Few
pathogens inspire fear to the degree that prions do. As the culprit behind such
mysterious diseases as mad cow disease and Familial Fatal Insomnia, prions
are avoided at all costs. In December of 2003 more than 30 countries closed
their borders to all beef imports from the United States because just one cow
from the state of Washington tested positive for mad cow disease (1). But what
are prions? And why do they evoke such aggressive responses?
Prions are
not viruses but rather a misfolded form of a particular protein, called prion
protein (PrP). This protein, whose
function remains unclear, is found throughout the body of healthy individuals
in its properly folded state, known as PrPC. When an individual is
exposed to a prion, the misfolded form of PrP known as PrPSc, the
prion can cause the normal protein to adopt its misfolded state. The normal PrPC
is converted into the abnormal PrPSc, which can then go on to
convert more healthy proteins into their pathogenic form. Eventually amyloid
plaques of these abnormal proteins build up, mostly in neuronal tissue, causing
transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, holes in the brain that continue to
grow until the individual has passed away.
Prion
diseases are universally fatal and there is no currently approved treatment to
slow their advance (P). Because these diseases occur due to a single misfolded
protein, they are not reliant on a nucleic acid based entity for transmission,
as is every other known transmissible disease. It is for this reason that
prions are not susceptible to normal sterilization procedures, including high
temperatures and UV radiation. Transmission can occur solely due to ingestion
of infected neural tissue or, as more recently suggested, via inhalation of air
droplets (2). Because there is no known treatment for prion diseases countries
tend to go to relatively extreme measures to prevent prions from crossing their
borders.
However,
new research suggests that the use of PrP antibodies, both prophylactically and
after infection has taken root, might help slow prion disease progression (3,
4, 5, 6). These antibodies bind to
specific regions of the normal PrP protein, helping them resist conversion to their
prion form (4). However, these have mostly involved in vitro studies, which do not necessarily mean that there are
practical clinical uses for anti-PrP antibodies in treating prion diseases. One
of the main hurdles to overcome is getting these antibodies to target tissues
in the central nervous system at concentrations high enough to have an effect.
In order to do this the blood brain barrier (BBB), which is normally
impermeable to antibodies, must be overcome. In the past this has meant
inserting the drugs directly into the brain of mouse models. However, it would
be more suitable in human patients for a less invasive delivery method to be
used, especially considering the possible transmission of prions that could
occur during brain surgery.
To address this problem a recent
study by Ohsawa et al. (2013) treated prion-infected mice with anti-PrP
antibodies using peripheral injections, which were administered via the tail
vein on a weekly basis. Treatment began 120 days after infection in order to
determine whether these antibodies would affect late stage disease progression.
While these antibodies have been shown to slow the progression of prion
diseases when administered directly to the central nervous system, it was
unclear whether the antibodies would be able to reach the brain in sufficient
doses to have their desired effect. These antibodies were fluorescently labeled
to allow observation of spatial distribution by immunohistochemistry. Levels of
PrPC and PrPSc were determined for various brain sections
via immunoblotting (P).
Immunohistochemistry revealed that
peripheral administration of the antibodies did in fact lead to successful
delivery to the brain. Areas where the concentrations of antibodies were high
enough to be detected include the cerebellar medullas, thalami, and hippocampus.
The mean survival time for mice treated with antibodies was longer than those
that received the control, although these results failed to reach statistical
significance. Mice that were given the antibodies but did not survive
significantly longer than control mice were found to have less well-distributed
concentrations of the antibodies in their brains. Immunoblotting, likewise,
revealed that administration of anti-PrP antibodies during late stage prion
disease correlated with a higher percentage of normal PrP proteins as compared
with their pathogenic form (P).
It has been suggested that late
stage prion disease might be associated with an increase in BBB permeability (6).
This would certainly explain the ability of the antibodies used in this study
to reach critical regions of the brain. However, the low sample number of this
study calls some of its results into question. More research is needed to
determine the factors that contribute to the differences observed in antibody
distribution for some of the mice used. For this the relationship between prion
disease progression and BBB permeability should be focused on. In addition,
while this treatment has promising results suggesting the ability of
peripherally injected antibodies to slow prion diseases a cure still remains
elusive. Antibodies might be able to help normal PrP proteins resist conversion
but without a mechanism to clear the abnormal prions the patient would still
remain infected and capable of transmitting the disease to others. Future
research should focus on ways to minimize the effects of already converted PrPSc
proteins.
Primary Source
P. Ohsawa,
Natsuo, Chang-Hyun Song, Akio Suzuki, Hidefumi Furuoka, Rie Hasebe,
and Motohiro Horiuchi.
"Therapeutic Effect of Peripheral Administration of
an Anti-Prion Protein Antibody on
Mice Infected with Prions." Microbiology
Secondary Sources
1. New
York Times. "Japan Deems Beef Standards Lax in Canada and U.S." New
York
2. Haybaeck,
Johannes, Mathias Heikenwalder, Britta Klevenz, Petra Schwarz, Ilan
Margalith, Claire Bridel, Kirsten
Mertz, Elizabeta Zirdum, Benjamin Petsch,
Thomas Fuchs, Lothar Stitz, and
Adriano Aguzzi. "Aerosols Transmit Prions
to Immunocompetent and
Immunodeficient Mice." Plos Pathogens 7.1
(2011): E1001257. (Haybaeck et al. 2011)
3. Enari,
Masato, Eckhard Flechsig, and Charles Weissmann. "Scrapie Prion Protein
Accumulation by Scrapie-Infected
Neuroblastoma Cells Abrogated by
Exposure to a Prion Protein
Antibody." Proceedings of the National Academy
4. Kim,
Chan-Lin, Ayako Karino, Naotaka Ishiguro, Morikazu Shinagawa, Motoyoshi
Sato, and Motohiro Horiuchi.
"Cell-surface Retention of PrPC by Anti-PrP Antibody Prevents
Protease-resistant PrP Formation." Journal
of General Virology 85.11 (2004): 3473-482.
5. Peretz,
David, Anthony Williamson, Kiotoshi Kaneko, Julie Vergara, Estelle Leclerc,
Gerold Schmitt-Ulms, Ingrid
Mehlhorn, Giuseppe Legname, Mark Wormald,
Pauline Rudd, Raymond Dwek, Dennis
Burton, and Stanley Prusiner.
"Antibodies Inhibit Prion
Propagation and Clear Cell Cultures of Prion Infectivity."
Nature 412
(2001): 739-43. (Peretz et al. 2001)
6. Trevitt,
Clare, and John Collinge. "A Systematic Review of Prion Therapeutics in
Experimental Models." Brain
129 (2006): 2241-265.
This is an interesting account of the advancement of possible methods to counteract these damaging prions. But how common are these diseases exactly? Are they more common in certain animals, or in humans?
ReplyDeleteThis post did an excellent job of conveying the brutal nature of this anomaly and the disparaging results in trying to cure it. Do you have any ideas of more tests that could be conducted to continue to search for a way of fighting the disease? And how conclusive of data do you think would be needed before tests were attempted on humans?
ReplyDelete