An engineered monomer binding-protein for α-synuclein efficiently inhibits the proliferation of amyloid fibrils

  1. Emil Dandanell Agerschou
  2. Patrick Flagmeier
  3. Theodora Saridaki
  4. Céline Galvagnion
  5. Daniel Komnig
  6. Laetitia Heid
  7. Vibha Prasad
  8. Hamed Shaykhalishahi
  9. Dieter Willbold
  10. Christopher M Dobson
  11. Aaron Voigt
  12. Björn Falkenburger  Is a corresponding author
  13. Wolfgang Hoyer  Is a corresponding author
  14. Alexander K Buell  Is a corresponding author
  1. Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Germany
  2. University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
  3. RWTH Aachen University, Germany
  4. Technical University of Denmark, Denmark

Abstract

Removing or preventing the formation of α-synuclein aggregates is a plausible strategy against Parkinson's disease. To this end we have engineered the β-wrapin AS69 to bind monomeric α-synuclein with high affinity. In cultured cells, AS69 reduced the self-interaction of α-synuclein and the formation of visible α-synuclein aggregates. In flies, AS69 reduced α-synuclein aggregates and the locomotor deficit resulting from α-synuclein expression in neuronal cells. In biophysical experiments in vitro, AS69 highly sub-stoichiometrically inhibited both primary and autocatalytic secondary nucleation processes, even in the presence of a large excess of monomer. We present evidence that the AS69-α-synuclein complex, rather than the free AS69, is the inhibitory species responsible for sub-stoichiometric inhibition of secondary nucleation. These results represent a new paradigm that high affinity monomer binders can lead to strongly sub-stoichiometric inhibition of nucleation processes.

Data availability

- Numerical data represented in the graphs for cell culture and fly experiments will be made publicly available on osf.io as we did for previous publications.- The numerical data for the biophysical experiments will be made publicly available within the same repository on osf.io.- The raw images of the gels used in the publication will be made publicly available.All data have been deposited on osf.io ( https://osf.io/6n2gs/?view_only=7eb7024d8ecb460a817cd0ed35978339 ) and will be made available in the event of publication

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Emil Dandanell Agerschou

    Institute of Physical Biology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Patrick Flagmeier

    Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1204-5340
  3. Theodora Saridaki

    Department of Neurology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Céline Galvagnion

    Institute of Physical Biology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Daniel Komnig

    Department of Neurology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6312-5236
  6. Laetitia Heid

    Institute of Physical Biology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Vibha Prasad

    Department of Neurology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Hamed Shaykhalishahi

    Institute of Physical Biology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Dieter Willbold

    Institute of Physical Biology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0065-7366
  10. Christopher M Dobson

    Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Aaron Voigt

    Department of Neurology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0428-7462
  12. Björn Falkenburger

    Department of Neurology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
    For correspondence
    bfalkenburger@ukaachen.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Wolfgang Hoyer

    Institute of Physical Biology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
    For correspondence
    wolfgang.hoyer@hhu.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Alexander K Buell

    Biotechnology and Biomedicine, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs Lyngby, Denmark
    For correspondence
    alebu@dtu.dk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1161-3622

Funding

Leverhulme Trust

  • Alexander K Buell

Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds

  • Patrick Flagmeier

Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes

  • Patrick Flagmeier

Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung

  • Céline Galvagnion

Parkinson's and Movement Disorder Foundation

  • Alexander K Buell

H2020 European Research Council (MCSA grant agreement No 706551)

  • Céline Galvagnion

Novo Nordisk Foundation

  • Alexander K Buell

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Andrew B West, Duke University, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: February 25, 2019
  2. Accepted: August 4, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: August 7, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: August 21, 2019 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record published: September 3, 2019 (version 3)
  6. Version of Record updated: December 11, 2019 (version 4)

Copyright

© 2019, Agerschou 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

  • 4,700
    Page views
  • 754
    Downloads
  • 36
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

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. Emil Dandanell Agerschou
  2. Patrick Flagmeier
  3. Theodora Saridaki
  4. Céline Galvagnion
  5. Daniel Komnig
  6. Laetitia Heid
  7. Vibha Prasad
  8. Hamed Shaykhalishahi
  9. Dieter Willbold
  10. Christopher M Dobson
  11. Aaron Voigt
  12. Björn Falkenburger
  13. Wolfgang Hoyer
  14. Alexander K Buell
(2019)
An engineered monomer binding-protein for α-synuclein efficiently inhibits the proliferation of amyloid fibrils
eLife 8:e46112.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.46112
  1. Further reading

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Andrew P Davison, Shailesh Appukuttan
    Insight

    Artificial neural networks could pave the way for efficiently simulating large-scale models of neuronal networks in the nervous system.

    1. Neuroscience
    Jonathan Nicholas, Nathaniel D Daw, Daphna Shohamy
    Research Article

    A key question in decision making is how humans arbitrate between competing learning and memory systems to maximize reward. We address this question by probing the balance between the effects, on choice, of incremental trial-and-error learning versus episodic memories of individual events. Although a rich literature has studied incremental learning in isolation, the role of episodic memory in decision making has only recently drawn focus, and little research disentangles their separate contributions. We hypothesized that the brain arbitrates rationally between these two systems, relying on each in circumstances to which it is most suited, as indicated by uncertainty. We tested this hypothesis by directly contrasting contributions of episodic and incremental influence to decisions, while manipulating the relative uncertainty of incremental learning using a well-established manipulation of reward volatility. Across two large, independent samples of young adults, participants traded these influences off rationally, depending more on episodic information when incremental summaries were more uncertain. These results support the proposal that the brain optimizes the balance between different forms of learning and memory according to their relative uncertainties and elucidate the circumstances under which episodic memory informs decisions.