Enhanced insulin signalling ameliorates C9orf72 hexanucleotide repeat expansion toxicity in Drosophila

Abstract

G4C2 repeat expansions within the C9orf72 gene are the most common genetic cause of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). The repeats undergo repeat-associated non-ATG translation to generate toxic dipeptide repeat proteins. Here, we show that insulin/Igf signalling is reduced in fly models of C9orf72 repeat expansion using RNA-sequencing of adult brain. We further demonstrate that activation of insulin/Igf signalling can mitigate multiple neurodegenerative phenotypes in flies expressing either expanded G4C2 repeats or the toxic dipeptide repeat protein poly-GR. Levels of poly-GR are reduced when components of the insulin/Igf signalling pathway are genetically activated in the diseased flies, suggesting a mechanism of rescue. Modulating insulin signalling in mammalian cells also lowers poly-GR levels. Remarkably, systemic injection of insulin improves the survival of flies expressing G4C2 repeats. Overall, our data suggest that modulation of insulin/Igf signalling could be an effective therapeutic approach against C9orf72 ALS/FTD.

Data availability

Sequencing data have been deposited in GEO under accession codes GSE151826. All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Magda Luciana Atilano

    Genetics, Evolution & Environment, Institute of Healthy Ageing, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3819-2023
  2. Sebastian Grönke

    Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1539-5346
  3. Teresa Niccoli

    Genetics, Evolution & Environment, Institute of Healthy Ageing, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Liam Kempthorne

    UK Dementia Research Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Oliver Hahn

    Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Javier Morón-Oset

    Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Oliver Hendrich

    Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Miranda Dyson

    Genetics, Evolution & Environment, Institute of Healthy Ageing, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Mirjam Lisette Adams

    UK Dementia Research Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Alexander Hull

    Genetics, Evolution & Environment, Institute of Healthy Ageing, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Marie-Therese Salcher-Konrad

    UK Dementia Research Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Amy Monaghan

    Alzheimer's Research UK UCL Drug Discovery Institute, University College of London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Magda Bictash

    Alzheimer's Research UK UCL Drug Discovery Institute, University College of London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Idoia Glaria

    UK Dementia Research Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4556-489X
  15. Adrian M Isaacs

    UK Dementia Research Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    a.isaacs@ucl.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Linda Partridge

    Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing, Cologne, Germany
    For correspondence
    Linda.Partridge@age.mpg.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9615-0094

Funding

Alzheimer's Research UK (ARUK-PG2016A-6)

  • Adrian M Isaacs

Wellcome Trust

  • Linda Partridge

Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (Open-access funding)

  • Linda Partridge

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Mani Ramaswami, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland

Version history

  1. Received: May 4, 2020
  2. Accepted: March 9, 2021
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: March 19, 2021 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: March 29, 2021 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2021, Atilano 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

  • 2,606
    Page views
  • 328
    Downloads
  • 14
    Citations

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

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. Magda Luciana Atilano
  2. Sebastian Grönke
  3. Teresa Niccoli
  4. Liam Kempthorne
  5. Oliver Hahn
  6. Javier Morón-Oset
  7. Oliver Hendrich
  8. Miranda Dyson
  9. Mirjam Lisette Adams
  10. Alexander Hull
  11. Marie-Therese Salcher-Konrad
  12. Amy Monaghan
  13. Magda Bictash
  14. Idoia Glaria
  15. Adrian M Isaacs
  16. Linda Partridge
(2021)
Enhanced insulin signalling ameliorates C9orf72 hexanucleotide repeat expansion toxicity in Drosophila
eLife 10:e58565.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.58565

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.58565

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Kiwamu Kudo, Kamalini G Ranasinghe ... Srikantan S Nagarajan
    Research Article

    Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is characterized by the accumulation of amyloid-β and misfolded tau proteins causing synaptic dysfunction, and progressive neurodegeneration and cognitive decline. Altered neural oscillations have been consistently demonstrated in AD. However, the trajectories of abnormal neural oscillations in AD progression and their relationship to neurodegeneration and cognitive decline are unknown. Here, we deployed robust event-based sequencing models (EBMs) to investigate the trajectories of long-range and local neural synchrony across AD stages, estimated from resting-state magnetoencephalography. The increases in neural synchrony in the delta-theta band and the decreases in the alpha and beta bands showed progressive changes throughout the stages of the EBM. Decreases in alpha and beta band synchrony preceded both neurodegeneration and cognitive decline, indicating that frequency-specific neuronal synchrony abnormalities are early manifestations of AD pathophysiology. The long-range synchrony effects were greater than the local synchrony, indicating a greater sensitivity of connectivity metrics involving multiple regions of the brain. These results demonstrate the evolution of functional neuronal deficits along the sequence of AD progression.

    1. Medicine
    2. Neuroscience
    Luisa Fassi, Shachar Hochman ... Roi Cohen Kadosh
    Research Article

    In recent years, there has been debate about the effectiveness of treatments from different fields, such as neurostimulation, neurofeedback, brain training, and pharmacotherapy. This debate has been fuelled by contradictory and nuanced experimental findings. Notably, the effectiveness of a given treatment is commonly evaluated by comparing the effect of the active treatment versus the placebo on human health and/or behaviour. However, this approach neglects the individual’s subjective experience of the type of treatment she or he received in establishing treatment efficacy. Here, we show that individual differences in subjective treatment - the thought of receiving the active or placebo condition during an experiment - can explain variability in outcomes better than the actual treatment. We analysed four independent datasets (N = 387 participants), including clinical patients and healthy adults from different age groups who were exposed to different neurostimulation treatments (transcranial magnetic stimulation: Studies 1 and 2; transcranial direct current stimulation: Studies 3 and 4). Our findings show that the inclusion of subjective treatment can provide a better model fit either alone or in interaction with objective treatment (defined as the condition to which participants are assigned in the experiment). These results demonstrate the significant contribution of subjective experience in explaining the variability of clinical, cognitive, and behavioural outcomes. We advocate for existing and future studies in clinical and non-clinical research to start accounting for participants’ subjective beliefs and their interplay with objective treatment when assessing the efficacy of treatments. This approach will be crucial in providing a more accurate estimation of the treatment effect and its source, allowing the development of effective and reproducible interventions.