Protein disulfide isomerases as CSF biomarkers for the neuronal response to tau pathology

INTRODUCTION

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers for specific cellular disease processes are lacking for tauopathies. In this translational study we aimed to identify CSF biomarkers reflecting early tau pathology-associated unfolded protein response (UPR) activation.

METHODS

We employed mass spectrometry proteomics and targeted immunoanalysis in a combination of biomarker discovery in primary mouse neurons in vitro and validation in patient CSF from two independent large multicentre cohorts (EMIF-AD MBD, n = 310; PRIDE, n = 771).

RESULTS

First, we identify members of the protein disulfide isomerase (PDI) family in the neuronal UPR-activated secretome and validate secretion upon tau aggregation in vitro. Next, we demonstrate that PDIA1 and PDIA3 levels correlate with total- and phosphorylated-tau levels in CSF. PDIA1 levels are increased in CSF from AD patients compared to controls and patients with tau-unrelated frontotemporal and Lewy body dementia (LBD).

HIGHLIGHTS

Neuronal unfolded protein response (UPR) activation induces the secretion of protein disulfide isomerases (PDIs) in vitro. PDIA1 is secreted upon tau aggregation in neurons in vitro. PDIA1 and PDIA3 levels correlate with total and phosphorylated tau levels in CSF. PDIA1 levels are increased in CSF from Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients compared to controls. PDIA1 levels are not increased in CSF from tau-unrelated frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and Lewy body dementia (LBD) patients.

Neuron-specific translational control shift ensures proteostatic resilience during ER stress

Proteostasis is essential for cellular survival and particularly important for highly specialised post‐mitotic cells such as neurons. Transient reduction in protein synthesis by protein kinase R‐like endoplasmic reticulum (ER) kinase (PERK)‐mediated phosphorylation of eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2α (p‐eIF2α) is a major proteostatic survival response during ER stress. Paradoxically, neurons are remarkably tolerant to PERK dysfunction, which suggests the existence of cell type‐specific mechanisms that secure proteostatic stress resilience. Here, we demonstrate that PERK‐deficient neurons, unlike other cell types, fully retain the capacity to control translation during ER stress. We observe rescaling of the ATF4 response, while the reduction in protein synthesis is fully retained. We identify two molecular pathways that jointly drive translational control in PERK‐deficient neurons. Haem‐regulated inhibitor (HRI) mediates p‐eIF2α and the ATF4 response and is complemented by the tRNA cleaving RNase angiogenin (ANG) to reduce protein synthesis. Overall, our study elucidates an intricate back‐up mechanism to ascertain translational control during ER stress in neurons that provides a mechanistic explanation for the thus far unresolved observation of neuronal resilience to proteostatic stress.

No evidence for cell-to-cell transmission of the unfolded protein response in cell culture

The unfolded protein response (UPR) is one of the major cell‐autonomous proteostatic stress responses. The UPR has been implicated in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative diseases and is therefore actively investigated as therapeutic target. In this respect, cell non‐autonomous effects of the UPR including the reported cell‐to‐cell transmission of UPR activity may be highly important. A pharmaca‐based UPR induction was employed to generate conditioned media (CM) from CM‐donating neuronal (‘donor’) cells (SK‐N‐SH and primary mouse neurons). As previously reported, upon subsequent transfer of CM to naive neuronal ‘acceptor’ cells, we confirmed UPR target mRNA and protein expression by qPCR and automated microscopy. However, UPR target gene expression was also induced in the absence of donor cells, indicating carry‐over of pharmaca. Genetic induction of single pathways of the UPR in donor cells did not result in UPR transmission to acceptor cells. Moreover, no transmission was detected upon full UPR activation by nutrient deprivation or inducible expression of the heavy chain of immunoglobulin M in donor HeLa cells. In addition, in direct co‐culture of donor cells expressing the immunoglobulin M heavy chain and fluorescent UPR reporter acceptor HeLa cells, UPR transmission was not observed. In conclusion, carry‐over of pharmaca is a major confounding factor in pharmaca‐based UPR transmission protocols that are therefore unsuitable to study cell‐to‐cell UPR transmission. In addition, the absence of UPR transmission in non‐pharmaca‐based models of UPR activation indicates that cell‐to‐cell UPR transmission does not occur in cell culture.

Unconventional secretion factor GRASP55 is increased by pharmacological unfolded protein response inducers in neurons

Accumulation of misfolded proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), defined as ER stress, results in activation of the unfolded protein response (UPR). UPR activation is commonly observed in neurodegenerative diseases. ER stress can trigger unconventional secretion mediated by Golgi reassembly and stacking proteins (GRASP) relocalization in cell lines. Here we study the regulation of GRASP55 by the UPR upon pharmacological induction of ER stress in primary mouse neurons. We demonstrate that UPR activation induces mRNA and protein expression of GRASP55, but not GRASP65, in cortical neurons. UPR activation does not result in relocalization of GRASP55. UPR-induced GRASP55 expression is reduced by inhibition of the PERK pathway of the UPR and abolished by inhibition of the endonuclease activity of the UPR transducer IRE1. Expression of the IRE1 target XBP1s in the absence of ER stress is not sufficient to increase GRASP55 expression. Knockdown of GRASP55 affects neither induction nor recovery of the UPR. We conclude that the UPR regulates the unconventional secretion factor GRASP55 via a mechanism that requires the IRE1 and the PERK pathway of the UPR in neurons.