Time-resolved studies define the nature of toxic IAPP intermediates, providing insight for anti-amyloidosis therapeutics

  1. Andisheh Abedini
  2. Annette Plesner
  3. Ping Cao
  4. Zachary Ridgway
  5. Jinghua Zhang
  6. Ling-Hsien Tu
  7. Chris T Middleton
  8. Brian Chao
  9. Daniel J Sartori
  10. Fanling Meng
  11. Hui Wang
  12. Amy G Wong
  13. Martin T Zanni
  14. C Bruce Verchere
  15. Daniel P Raleigh  Is a corresponding author
  16. Ann Marie Schmidt  Is a corresponding author
  1. New York University School of Medicine, United States
  2. Novo Nordisk, Denmark
  3. Stony Brook University, United States
  4. PhaseTech Spectroscopy, Inc., United States
  5. University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States
  6. University of British Columbia, Canada

Abstract

Islet amyloidosis by IAPP contributes to pancreatic β-cell death in diabetes, but the nature of toxic IAPP species remains elusive. Using concurrent time-resolved biophysical and biological measurements, we define the toxic species produced during IAPP amyloid formation and link their properties to induction of rat INS-1 β-cell and murine islet toxicity. These globally flexible, low order oligomers upregulate pro-inflammatory markers and induce reactive oxygen species. They do not bind 1-anilnonaphthalene-8-sulphonic acid and lack extensive β-sheet structure. Aromatic interactions modulate, but are not required for toxicity. Not all IAPP oligomers are toxic; toxicity depends on their partially structured conformational states. Some anti-amyloid agents paradoxically prolong cytotoxicity by prolonging the lifetime of the toxic species. The data highlight the distinguishing properties of toxic IAPP oligomers and the common features that they share with toxic species reported for other amyloidogenic polypeptides, providing information for rational drug design to treat IAPP induced β-cell death.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Andisheh Abedini

    Diabetes Research Program, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Annette Plesner

    Novo Nordisk, Bagsværd, Denmark
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Ping Cao

    Department of Chemistry, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Zachary Ridgway

    Department of Chemistry, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Jinghua Zhang

    Diabetes Research Program, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Ling-Hsien Tu

    Department of Chemistry, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Chris T Middleton

    PhaseTech Spectroscopy, Inc., Madison, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Brian Chao

    Diabetes Research Program, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Daniel J Sartori

    Diabetes Research Program, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Fanling Meng

    Department of Chemistry, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Hui Wang

    Department of Chemistry, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Amy G Wong

    Department of Chemistry, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Martin T Zanni

    Department of Chemistry, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. C Bruce Verchere

    Child & Family Research Institute and Department of Surgery and Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Daniel P Raleigh

    Department of Chemistry, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, United States
    For correspondence
    Daniel.Raleigh@stonybrook.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Ann Marie Schmidt

    Diabetes Research Program, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    annmarie.schmidt@nyumc.org
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Jeffery W Kelly, The Scripps Research Institute, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All procedures were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of New York University Langone Medical Center (NYULMC) and conform to the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals published by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) (8th Edition, 2011, ISBN 10: 0-309-15400-6). The Animal Care and Use Program at NYULMC are in full compliance with NIH policy (NYULMC Compliance Number is A3435-01).

Version history

  1. Received: November 12, 2015
  2. Accepted: May 20, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 23, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: June 1, 2016 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record published: July 11, 2016 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2016, Abedini et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 4,117
    views
  • 928
    downloads
  • 125
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Andisheh Abedini
  2. Annette Plesner
  3. Ping Cao
  4. Zachary Ridgway
  5. Jinghua Zhang
  6. Ling-Hsien Tu
  7. Chris T Middleton
  8. Brian Chao
  9. Daniel J Sartori
  10. Fanling Meng
  11. Hui Wang
  12. Amy G Wong
  13. Martin T Zanni
  14. C Bruce Verchere
  15. Daniel P Raleigh
  16. Ann Marie Schmidt
(2016)
Time-resolved studies define the nature of toxic IAPP intermediates, providing insight for anti-amyloidosis therapeutics
eLife 5:e12977.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12977

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12977

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Natalia E Ketaren, Fred D Mast ... John D Aitchison
    Research Advance

    To date, all major modes of monoclonal antibody therapy targeting SARS-CoV-2 have lost significant efficacy against the latest circulating variants. As SARS-CoV-2 omicron sublineages account for over 90% of COVID-19 infections, evasion of immune responses generated by vaccination or exposure to previous variants poses a significant challenge. A compelling new therapeutic strategy against SARS-CoV-2 is that of single-domain antibodies, termed nanobodies, which address certain limitations of monoclonal antibodies. Here, we demonstrate that our high-affinity nanobody repertoire, generated against wild-type SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (Mast et al., 2021), remains effective against variants of concern, including omicron BA.4/BA.5; a subset is predicted to counter resistance in emerging XBB and BQ.1.1 sublineages. Furthermore, we reveal the synergistic potential of nanobody cocktails in neutralizing emerging variants. Our study highlights the power of nanobody technology as a versatile therapeutic and diagnostic tool to combat rapidly evolving infectious diseases such as SARS-CoV-2.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    Benjamin R Duewell, Naomi E Wilson ... Scott D Hansen
    Research Article

    Phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) beta (PI3Kβ) is functionally unique in the ability to integrate signals derived from receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs), G-protein coupled receptors, and Rho-family GTPases. The mechanism by which PI3Kβ prioritizes interactions with various membrane-tethered signaling inputs, however, remains unclear. Previous experiments did not determine whether interactions with membrane-tethered proteins primarily control PI3Kβ localization versus directly modulate lipid kinase activity. To address this gap in our knowledge, we established an assay to directly visualize how three distinct protein interactions regulate PI3Kβ when presented to the kinase in a biologically relevant configuration on supported lipid bilayers. Using single molecule Total Internal Reflection Fluorescence (TIRF) Microscopy, we determined the mechanism controlling PI3Kβ membrane localization, prioritization of signaling inputs, and lipid kinase activation. We find that auto-inhibited PI3Kβ prioritizes interactions with RTK-derived tyrosine phosphorylated (pY) peptides before engaging either GβGγ or Rac1(GTP). Although pY peptides strongly localize PI3Kβ to membranes, stimulation of lipid kinase activity is modest. In the presence of either pY/GβGγ or pY/Rac1(GTP), PI3Kβ activity is dramatically enhanced beyond what can be explained by simply increasing membrane localization. Instead, PI3Kβ is synergistically activated by pY/GβGγ and pY/Rac1 (GTP) through a mechanism consistent with allosteric regulation.