF10)²¹ were transduced with 3F4 epitope tagged mouse PrP-sen (Mo3F4), 3F4 epitope tagged mouse PrP-sen without the GPI anchor (Mo3F4 GPI-), or Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-sen plus wild-type, GPI anchored mouse PrP-sen (MoPrP). The cells were then exposed to the mouse scrapie strain 22L and passaged. (A) The presence of 3F4 epitope tagged, cell surface mouse PrP-sen was assayed by FACS analysis of fixed, non-permeabilized cells. CF10 cells expressing the following mouse PrP-sen molecules were assayed: Mo3F4 (solid line); Mo3F4 GPI⁻ (dashed line); Mo3F4 GPI⁻ + MoPrP (dotted and dashed line); Mo3F4 GPI⁻ + MoPrP infected with 22L scrapie (dotted line). Only cells expressing Mo3F4 PrP-sen were positive for cell surface, 3F4 epitope tagged PrP. (B) Persistent infection was analyzed by inoculating the cells intracranially into transgenic mice overexpressing MoPrP (Tga20 mice). Only cells expressing anchored mouse PrP-sen were susceptible to scrapie infection. Cells expressing anchorless mouse PrP-sen did not contain detectable infectivity in either the cells or the cellular supernatant (data not shown). Data in (B) are adapted from McNally 2009.¹⁷In terms of persistent PrP-res formation, however, our data suggest that the GPI anchor is important. Despite an initial burst of PrP-res formation within the first 96 hours post-infection, Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-res was not observed following passage of the cells nor did the cells become infected. This effect was not due either to resistance of the cells to scrapie infection or to an inability of the scrapie strain used to infect cells. When the same cells expressed anchored Mo3F4 PrP-sen and were exposed to the same mouse scrapie strain, both acute and persistent PrP-res formation were detected and the cells were persistently infected with scrapie (Fig. 1B).¹⁷ Taken together, these data demonstrate that cells expressing anchorless PrP-sen do not support persistent PrP-res formation. Furthermore, the data strongly suggest that GPI-anchored PrP-sen is required during the transition from acute to persistent scrapie infection. In support of this hypothesis, the resistance of cells expressing Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-sen to persistent prion infection could be overcome if wild-type GPI anchored PrP-sen was co-expressed in the same cell. When both forms of PrP-sen were expressed, anchored and anchorless forms of PrP-res were made and the cells became persistently infected (Fig. 1B).¹⁷ Thus, the data suggest that GPI anchored PrP is necessary to establish prion infection within a cell.How could GPI membrane anchored PrP be involved in the establishment and maintenance of persistent prion infection? Several studies have suggested that the GPI anchor is needed to localize PrP-sen to specific membrane environments where PrP-res formation is favored.^5–8 However, if this localization was essential for PrP-res formation, GPI-PrP-sen would presumably never form PrP-res. Lacking the GPI anchor, it would not be in the correct membrane environment to support conversion. As a result, neither acute nor persistent prion infection could occur. This is obviously not the case. Transgenic mice expressing only anchorless PrP-sen generate PrP-res and can be infected with scrapie even though (1) flotation gradients showed that anchorless PrP-sen was not in the same membrane environment as anchored PrP-sen and, (2) flow cytometry analysis demonstrated that anchorless PrP-sen was not present on the cell surface.¹⁶ Thus, the GPI anchor is not needed to target PrP-sen to a conversion friendly membrane environment.Consistent with the idea that the GPI anchor is not essential for PrP-res formation, in our studies anchorless PrP-sen could form PrP-res in cells acutely infected with scrapie despite the fact that it is processed differently than anchored PrP-sen, is not present on the cell surface (Fig. 1A), and is secreted.¹⁷ Persistent formation of anchorless PrP-res only occurred when both anchored and anchorless forms of PrP were expressed in the same cell.¹⁷ For this to happen both types of PrP must share a cellular compartment where PrP-res formation occurs, presumably either on the cell surface or in a specific location along the endocytic pathway^2,3 such as the endosomal recycling compartment.⁴ Analysis of infected and uninfected cells co-expressing Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-sen and wild-type PrP-sen demonstrated that Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-sen was not present on the cell surface (Fig. 1A). Thus, it is unlikely that GPI-PrP-res formation is occurring on the cell surface. We speculate that the anchored form of PrP-res encounters anchorless PrP-sen along either a secretory or endocytic pathway, allowing for the formation of anchorless PrP-res. Regardless of the precise location, the in vitro and in vivo data strongly suggest that the role of the anchor in persistent prion infection is not simply to localize PrP-sen to an environment compatible with PrP-res formation.However, the data are consistent with the idea that GPI anchored PrP is absolutely essential for the establishment of persistent infection in vitro. This is likely related to the spread of infectivity within a culture that is necessary for maintaining a persistent infection over time. Evidence suggests that PrP-res can be transferred between cells in a variety of ways including mother-daughter cell division,²⁵ cell-to-cell contact^26,27 and exosomes.²⁸ Tunneling nanotubes have also been hypothesized to be involved in intercellular prion spread¹⁹ and recent data suggest that spread can occur via these structures.²⁰ Any of these processes could involve the cell-to-cell transfer of PrP-res in membrane containing particles as has been observed in cell-free⁷ and cell-based systems.²⁹ If cell-to-cell contact were required, for example via simple physical proximity or perhaps tunneling nanotubes,^19,20 then the conversion of cell surface PrP-sen on the naïve cell by cell surface PrP-res on the infected cell would transfer infection to the naïve cell. In this instance, GPI membrane anchored, cell surface PrP-sen would be essential as it would allow for PrP-res formation on the cell surface. If spread is via cell division, then GPI-anchored, cell surface PrP-sen would be important for its role as a precursor to PrP-res formation.² In this instance, cell surface PrP-sen would be an essential intermediate in the continuous formation of PrP-res necessary for the accumulation and amplification of PrP-res within the cell. It would also help to cycle PrP between the cell surface and intracellular compartments where PrP-res can be formed.⁴ In either case, GPI-anchored PrP-sen would facilitate the accumulation of intracellular PrP-res to high enough levels to maintain both persistent infection in the mother cell and enable the transfer of organelles containing sufficient PrP-res to initiate infection in the daughter cell. Thus, we would suggest that efficient spread of infectivity requires not just the passive transfer of PrP-res from cell-to-cell but the concurrent initiation of conversion and amplification of PrP-res via cell surface, GPI anchored PrP-sen.In vivo, several lines of evidence suggest that the spread of scrapie infectivity also requires de novo PrP-res formation in the recipient cell and not simply transfer of PrP-res from one cell to another. For example, when neurografts from PrP expressing mice were placed in the brains of PrP knockout mice and the mice were challenged intracranially with scrapie, the graft showed scrapie pathology, but the surrounding tissue did not.³⁰ Furthermore, PrP-res from the graft migrated to the host tissue demonstrating that simple transfer of PrP-res was not sufficient and that PrP-sen expression was required for the spread of scrapie pathology.³⁰ In fact, these mice did not develop scrapie pathology following peripheral infection even when peripheral lymphoid tissues were reconstituted with PrP-sen expressing cells.³¹ Even though PrP-sen expressing cells were present in both the brain and spleen, in order for infectivity to spread from the lymphoreticular system to the central nervous system PrP-sen expression was also required in an intermediate tissue such as peripheral nerve.^31,32 Given that PrP-res uptake and trafficking do not require PrP-sen, the most obvious explanation for the requirement of PrP-sen in contiguous tissues is that de novo PrP-res formation in naïve cells is necessary for (1) infectivity to move from cell to cell within a tissue and, (2) infectivity to move from tissue to tissue.Another study demonstrated that peripheral expression of heterologous mouse PrP significantly increased the incubation time and actually prevented clinical disease in the majority of transgenic mice expressing hamster PrP in neurons of the brain.³³ Once again, if simple transfer and uptake of PrP-res were sufficient for spread, the presence of heterologous PrP molecules should not interfere because cellular uptake of PrP-res is independent of PrP-sen expression.^19,21–23 Clinical disease in these mice was likely prevented by the heterologous PrP molecule interfering with conversion of PrP-sen to PrP-res suggesting that prevention of de novo PrP-res formation inhibits spread of PrP-res and infectivity. These in vivo data, when combined with our recent in vitro data,¹⁷ provide evidence to support the importance of cell surface, and by extension GPI-anchored, PrP in the spread of prion infection.Our data demonstrate that the GPI anchor plays a role in the establishment of persistent scrapie infection in vitro. In our tissue culture system,²¹ as well as others where spread of infectivity by cell to cell contact appears to be limited,^25,34 the role of GPI anchored PrP-sen would be to amplify PrP-res to enable the efficient transfer of infectivity from mother to daughter cell. In cell systems where spread of prion infectivity may require cell to cell contact,^26,27 we propose that the role of GPI anchored PrP-sen is to facilitate the spread of prion infection via a chain of conversion from cell-to-cell, a “domino” type spread of infection that has been previously hypothesized.^35,36In vivo, such a mechanism might explain why neuroinvasion does not necessarily require axonal transport^32,37,38 and can occur independently of the axonal neurofilament machinery.³⁹ It would likely vary with cell type²⁷ and be most important in areas where infectivity is transferred from the periphery to the nervous system as well as in areas where cell division may be limited. It is also possible, if the location of PrP-res formation differs for different scrapie strains,⁴⁰ that the relative importance of a domino-like spread of infectivity in vivo would vary with the scrapie strain.Of course, spread of infectivity via a “wave” of GPI anchored, PrP mediated conversion would not preclude the spread of infectivity by other intracellular means such as axonal transport (reviewed in ref. ⁴¹). Furthermore, spread of infectivity may still also occur extracellularly such as in the unique case of mice which express anchorless PrP-sen,¹⁶ where our in vitro data would suggest that the cells themselves are not infected. In such a case, spread would require neither GPI anchored PrP-sen nor amplification of PrP-res in cells but would likely occur via other means such as blood⁴¹ or interstitial fluid flow.⁴²     

Mechanism of annexin I-mediated membrane aggregation

It has been proposed that annexin I has two separate interaction sites that are involved in membrane binding and aggregation, respectively. To better understand the mechanism of annexin I-mediated membrane aggregation, we investigated the properties of the inducible secondary interaction site implicated in membrane aggregation. X-ray specular reflectivity measurements showed that the thickness of annexin I layer bound to the phospholipid monolayer was 31 +/- 2 A, indicating that annexin I binds membranes as a protein monomer or monolayer. Surface plasmon resonance measurements of annexin I, V, and mutants, which allowed evaluation of membrane aggregation activity of annexin I separately from its membrane binding, revealed direct correlation between the relative membrane aggregation activity and the relative affinity of the secondary interaction site for the secondary membrane. The secondary binding was driven primarily by hydrophobic interactions, unlike calcium-mediated electrostatic primary membrane binding. Chemical cross-linking of membrane-bound annexin I showed that a significant degree of lateral association of annexin I molecules precedes its membrane aggregation. Taken together, these results support a hypothetical model of annexin I-mediated membrane aggregation, in which a laterally aggregated monolayer of membrane-bound annexin I directly interacts with a secondary membrane via its induced hydrophobic interaction site.     

Mutant prion protein-mediated aggregation of normal prion protein in the endoplasmic reticulum: implications for prion propagation and neurotoxicity

Familial prion disorders are believed to result from spontaneous conversion of mutant prion protein (PrPM) to the pathogenic isoform (PrPSc). While most familial cases are heterozygous and thus express the normal (PrPC) and mutant alleles of PrP, the role of PrPC in the pathogenic process is unclear. Plaques from affected cases reveal a heterogeneous picture; in some cases only PrPM is detected, whereas in others both PrPC and PrPM are transformed to PrPSc. To understand if the coaggregation of PrPC is governed by PrP mutations or is a consequence of the cellular compartment of PrPM aggregation, we coexpressed PrPM and PrPC in neuroblastoma cells, the latter tagged with green fluorescent protein (PrPC-GFP) for differentiation. Two PrPM forms (PrP231T, PrP217R/231T) that aggregate spontaneously in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) were generated for this analysis. We report that PrPC-GFP aggregates when coexpressed with PrP231T or PrP217R/231T, regardless of sequence homology between the interacting forms. Furthermore, intracellular aggregates of PrP231T induce the accumulation of a C-terminal fragment of PrP, most likely derived from a potentially neurotoxic transmembrane form of PrP (CtmPrP) in the ER. These findings have implications for prion pathogenesis in familial prion disorders, especially in cases where transport of PrPM from the ER is blocked by the cellular quality control.     

The role of prion peptide structure and aggregation in toxicity and membrane binding

Prion diseases are neurodegenerative disorders associated with a conformational change in the normal cellular isoform of the prion protein, PrP(C), to an abnormal scrapie isoform, PrP(SC). Unlike the alpha-helical PrP(C), the protease-resistant core of PrP(SC) is predominantly beta-sheet and possesses a tendency to polymerize into amyloid fibrils. We performed experiments with two synthetic human prion peptides, PrP(106-126) and PrP(127-147), to determine how peptide structure affects neurotoxicity and protein-membrane interactions. Peptide solutions possessing beta-sheet and amyloid structures were neurotoxic to PC12 cells in vitro and bound with measurable affinities to cholesterol-rich phospholipid membranes at ambient conditions, but peptide solutions lacking stable beta-sheet structures and amyloid content were nontoxic and possessed less than one tenth of the binding affinities of the amyloid-containing peptides. Regardless of structure, the peptide binding affinities to cholesterol-depleted membranes were greatly reduced. These results suggest that the beta-sheet and amyloid structures of the prion peptides give rise to their toxicity and membrane binding affinities and that membrane binding affinity, especially in cholesterol-rich environments, may be related to toxicity. Our results may have significance in understanding the role of the fibrillogenic cerebral deposits associated with some of the prion diseases in neurodegeneration and may have implications for other amyloidoses.