Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Parahippocampal gyrus expression of endothelial and insulin receptor signaling pathway genes is modulated by Alzheimer’s disease and normalized by treatment with anti-diabetic agents

  • P. Katsel,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision

    Affiliation Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States of America

    ⨯
  • P. Roussos,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Software

    Affiliations Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States of America, Department of Genetics and Genomic Science and Institute for Multiscale Biology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States of America, Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, J.J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York, United States of America

    ⨯
  • M. S. Beeri,

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology

    Affiliations Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States of America, The Joseph Sagol Neuroscience Center, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel

    ⨯
  • M. A. Gama-Sosa,

    Roles Investigation, Methodology

    Affiliations Department of Neuroscience, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States of America, Division of Neurology, J.J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York, United States of America

    ⨯
  • S. Gandy,

    Roles Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliations Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States of America, Division of Neurology, J.J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York, United States of America, Department of Neurology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States of America, General Medical Research Service, J.J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York, United States of America

    ⨯
  • S. Khan,

    Roles Data curation, Investigation, Methodology

    Affiliation Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States of America

    ⨯
  • V. Haroutunian

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources

    vahram.haroutunian@mssm.edu

    Affiliations Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States of America, Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, J.J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York, United States of America, Department of Neuroscience, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States of America

    ⨯

Abstract

A large body of literature links risk of cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) or pre-diabetes. Accumulating evidence implicates a close relationship between the brain insulin receptor signaling pathway (IRSP) and the accumulation of amyloid beta and hyperphosphorylated and conformationally abnormal tau. We showed previously that the neuropathological features of Alzheimer’s disease (AD were reduced in patients with diabetes who were treated with insulin and oral antidiabetic medications. To understand better the neurobiological substrates of T2D and T2D medications in AD, we examined IRSP and endothelial cell markers in the parahippocampal gyrus of controls (N = 30), of persons with AD (N = 19), and of persons with AD and T2D, who, in turn, had been treated with anti-diabetic drugs (insulin and or oral agents; N = 34). We studied the gene expression of selected members of the IRSP and selective endothelial cell markers in bulk postmortem tissue from the parahippocampal gyrus and in endothelial cell enriched isolates from the same brain region. The results indicated that there are considerable abnormalities and reductions in gene expression (bulk tissue homogenates and endothelial cell isolates) in the parahippocampal gyri of persons with AD that map directly to genes associated with the microvasculature and the IRSP. Our results also showed that the numbers of abnormally expressed microvasculature and IRSP associated genes in diabetic AD donors who had been treated with anti-diabetic agents were reduced significantly. These findings suggest that anti-diabetic treatments may reduce or normalize compromised microvascular and IRSP functions in AD.

Citation: Katsel P, Roussos P, Beeri MS, Gama-Sosa MA, Gandy S, Khan S, et al. (2018) Parahippocampal gyrus expression of endothelial and insulin receptor signaling pathway genes is modulated by Alzheimer’s disease and normalized by treatment with anti-diabetic agents. PLoS ONE 13(11): e0206547. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206547

Editor: Stephen D. Ginsberg, Nathan S Kline Institute, UNITED STATES

Received: May 11, 2018; Accepted: October 15, 2018; Published: November 1, 2018

This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding: This work was supported by Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Rehabilitation Research and Development Service Awards 1 I21 RX002069-01 and 1 I21 RX002876-01 (MAGS); VA Merit BX002267, NIH- N01HHSN 271201300031, P50 AG005138-31 (VH); R01 AG034087, R01 AG053446, R01 AG051545 (MSB). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

A significant body of literature links risk of cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) or pre-diabetes[1, 2]. T2D or impaired fasting glucose may be present in up to 80% of persons with Alzheimer’s disease (AD)[3]. Modifications in brain insulin metabolism are thought to be among the pathophysiological factors underlying dementia, whether due to AD[4] or to vascular cognitive impairment and dementia (VCID). Several studies suggest that pre-diabetes[5] and T2D may anticipate conversion to MCI[2, 6]. Imaging studies suggest significant changes in the brain microvasculature and in metabolic dysfunction[7] in persons with T2D, or even simple hyperglycemia in the absence of full blown diabetes, and dementia[8–10]. Accumulating evidence implicates a close relationship between the brain insulin receptor signaling pathway (IRSP) and the major neurobiological abnormalities of AD, amyloid beta (Aβ) and hyperphosphorylated and conformationally abnormal tau. Both pathologies have been shown to lower neuronal IR responses to insulin and to cause rapid and substantial loss of neuronal surface insulin receptors (IRs)[11]. Disruption of brain insulin signaling is one of the explanations for the consistently higher risk of AD and dementia in type 2 diabetic elderly[12]. Fat-feed laboratory transgenic mice models of AD that overexpress brain amyloidogenic genes develop glucose intolerance and insulin resistance, illustrating the potential bidirectional complexity of this relationship[13]. In AD patients, monotherapy with insulin[14] or with single representatives of other classes of hypoglycemic medications[15, 16] have been shown to not alter the risk of AD[17], but to potentially improve memory performance and slow cognitive decline. That cognitive impairment and AD neuropathology have been linked with T2D and even pre-diabetes suggests that the mechanisms underlying the relationship of T2D with dementia may be generalizable to non-T2D individuals. Although not performed on brain tissue, a recent study strongly supports an association between the molecular mechanisms of AD, insulin regulation, and T2D[18]. Integrative systems analysis of multiple tissues and organs in ob/ob mice identified APP as a top regulator of islet cell functions with the potential to regulate plasma insulin levels. This and other evidence for the complexity of the T2D-dementia interaction was comprehensively reviewed by Arnold and colleagues[19].

Recent evidence[20] suggests that metformin, and by extension other hypoglycemic medications[21], can significantly improve health- and lifespan. For example, metformin has the unique ability to correct the aging-related missorting of nuclear and cytoplasmic proteins[22]. In non-diabetic AD patients, monotherapy with insulin[23, 24] or with other hypoglycemic medications[14, 25] has shown some, albeit inconsistent, improvement in memory performance and slowing of AD symptom progression. In a series of studies[26, 27], our group showed that, when taken as a whole, T2D did not significantly affect the neuropathological sequelae of AD, but that the absence of a “T2D X AD neuropathology” interaction was apparently driven in large measure by the presence of antidiabetic drugs. Our studies showed that elderly persons with T2D treated with insulin plus other hypoglycemic agents (i.e., combination therapy) have dramatically less AD neuropathology (reduced densities of neuritic plaques and neurofibrillary tangles in the cortex) than otherwise similar non-T2D persons2. In an effort to understand better the neurobiological substrates of T2D and T2D medications in AD, we examined in the current study IRSP and endothelial cell markers in the parahippocampal gyri of persons with and without AD, T2D and T2D medications.

Insulin receptors (IR) are particularly abundant in brain regions supporting cognition, with recent evidence implicating a close relationship between the brain IR signaling pathway (IRSP) and the major neurobiological abnormalities of accumulations of Aβ and of conformationally abnormal and hyperphosphorylated tau (pTau)e.g.,[28]. In vitro studies3-5 provide support for our findings identifying the IRSP as an underlying mechanism by which combination of insulin with non-insulin T2D medications may modulate AD neuropathology even in the absence of comorbid T2D. Insulin binds to IR subunits (member of the receptor tyrosine kinase family engaging Akt and mTOR pathways). Phosphorylated insulin receptor substrate (IRS) scaffolding proteins link the IR to downstream signaling effectors including Akt. Akt activation inhibits pro-apoptotic signaling molecules such as BCL2-antagonist of cell death (BAD), B cell lymphoma 2 (BCL2), Forkhead Box O (FoxO), nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) and glycogen synthase kinase-3 beta (GSK3β). GSK3β by itself inhibits Akt by controlling mTORC, a key activating kinase for AKT[29]. GSK3β also phosphorylates β-catenin, targeting it for ubiquitination and proteasome dependent degradation[30]. Independent evidence implicates elements of this pathway in neuronal dysfunction, neurodegeneration and dementia[31–34]. In addition to this canonical “metabolic and anti-apoptotic” pathway of the IRSP, insulin binding to IR can also activate a second, SHC-ERK1/2, pro-survival pathway culminating in the activation of PPAR, and its coactivator PGC-1α, and interactions with the master cholesterol regulators RxR and LxR[35, 36]. Notably, these are the molecules that our studies indicate to be dysregulated in postmortem human AD brain[37, 38]. The IRSP in the brain contributes to the control of processes such as synaptic plasticity, e.g.,[27] [33, 34], neuroprotection, neurodegeneration, survival, growth, and energy metabolism, e.g.,[39], all of which are particularly relevant to cognition.

The mechanism by which insulin is delivered to the brain is uncertain, but insulin receptors (IR) on endothelial cells are the leading candidates[40]. Several non-mutually exclusive mechanisms may underlie the association between T2D and dementia, but increased cerebrovascular compromise and blood-brain barrier disruption[41–43]; defective signal transduction mechanism of central nervous system insulin receptors[44, 45]; and their potential interactions with amyloidogenic processes[44, 46–48] are among the most prominent see also, [19]. Multiple studies have suggested that microvascular dysfunction, including permeability of the blood-brain barrier[49–52], may be a significant contributor to cognitive impairment in the elderly and in VCID or AD[53]. This evidence has come not only from numerous neuroimaging studies of microvascular dysfunction[54–56], but also from direct neuropathological investigations[57–65] and animal model systems[66, 67]. Similarly, microvascular damage and involvement, including dysfunction of endothelial cells in T2D, is undeniable[23, 55, 56, 68–71]. On the other hand, IRs in the brain do not appear to downregulate dramatically in response to high concentrations of insulin, and—in contrast to its role in glia and peripheral cells—insulin has a relatively limited role in regulating glucose metabolism in neurons[20, 72] and densities of IRs are not adversely affected in AD[47] when studied in bulk tissue assays. However, the vast majority of the studies of the brain IRSP in AD and T2D have been conducted in homogenized bulk tissue where even large changes and abnormalities in one or more cell types can be diluted or completely obscured when different cell types are intermixed in bulk-homogenate studies. In order to overcome this limitation and to address more directly the roles of T2D and antidiabetic medication in AD, we developed a method of endothelial cell enrichment from bulk human postmortem brain tissue and studied components of the IRSP and markers of endothelial cell function.

Methods

Tissue processing

This study involved analysis of postmortem human brain samples only. Consent for research use of the tissue was obtained from all donors. The collection and consent procedures were reviewed by the Mount Sinai (HS#: 13–00709 PS) and JJ Peters VA (ID01527) IRBs and were exempted from further review. The parahippocampal gyrus (Brodmann 36), was dissected from snap-frozen ~8 mm thick coronal sections. The dissected block was then pulverized using liquid nitrogen cooled mortar and pestle. The crushed homogenate was aliquoted into 50 and 100 mg aliquots. The general procedures for tissue acquisition, dissection and aliquot preparation have been described previously[73]. Some aliquots were used for bulk tissue analyses, whereas other sister aliquots from the same brain region of each donor were used for endothelial cell enrichment.

Gene expression studies

Custom 51-plex QuantiGene assays (Life Technologies/Thermo, CA) were used for gene expression studies. Tissue and microvessel isolate homogenization, proteinase K treatment, probe hybridization and signal amplification were performed according to the manufacturer manual. Measurement of 51 genes (Table 1, and S1 File) was performed on Luminex 200 (Millipore, MA) instrument. Relative expression values were calculated using standard curve method and normalized to geometric means of four housekeeping genes included in the panel: HMBS, NONO, PPIB and RPLP0.

thumbnail
Download:
Table 1. Characteristics of the primary study cohorts.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206547.t001

Selection of mRNA transcripts for expression studies

Twenty-four to twenty-six mRNA transcripts were selected for study. The selection of transcripts was based on several factors that included: known association with the IRSP; known and relatively enriched expression in endothelial cells[74], and relatively high or altered expression in bulk tissue microarray studies of AD[75, 76]. Twenty-three other transcripts associated with immune-inflammation, neurons, oligodendrocytes, astrocytes and microglia were also studied to survey other systems that may have been affected by T2D medications. The results of these later assays are shown in S1 File.

Microvascular/endothelial cell enrichment

One hundred milligrams of brain tissue was gently homogenized in cold 18% dextran/PBS containing protectRNA RNase inhibitor (Sigma, MO) (10 ml/g of tissue) using a Potter-Elvejehm with a loose-fit Teflon pestle (6–8 strokes at low speed)[77]. The homogenate was overlaid onto an equal volume of a discontinuous gradient of Ficoll-Paque PLUS™ and centrifuged for 30 min at 1,500 x g and 4°C. The resulting microvascular enriched pellet was resuspended and washed twice with PBS. The isolated microvascular/endothelial cell fragment was frozen and stored at -80C until further assays. In preliminary multiple gene expression studies, we have found this protocol to results in a significant (3–7 fold depending on the endothelial cell marker used) enrichment of microvascular/endothelial cell markers and a many-fold reduction in the levels of non-endothelial cell markers. Fig 1 shows one such example.

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 1. Enrichment of endothelial cell transcripts in microvascular isolates.

The expression levels of selected endothelial cell markers and non-endothelial markers are expressed as fold change ratios relative to the levels of each transcript in bulk tissue homogenates.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206547.g001

Characteristics of brain tissue donors and molecular pathways of interest

The demographic characteristics and group stratification of study cases is shown in Table 1. All postmortem brain tissue donors were derived from the Mount Sinai NIH Neurobiobank (http://icahn.mssm.edu/research/nih-brain-tissue-repository/about). All brain tissue donations were derived from cases with written consent from the next of kin of each donor for research use. Each brain underwent a detailed neuropathological assessment as described previously[78, 79]. Donors were selected from over 1,900 cases for short postmortem interval (under 24 hours), high brain tissue pH (>6.0), the presence of either only AD pathology (as defined by CERAD[80]) or no evidence of neuropathology. Brodmann area 36 (the parahippocampal gyrus) was selected for study because transcriptome-wide analysis of 17 different brain regions showed it to be among the most transcriptionally vulnerable brain region in AD[76]. To enable direct comparison of assayed IRSP and endothelial cell mRNA expression, cases with AD and no known history of T2D were selected to match those with AD and a history of T2D as closely as possible with respect to both pre-agonal cognitive function and severity of neuropathology as defined by Braak score and density of cortical neuritic plaques. Cases with neuropathological evidence of non-AD pathology (e.g., Lewy body pathology, significant vascular pathology such as stroke or amyloid angiopathy, etc.) were excluded from all studies as described previously. Donors were included as presenting with T2D based on the American Diabetes Association criteria (symptoms of diabetes plus casual plasma glucose concentration > 200mg/dl; fasting plasma glucose > 126mg/dl; 2h plasma glucose>200mg/dl during OGTT); and/or record of receiving anti-diabetes medication; history of diabetes in the medical record. Diagnoses of T2D were ascertained from detailed structured review (>275 items) of all medical records and medical history. Similarly, medication use history and laboratory test results were derived from detailed reviews of medical records and semi-structured guided interviews of the next of kin or caregivers intimately acquainted with the donor.

Statistical methods

Differential expression between disease status (control, AD) and treatment (insulin and/or oral anti-diabetes agents) was assessed using the limma package in R, with normalized gene expression matrix and the final covariate model, which included gender and PMI. Note that the analysis was run separately for gene expression derived from vessels and homogenate tissue. For each gene, least-squares linear regression was performed using limma to yield coefficients for the effect on gene expression of each variable on the right-hand side: where Group is defined based on combination of diagnosis and treatment [i.e., control, AD (no T2D, no T2D medications), and AD+T2D treated with insulin and/or oral anti-diabetes agents]. P values were adjusted for multiple hypothesis testing using false discovery rate (FDR) estimation, and the differentially expressed genes were determined as those with an estimated FDR ≤ 5%, or where specified FDR ≤ 7%.

Results

The main analyses were performed on the expression of the genes shown in Table 2 with the primary goal of determining the extent to which IRSP and endothelial cell related transcripts were altered in AD vs. controls and whether these disease-associated changes were normalized in the brain of persons with AD receiving one or more antidiabetic medications of any kind and in any combination (i.e., insulin only, oral agents only, insulin plus oral agents).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 2. Abbreviations, brief function and cell-type expression and expression levels of IRSP and endothelial cell transcripts in AD-tissue and vessels.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206547.t002

Altered mRNA expression in whole tissue homogenates of the parahippocampal gyrus in AD and anti-T2D medicated AD

Compared to controls, 12 of the 18-endothelial cell and IRSP-associated genes assayed were significantly (12 of 18 unadjusted ps<0.05; 6 of 12 after FDR correction) altered in AD (Figs 2 and 3). One third of the altered genes (unadjusted ps<0.05), or 44% after FDR correction, were genes with preponderant expression in endothelial cells[74]. In AD donors who had a history of receiving antidiabetic treatment, only 4 of these 12 genes remained significant before FDR correction and only 1 (ANGPT1) after FDR correction.

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 2. Endothelial cell markers in parahippocampal gyrus bulk tissue.

Values represent relative log fold change in persons with AD relative to controls and log fold change in persons with AD and T2D who had been treated with anti-diabetes agents. * = p<0.05 after FDR correction; # = p<0.05 without FDR correction; ✦ = p<0.05 AD-No Treatment vs. AD-T2D Treatment.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206547.g002

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 3. IRSP-associated markers in parahippocampal gyrus bulk tissue.

Values represent relative log fold change in persons with AD relative to controls and log fold change in in persons with AD and T2D who had been treated with anti-diabetes agents. * = p<0.05 after FDR correction; # = p<0.05 without FDR correction; ✦ = p<0.05 AD-No Treatment vs. AD-T2D Treatment.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206547.g003

Altered mRNA expression in endothelial cells of the parahippocampal gyrus in AD and anti-T2D medicated AD

Compared to EC enriched fraction of controls, 5 (unadjusted for FDR) endothelial and IRSP-related genes were abnormally expressed in untreated persons with AD (Figs 4 and 5). None of the IRSP/endothelial cell associated genes, except for AKT3, met the FDR corrected threshold. Only one of these 5 genes (IRS1) remained significantly different in expression in the endothelial cell fraction of treated persons with AD, and even the expression levels of this gene approached that of the controls, nominally. Interestingly, the expression level of IRS1 was not changed in the endothelial fractions derived from persons with AD, but its expression increased significantly (corrected p = 0.05) in those AD donors who had been treated with antidiabetic medications.

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 4. Endothelial cell markers in microvascular enriched isolates from the parahippocampal gyrus.

Values represent relative log fold change in persons with AD relative to controls and log fold change in persons with AD and T2D who had been treated with anti-diabetes agents. * = p<0.05 after FDR correction; # = p<0.05 without FDR correction; ✦ = p<0.05 AD-No Treatment vs. AD-T2D Treatment.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206547.g004

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 5. IRSP-associated markers in microvascular enriched isolates from the parahippocampal gyrus.

Values represent relative log fold change in persons with AD relative to controls and log fold change in persons with AD and T2D who had been treated with anti-diabetes agents. * = p<0.05 after FDR correction; # = p<0.05 without FDR correction; ✦ = p<0.05 AD-No Treatment vs. AD-T2D Treatment.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206547.g005

Non-IRSP and/or non-endothelial cell mRNAs in the parahippocampal gyrus in AD and anti-T2D medicated AD

Twenty-three mRNAs representing neuronal, oligodendroglial, astrocytic, microglial cell types, and cell-cell adhesion, inflammation/immune, cell fate markers were also selected (S1 File) to study the consequences of antidiabetic treatment on some of the more non-IRSP/endothelial cell functions of the parahippocampal gyrus. Not surprisingly, the expression of 8 of the 23 mRNAs studied was affected in the whole tissue homogenates of untreated persons with AD and included mRNAs encoding for proteins associated with synaptic function, astrocytes, cell adhesion and immune/inflammation responses. Treatment with antidiabetic medications reduced the number of adversely affected mRNAs to 3 that included markers of immune/inflammation and cell-cell adhesion. Significantly fewer of these markers were affected in the endothelial cell enriched fraction, where 2 (oligodendroglial and nuclear RNA retention) of the 23 markers were affected in untreated AD samples and altered expression remained significant, albeit nominally moderated in the treatment group.

Discussion

Numerous clinical, animal model, and postmortem studies have suggested that treatment of persons suffering from dementia with antidiabetic medications may have beneficial effects on cognitive function and on AD-related neuropathology[19, 26]. A number of recent studies and reviews have drawn attention to the role(s) of the brain microvasculature in dementia[56] and especially in persons with diabetes[55, 56, 81]. The current study was designed to uncover some of the transcriptomic substrates for microvascular abnormalities in AD and to delineate whether any beneficial effects of T2D medications could be attributed to the restoration of microvascular and endothelial cell attributes affected in AD.

The results indicated that there are considerable abnormalities and reductions in gene expression (whole tissue homogenates and endothelial cell isolates) in the parahippocampal gyrus of persons with AD that map directly to genes associated with the microvasculature and the IRSP. Whether these endothelial and IRSP abnormalities contribute to the genesis of AD neuropathology, or whether they result from other neuropathological changes cannot be determined in postmortem studies. The findings also showed that the numbers of abnormally expressed microvasculature and IRSP associated genes in diabetic AD donors who had been treated with anti-diabetic agents were reduced significantly. Of course, it can be argued that in the absence of untreated studied cases with AD and T2D, the “normalization” of microvasculature and the IRSP gene expression could be due to T2D and not its treatment. Although this argument cannot be countered by the results of this study, we find this alternative explanation to be less biologically plausible given knowledge of the well-documented detrimental effects of T2D on brain parenchyma and especially on the brain microvasculature. The interpretation that treatment of T2D “normalized” multiple transcriptional abnormalities associated with AD is, however, consistent with the results of some of the clinical trials reported to date[24, 82] as well as our earlier studies of the effects of anti-diabetic treatments on AD neuropathology[26, 27]. That AKT3 expression was dramatically and robustly reduced in endothelial cells, and to a lesser extent in whole tissue homogenates suggests that tissue level expression was driven by changes in the endothelial transcriptome and that the disruption of components of the IRSP in endothelial cells is a significant participant in AD neuropathology.

The expression levels of GLUT4 (SLC2A4), which encodes for an insulin-regulated glucose transporter, were significantly upregulated in bulk tissue from the parahippocampal gyrus of AD donors (Fig 3), while the expression levels of this same transcript were significantly reduced in the endothelial cell enriched isolates derived from the same donors and brain region. On the other hand, the expression levels of GLUT4 in persons with AD and T2D who had been treated with anti-diabetic medications were similar to the levels detected in controls. This suggests that anti-diabetic medications restored homeostasis to this critical glucose transporter and that dis-homeostasis of glucose transport in brain endothelial and non-endothelial cells may be a critical abnormality in AD that is restored by anti-diabetes medications. Animal model and in vitro studies will need to be conducted to determine whether dysregulation of GLUT4 may be a key contributor to at least some of the other IRSP and endothelial cell abnormalities observed in the current study. Zlokovic and colleagues have independently implicated GLUT1, another glucose transporter, as a key player in the microvascular pathology associated with AD[83].

“Normalization” of abnormally expressed genes in AD by anti-T2D treatment was not limited to transcripts associated with the IRSP and endothelial cells, but as shown in Figs 1 and 2 of the S1 File carried over to genes associated with immune-inflammation, microglia, cell-adhesion and synaptic function. These findings are not surprising if it is assumed that treatment with anti-T2D medications results in decreased overall inflammation and improved insulin signaling.

The fact that no brains from AD+T2D diabetic donors that had not been treated with antidiabetic agents were included in this study is a distinct weakness and detracts from interpretative power. However, in developed countries, the vast majority of persons diagnosed with T2D receive insulin or oral anti-diabetes medications, making it difficult to include such a group in clinical and postmortem studies. In addition, interpretation of results, even if such a group had been included, would have been hampered since, almost by definition, the severity of T2D would have been significantly less than that of the treated subjects. Despite the imperfect nature of mouse models, these variables will be easier to control in such a system, and we plan to attempt to address some of these questions left open in our postmortem human studies by employing mouse models of amyloidosis or tauopathy, each of which will be studied without or with diabetes, and each of those groups, in turn, can be studied with or without antidiabetic medication. Choice of the adequate mouse model of diabetes will be key since we have observed some unexpected effects in some transgenic mouse models for amyloidosis[84] and the effect of a deficiency of the T2D gene, Sorcs1[85]. Finally, we might also need to examine the effects of young ages vs older as additional parameters in this highly ambitious study.

As noted in Table 1, the great majority of the donors (79+%) who were treated with oral anti-diabetes agents were treated with sulfonylureas. Although this makes it easier to attribute any oral medication effects to sulfonylureas, it detracts from our ability to distinguish between the effects of the myriad of different agents with different mechanisms of action. The inability to discern the specific neuro/vascular effects of different anti-diabetic agents in this study also precluded our ability to assess how the reported interactions of metformin and APP/Aβ influence IRSP and endothelial cell markers[86–88]. In addition, it would have been of significant interest to stratify the studied cohort according to whether they received insulin only, oral agents only, or insulin plus oral agents as well as the efficacy and duration of treatment. Unfortunately, extended medical histories (e.g., since mid-life) were not available since the study cohort was nursing home based and the sample size was not large enough for adequate statistical power to analyze the results with medication type granularity.

Challenge notwithstanding, about half of diabetics develop dementia and that roughly doubles the cost of caring for each demented diabetic patient especially since their cognitive decline makes it impossible for the patient to participate in the monitoring and modulation of his/her diabetic status. Given the dual epidemics of T2D and dementia in the most rapidly growing segment of our population, there is enormous importance in elucidating the basis for cognitive impairment in T2D so that potentially meaningful interventions can be evaluated.

Supporting information

S1 File. Other transcripts.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206547.s001

(DOCX)

S2 File. Original raw data.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206547.s002

(XLSX)

S1 Fig. Significantly affected non-endothelial and non-IRSP associated transcripts in parahippocampal gyrus bulk tissue.

Values represent relative log fold change in persons with AD relative to controls and log fold change in persons with AD and T2D who had been treated with anti-diabetes agents. * = p<0.05 after FDC correction; # = p<0.05 without FDR correction.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206547.s003

(TIF)

S2 Fig. Significantly affected non-endothelial and non-IRSP associated transcripts in microvascular enriched isolates from the parahippocampal gyrus.

Values represent relative log fold change in persons with AD relative to controls and log fold change in persons with AD and T2D who had been treated with anti-diabetes agents. * = p<0.05 after FDC correction; # = p<0.05 without FDR correction.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206547.s004

(TIF)

References

  1. 1. Ravona-Springer R, Moshier E, Schmeidler J, Godbold J, Akrivos J, Rapp M, et al. Changes in glycemic control are associated with changes in cognition in non-diabetic elderly. J Alzheimers Dis. 2012;30(2):299–309. pmid:22426020.
  2. 2. Ravona-Springer R, Luo X, Schmeidler J, Wysocki M, Lesser G, Rapp M, et al. Diabetes is associated with increased rate of cognitive decline in questionably demented elderly. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2010;29(1):68–74. pmid:20130405.
  3. 3. Janson J, Laedtke T, Parisi JE, O’Brien P, Petersen RC, Butler PC. Increased risk of type 2 diabetes in Alzheimer disease. Diabetes. 2004;53(2):474–81. pmid:14747300
  4. 4. Salameh TS, Bullock KM, Hujoel IA, Niehoff ML, Wolden-Hanson T, Kim J, et al. Central Nervous System Delivery of Intranasal Insulin: Mechanisms of Uptake and Effects on Cognition. J Alzheimers Dis. 2015;47(3):715–28. pmid:26401706.
  5. 5. Xu W, Qiu C, Winblad B, Fratiglioni L. The effect of borderline diabetes on the risk of dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. Diabetes. 2007;56(1):211–6. pmid:17192484
  6. 6. Xu W, Caracciolo B, Wang HX, Winblad B, Backman L, Qiu C, et al. Accelerated progression from mild cognitive impairment to dementia in people with diabetes. Diabetes. 2010;59(11):2928–35. pmid:20713684.
  7. 7. Neth BJ, Craft S. Insulin Resistance and Alzheimer’s Disease: Bioenergetic Linkages. Frontiers in aging neuroscience. 2017;9:345. pmid:29163128.
  8. 8. van Bussel FC, Backes WH, Hofman PA, van Oostenbrugge RJ, Kessels AG, van Boxtel MP, et al. On the interplay of microvasculature, parenchyma, and memory in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2015;38(5):876–82. pmid:25690006.
  9. 9. Kerti L, Witte AV, Winkler A, Grittner U, Rujescu D, Floel A. Higher glucose levels associated with lower memory and reduced hippocampal microstructure. Neurology. 2013;81(20):1746–52. pmid:24153444.
  10. 10. Hayashi K, Kurioka S, Yamaguchi T, Morita M, Kanazawa I, Takase H, et al. Association of cognitive dysfunction with hippocampal atrophy in elderly Japanese people with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011;94(2):180–5. pmid:21835484.
  11. 11. Zhao WQ, De Felice FG, Fernandez S, Chen H, Lambert MP, Quon MJ, et al. Amyloid beta oligomers induce impairment of neuronal insulin receptors. FASEB J. 2008;22(1):246–60. pmid:17720802
  12. 12. De Felice FG, Ferreira ST. Inflammation, defective insulin signaling, and mitochondrial dysfunction as common molecular denominators connecting type 2 diabetes to Alzheimer disease. Diabetes. 2014;63(7):2262–72. pmid:24931033.
  13. 13. Ruiz HH, Chi T, Shin AC, Lindtner C, Hsieh W, Ehrlich M, et al. Increased susceptibility to metabolic dysregulation in a mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease is associated with impaired hypothalamic insulin signaling and elevated BCAA levels. Alzheimers Dement. 2016;12(8):851–61. pmid:26928090.
  14. 14. Craft S, Asthana S, Cook DG, Baker LD, Cherrier M, Purganan K, et al. Insulin dose-response effects on memory and plasma amyloid precursor protein in Alzheimer’s disease: interactions with apolipoprotein E genotype. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2003;28(6):809–22. pmid:12812866
  15. 15. Risner ME, Saunders AM, Altman JF, Ormandy GC, Craft S, Foley IM, et al. Efficacy of rosiglitazone in a genetically defined population with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease. PharmacogenomicsJ. 2006;6(4):246–54.
  16. 16. Ryan CM, Freed MI, Rood JA, Cobitz AR, Waterhouse BR, Strachan MW. Improving metabolic control leads to better working memory in adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2006;29(2):345–51. pmid:16443885
  17. 17. Imfeld P, Bodmer M, Jick SS, Meier CR. Metformin, other antidiabetic drugs, and risk of Alzheimer’s disease: a population-based case-control study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012;60(5):916–21. pmid:22458300.
  18. 18. Saxena R, Elbers CC, Guo Y, Peter I, Gaunt TR, Mega JL, et al. Large-scale gene-centric meta-analysis across 39 studies identifies type 2 diabetes loci. Am J Hum Genet. 2012;90(3):410–25. pmid:22325160.
  19. 19. Arnold SE, Arvanitakis Z, Macauley-Rambach SL, Koenig AM, Wang HY, Ahima RS, et al. Brain insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes and Alzheimer disease: concepts and conundrums. Nature reviews Neurology. 2018;14(3):168–81. pmid:29377010.
  20. 20. Zhao W, Chen H, Xu H, Moore E, Meiri N, Quon MJ, et al. Brain insulin receptors and spatial memory. Correlated changes in gene expression, tyrosine phosphorylation, and signaling molecules in the hippocampus of water maze trained rats. JBiolChem. 1999;274(49):34893–902.
  21. 21. Zimmerman RS, Hobbs TM, Wells BJ, Kong SX, Kattan MW, Bouchard J, et al. Association of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist use and rates of acute myocardial infarction, stroke and overall mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in a large integrated health system. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2017;19(11):1555–61. pmid:28407414.
  22. 22. Gough NR. Placing the nuclear pore in the metformin mechanism of action. Sci Signal. 2017;10(460). pmid:28049772.
  23. 23. Sanahuja J, Alonso N, Diez J, Ortega E, Rubinat E, Traveset A, et al. Increased Burden of Cerebral Small Vessel Disease in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Retinopathy. Diabetes Care. 2016;39(9):1614–20. pmid:27281772.
  24. 24. Craft S, Claxton A, Baker LD, Hanson AJ, Cholerton B, Trittschuh EH, et al. Effects of Regular and Long-Acting Insulin on Cognition and Alzheimer’s Disease Biomarkers: A Pilot Clinical Trial. J Alzheimers Dis. 2017;57(4):1325–34. pmid:28372335.
  25. 25. Craft S, Watson GS. Insulin and neurodegenerative disease: shared and specific mechanisms. Lancet Neurol. 2004;3(3):169–78. pmid:14980532
  26. 26. Beeri MS, Schmeidler J, Silverman JM, Gandy S, Wysocki M, Hannigan CM, et al. Insulin in combination with other diabetes medication is associated with less Alzheimer neuropathology. Neurology. 2008;71(10):750–7. pmid:18765651.
  27. 27. Beeri MS, Silverman JM, Davis KL, Marin D, Grossman HZ, Schmeidler J, et al. Type 2 diabetes is negatively associated with Alzheimer’s disease neuropathology. Journals of Gerontology Series A-Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences. 2005;60(4):471–5.
  28. 28. Willette AA, Johnson SC, Birdsill AC, Sager MA, Christian B, Baker LD, et al. Insulin resistance predicts brain amyloid deposition in late middle-aged adults. Alzheimers Dement. 2015;11(5):504–10 e1. pmid:25043908.
  29. 29. Chen CH, Shaikenov T, Peterson TR, Aimbetov R, Bissenbaev AK, Lee SW, et al. ER stress inhibits mTORC2 and Akt signaling through GSK-3beta-mediated phosphorylation of rictor. SciSignal. 2011;4(161):ra10. pmid:21343617
  30. 30. Anderton BH, Dayanandan R, Killick R, Lovestone S. Does dysregulation of the Notch and wingless/Wnt pathways underlie the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease? MolMedToday. 2000;6(2):54–9.
  31. 31. de la Monte SM, Wands JR. Review of insulin and insulin-like growth factor expression, signaling, and malfunction in the central nervous system: relevance to Alzheimer’s disease. J Alzheimers Dis. 2005;7(1):45–61. pmid:15750214
  32. 32. Craft S, Foster TC, Landfield PW, Maier SF, Resnick SM, Yaffe K. Session III: Mechanisms of Age-Related Cognitive Change and Targets for Intervention: Inflammatory, Oxidative, and Metabolic Processes. JGerontolA BiolSciMedSci. 2012;67(7):754–9. pmid:22570133
  33. 33. Lee CC, Huang CC, Hsu KS. Insulin promotes dendritic spine and synapse formation by the PI3K/Akt/mTOR and Rac1 signaling pathways. Neuropharmacology. 2011;61(4):867–79. pmid:21683721.
  34. 34. Arnold SE, Lucki I, Brookshire BR, Carlson GC, Browne CA, Kazi H, et al. High fat diet produces brain insulin resistance, synaptodendritic abnormalities and altered behavior in mice. Neurobiol Dis. 2014;67:79–87. pmid:24686304.
  35. 35. Jiang Q, Heneka M, Landreth GE. The role of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPARgamma) in Alzheimer’s disease: therapeutic implications. CNS Drugs. 2008;22(1):1–14. pmid:18072811.
  36. 36. Salvado L, Serrano-Marco L, Barroso E, Palomer X, Vazquez-Carrera M. Targeting PPARbeta/delta for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. ExpertOpinTherTargets. 2012;16(2):209–23. pmid:22280315
  37. 37. Akram A, Schmeidler J, Katsel P, Hof PR, Haroutunian V. Increased expression of RXRalpha in dementia: an early harbinger for the cholesterol dyshomeostasis? Mol Neurodegener. 2010;5:36. pmid:20843353.
  38. 38. Qin WP, Haroutunian V, Katsel P, Cardozo CP, Ho L, Buxbaum JD, et al. PGC-1 alpha Expression Decreases in the Alzheimer Disease Brain as a Function of Dementia. Archives of Neurology. 2009;66(3):352–61. pmid:19273754
  39. 39. van der Heide LP, Ramakers GM, Smidt MP. Insulin signaling in the central nervous system: learning to survive. ProgNeurobiol. 2006;79(4):205–21. pmid:16916571
  40. 40. Gray SM, Meijer RI, Barrett EJ. Insulin regulates brain function, but how does it get there? Diabetes. 2014;63(12):3992–7. pmid:25414013.
  41. 41. Arvanitakis Z, Schneider JA, Wilson RS, Li Y, Arnold SE, Wang Z, et al. Diabetes is related to cerebral infarction but not to AD pathology in older persons. Neurology. 2006;67(11):1960–5. pmid:17159101
  42. 42. Stoeckel L, Arvanitakis Z, Gandy S, Small D, Kahn C, Pascual-Leone A, et al. "White Paper" meeting summary and catalyst for future inquiry: Complex mechanisms linking neurocognitive dysfunction to insulin resistance and other metabolic dysfunction. F1000Research. 2016;5(353).
  43. 43. Hsu TM, Kanoski SE. Blood-brain barrier disruption: mechanistic links between Western diet consumption and dementia. Frontiers in aging neuroscience. 2014;6:88. pmid:24847262.
  44. 44. Xie L, Helmerhorst E, Taddei K, Plewright B, Van Bronswijk W, Martins R. Alzheimer’s beta-amyloid peptides compete for insulin binding to the insulin receptor. J Neurosci. 2002;22(10):RC221. pmid:12006603
  45. 45. De Felice FG, Vieira MN, Bomfim TR, Decker H, Velasco PT, Lambert MP, et al. Protection of synapses against Alzheimer’s-linked toxins: insulin signaling prevents the pathogenic binding of Abeta oligomers. ProcNatlAcad Sci US A. 2009;106(6):1971–6.
  46. 46. Craft S. Alzheimer disease: Insulin resistance and AD—extending the translational path. Nature reviews Neurology. 2012;8(7):360–2. pmid:22710630.
  47. 47. Ho L, Yemul S, Knable L, Katsel P, Zhao R, Haroutunian V, et al. Insulin receptor expression and activity in the brains of nondiabetic sporadic Alzheimer’s disease cases. IntJAlzheimersDis. 2012;2012:321280. pmid:22666619
  48. 48. Talbot K, Wang HY, Kazi H, Han LY, Bakshi KP, Stucky A, et al. Demonstrated brain insulin resistance in Alzheimer’s disease patients is associated with IGF-1 resistance, IRS-1 dysregulation, and cognitive decline. JClinInvest. 2012;122(4):1316–38. pmid:22476197
  49. 49. Starr JM, Farrall AJ, Armitage P, McGurn B, Wardlaw J. Blood-brain barrier permeability in Alzheimer’s disease: a case-control MRI study. Psychiatry Res. 2009;171(3):232–41. pmid:19211227.
  50. 50. Bell RD, Zlokovic BV. Neurovascular mechanisms and blood-brain barrier disorder in Alzheimer’s disease. Acta Neuropathol. 2009;118(1):103–13. pmid:19319544
  51. 51. Bell RD, Sagare AP, Friedman AE, Bedi GS, Holtzman DM, Deane R, et al. Transport pathways for clearance of human Alzheimer’s amyloid beta-peptide and apolipoproteins E and J in the mouse central nervous system. JCerebBlood Flow Metab. 2007;27(5):909–18. pmid:17077814
  52. 52. Zlokovic BV. Neurovascular mechanisms of Alzheimer’s neurodegeneration. Trends Neurosci. 2005;28(4):202–8. pmid:15808355
  53. 53. De Silva TM, Faraci FM. Microvascular Dysfunction and Cognitive Impairment. Cell Mol Neurobiol. 2016;36(2):241–58. pmid:26988697.
  54. 54. Wardlaw JM, Smith C, Dichgans M. Mechanisms of sporadic cerebral small vessel disease: insights from neuroimaging. Lancet Neurol. 2013;12(5):483–97. pmid:23602162.
  55. 55. Barrett EJ, Liu Z, Khamaisi M, King GL, Klein R, Klein BEK, et al. Diabetic Microvascular Disease: An Endocrine Society Scientific Statement. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017;102(12):4343–410. pmid:29126250.
  56. 56. Snyder HM, Corriveau RA, Craft S, Faber JE, Greenberg SM, Knopman D, et al. Vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia including Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2015;11(6):710–7. pmid:25510382.
  57. 57. Thomas T, Miners S, Love S. Post-mortem assessment of hypoperfusion of cerebral cortex in Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia. Brain. 2015;138(Pt 4):1059–69. pmid:25688080.
  58. 58. Gorelick PB, Scuteri A, Black SE, Decarli C, Greenberg SM, Iadecola C, et al. Vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia: a statement for healthcare professionals from the american heart association/american stroke association. Stroke. 2011;42(9):2672–713. pmid:21778438.
  59. 59. Jellinger KA, Attems J. Prevalence of dementia disorders in the oldest-old: an autopsy study. Acta Neuropathol. 2010;119(4):421–33. pmid:20204386
  60. 60. Brayne C, Richardson K, Matthews FE, Fleming J, Hunter S, Xuereb JH, et al. Neuropathological Correlates of Dementia in Over-80-Year-Old Brain Donors from the Population-Based Cambridge City over-75s Cohort (CC75C) Study. JAlzheimers Dis. 2009. pmid:19661624
  61. 61. Giannakopoulos P, Kovari E, Herrmann FR, Hof PR, Bouras C. Interhemispheric Distribution of Alzheimer Disease and Vascular Pathology in Brain Aging. Stroke. 2009;40:983–6. pmid:19118241
  62. 62. Giannakopoulos P, Gold G, Kovari E, Von Gunten A, Imhof A, Bouras C, et al. Assessing the cognitive impact of Alzheimer disease pathology and vascular burden in the aging brain: the Geneva experience. Acta Neuropathol. 2007;113(1):1–12. pmid:17036244
  63. 63. Bouras C, Kovari E, Herrmann FR, Rivara CB, Bailey TL, Von Gunten A, et al. Stereologic analysis of microvascular morphology in the elderly: Alzheimer disease pathology and cognitive status. Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology. 2006;65(3):235–44. pmid:16651885
  64. 64. Bailey TL, Rivara CB, Perl DP, Haroutunian V, Bouras C, Giannakopoulos P, et al. Hippocampal microvasculature attrition and cognitive decline in Alzheimers disease. Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology; 5/20052005. p. 467-.
  65. 65. Di Marco LY, Venneri A, Farkas E, Evans PC, Marzo A, Frangi AF. Vascular dysfunction in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease—A review of endothelium-mediated mechanisms and ensuing vicious circles. Neurobiol Dis. 2015;82:593–606. pmid:26311408.
  66. 66. Gama Sosa MA, Gasperi RD, Rocher AB, Wang AC, Janssen WG, Flores T, et al. Age-related vascular pathology in transgenic mice expressing presenilin 1-associated familial Alzheimer’s disease mutations. Am J Pathol. 2010;176(1):353–68. pmid:20008141.
  67. 67. Nicolakakis N, Hamel E. Neurovascular function in Alzheimer’s disease patients and experimental models. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2011;31(6):1354–70. pmid:21468088.
  68. 68. Stirban A. Microvascular dysfunction in the context of diabetic neuropathy. Curr Diab Rep. 2014;14(11):541. pmid:25189434.
  69. 69. Ostergaard L, Finnerup NB, Terkelsen AJ, Olesen RA, Drasbek KR, Knudsen L, et al. The effects of capillary dysfunction on oxygen and glucose extraction in diabetic neuropathy. Diabetologia. 2015;58(4):666–77. pmid:25512003.
  70. 70. Clegg LE, Mac Gabhann F. Systems biology of the microvasculature. Integr Biol (Camb). 2015;7(5):498–512. pmid:25839068.
  71. 71. Eelen G, de Zeeuw P, Simons M, Carmeliet P. Endothelial cell metabolism in normal and diseased vasculature. Circ Res. 2015;116(7):1231–44. pmid:25814684.
  72. 72. Adamo M, Raizada MK, LeRoith D. Insulin and insulin-like growth factor receptors in the nervous system. Mol Neurobiol. 1989;3(1–2):71–100. pmid:2553069.
  73. 73. Katsel P, Tan W, Haroutunian V. Gain in brain immunity in the oldest-old differentiates cognitively normal from demented individuals. PLoS One. 2009;4(10):e7642. pmid:19865478.
  74. 74. Zhang Y, Chen K, Sloan SA, Bennett ML, Scholze AR, O’Keeffe S, et al. An RNA-sequencing Transcriptome and splicing database of Glia, neurons, and vascular cells of the cerebral cortex. J Neurosci. 2014;34. pmid:25186741
  75. 75. Haroutunian V, Katsel P, Schmeidler J. Transcriptional vulnerability of brain regions in Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. Neurobiol Aging. 2009;30(4):561–73. pmid:17845826.
  76. 76. Wang M, Roussos P, McKenzie A, Zhou X, Kajiwara Y, Brennand KJ, et al. Integrative network analysis of nineteen brain regions identifies molecular signatures and networks underlying selective regional vulnerability to Alzheimer’s disease. Genome Med. 2016;8(1):104. pmid:27799057.
  77. 77. Gama-Sosa M, Katsel P, De Gasperi R, Garcia GP, Triperson V, Searcy CJ, et al. Step-gradient isolation of the adult mammalian brain microvasculature through a layer of Ficoll-Paque PLUS. Microvascular Research. 2016;In press.
  78. 78. Haroutunian V, Purohit DP, Perl DP, Marin D, Khan K, Lantz M, et al. Neurofibrillary tangles in nondemented elderly subjects and mild Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol. 1999;56(6):713–8. Epub 1999/11/24. pmid:10369312.
  79. 79. Haroutunian V, Perl DP, Purohit DP, Marin D, Khan K, Lantz M, et al. Regional distribution of neuritic plaques in the nondemented elderly and subjects with very mild Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol. 1998;55(9):1185–91. pmid:9740112
  80. 80. Mirra SS, Heyman A, McKeel D, Sumi SM, Crain BJ, Brownlee LM, et al. The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease (CERAD). Part II. Standardization of the neuropathologic assessment of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology. 1991;41(4):479–86. pmid:2011243.
  81. 81. Hughes TM, Craft S. The role of insulin in the vascular contributions to age-related dementia. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2016;1862(5):983–91. pmid:26657615.
  82. 82. Craft S, Baker LD, Montine TJ, Minoshima S, Watson GS, Claxton A, et al. Intranasal insulin therapy for Alzheimer disease and amnestic mild cognitive impairment: a pilot clinical trial. ArchNeurol. 2012;69(1):29–38. pmid:21911655
  83. 83. Winkler EA, Nishida Y, Sagare AP, Rege SV, Bell RD, Perlmutter D, et al. GLUT1 reductions exacerbate Alzheimer’s disease vasculo-neuronal dysfunction and degeneration. Nat Neurosci. 2015;18(4):521–30. pmid:25730668.
  84. 84. Lubitz I, Haroutunian V, Katsel P, Leroith D, Landa N, Castel D, et al. Non-viability of crossing the Alzheimer mouse model Tg2576 with the type 2 diabetes mouse model ob/ob. Neurobiol Aging. 2014;35(7):e19–20.
  85. 85. Knight EM, Ruiz HH, Kim SH, Harte JC, Hsieh W, Glabe C, et al. Unexpected partial correction of metabolic and behavioral phenotypes of Alzheimer’s APP/PSEN1 mice by gene targeting of diabetes/Alzheimer’s-related Sorcs1. Acta Neuropathol Commun. 2016;4:16. pmid:26916443.
  86. 86. Picone P, Vilasi S, Librizzi F, Contardi M, Nuzzo D, Caruana L, et al. Biological and biophysics aspects of metformin-induced effects: cortex mitochondrial dysfunction and promotion of toxic amyloid pre-fibrillar aggregates. Aging (Albany NY). 2016;8(8):1718–34.
  87. 87. Picone P, Nuzzo D, Caruana L, Messina E, Barera A, Vasto S, et al. Metformin increases APP expression and processing via oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction and NF-kappaB activation: Use of insulin to attenuate metformin’s effect. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2015;1853(5):1046–59. pmid:25667085.
  88. 88. Chen Y, Zhou K, Wang R, Liu Y, Kwak YD, Ma T, et al. Antidiabetic drug metformin (GlucophageR) increases biogenesis of Alzheimer’s amyloid peptides via up-regulating BACE1 transcription. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106(10):3907–12. pmid:19237574