Marked Mild Cognitive Deficits in Humanized Mouse Model of Alzheimer's-Type Tau Pathology.
Alzheimer’s disease
cognition
mouse model
neurodegeneration
spatial memory
tau pathology
Journal
Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience
ISSN: 1662-5153
Titre abrégé: Front Behav Neurosci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101477952
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
27
11
2020
accepted:
21
04
2021
entrez:
7
6
2021
pubmed:
8
6
2021
medline:
8
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Hyperphosphorylation and the subsequent aggregation of tau protein into neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) are well-established neuropathological hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and associated tauopathies. To further examine the impact and progression of human tau pathology in neurodegenerative contexts, the humanized tau (htau) mouse model was originally created. Despite AD-like tau pathological features recapitulated in the htau mouse model, robustness of behavioral phenotypes has not been fully established. With the ultimate goal of evaluating the htau mouse model as a candidate for testing AD therapeutics, we set out to verify, in-house, the presence of robust, replicable cognitive deficits in the htau mice. The present study shows behavioral data collected from a carefully curated battery of learning and memory tests. Here we report a significant short-term spatial memory deficit in aged htau mice, representing a novel finding in this model. However, we did not find salient impairments in long-term learning and memory previously reported in this mouse model. Here, we attempted to understand the discrepancies in the literature by highlighting the necessity of scrutinizing key procedural differences across studies. Reported cognitive deficits in the htau model may depend on task difficulty and other procedural details. While the htau mouse remains a unique and valuable animal model for replicating late onset AD-like human tau pathology, its cognitive deficits are modest under standard testing conditions. The overarching message is that before using any AD mouse model to evaluate treatment efficacies, it is imperative to first characterize and verify the presence of behavioral deficits in-house.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34093145
doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2021.634157
pmc: PMC8175658
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
634157Subventions
Organisme : NINDS NIH HHS
ID : R01 NS095922
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Cho, Kim, Rafikian, Yang and Santa-Maria.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Nat Protoc. 2013 Oct;8(10):1985-2005
pubmed: 24051960
Cell. 2020 Feb 20;180(4):633-644.e12
pubmed: 32032505
Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2007 Apr 13;31(3):746-51
pubmed: 17289240
Learn Mem. 2006 Mar-Apr;13(2):187-91
pubmed: 16585794
Methods Mol Biol. 2019;1916:105-111
pubmed: 30535688
Prog Neurobiol. 2008 Jun;85(2):148-75
pubmed: 18448228
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2016 Jan;17(1):5-21
pubmed: 26631930
Nat Protoc. 2013 Oct;8(10):2006-21
pubmed: 24051961
Prog Neurobiol. 2017 Sep;156:1-68
pubmed: 28322921
PLoS One. 2016 Apr 12;11(4):e0153724
pubmed: 27070146
Neurology. 1992 Mar;42(3 Pt 1):631-9
pubmed: 1549228
Physiol Rev. 2004 Apr;84(2):361-84
pubmed: 15044677
Acta Neuropathol. 2019 Oct;138(4):631-652
pubmed: 31065832
J Alzheimers Dis. 2014;40 Suppl 1:S97-S111
pubmed: 24603946
Alzheimers Dement. 2018 Apr;14(4):535-562
pubmed: 29653606
Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2001 Jul-Aug;12(4):265-80
pubmed: 11351138
Acta Neuropathol. 2017 May;133(5):665-704
pubmed: 28386764
Aging (Albany NY). 2018 Sep 22;10(9):2498-2510
pubmed: 30243024
Anal Chem. 2016 Apr 5;88(7):3704-14
pubmed: 26877193
Lab Invest. 2019 Jul;99(7):912-928
pubmed: 30742061
Ann Neurol. 2019 Feb;85(2):229-240
pubmed: 30597624
Neural Comput. 1998 Jan 1;10(1):73-111
pubmed: 9501505
Hum Mol Genet. 2012 Sep 15;21(18):4094-103
pubmed: 22723018
Nat Protoc. 2006;1(2):848-58
pubmed: 17406317
Brain. 2017 Dec 1;140(12):3286-3300
pubmed: 29053874
Behav Brain Res. 2018 Feb 26;339:140-152
pubmed: 29175372
Cell Rep. 2020 Oct 27;33(4):108303
pubmed: 33113364
Prog Neurobiol. 2015 Aug;131:21-64
pubmed: 26072273
Nat Rev Neurol. 2018 Aug;14(8):496-506
pubmed: 29980763
J Neurotrauma. 2018 Jan 1;35(1):73-84
pubmed: 28859549
J Neuroinflammation. 2018 Sep 25;15(1):278
pubmed: 30253780
Sci Transl Med. 2020 Jan 1;12(524):
pubmed: 31894103
Sci Rep. 2016 Jan 20;6:19393
pubmed: 26786552
Alzheimers Res Ther. 2016 Dec 15;8(1):54
pubmed: 27974048
Cell. 2016 Feb 11;164(4):603-15
pubmed: 26871627
J Neurosci. 2012 May 9;32(19):6525-41
pubmed: 22573675
J Neurosci. 2009 Aug 26;29(34):10741-9
pubmed: 19710325
Neuroscience. 2016 Aug 4;329:98-111
pubmed: 27167086
Cell Rep. 2018 Apr 17;23(3):709-715
pubmed: 29669277
Alzheimers Dement. 2012 Jan;8(1):1-13
pubmed: 22265587
Acta Neuropathol. 2012 Jan;123(1):1-11
pubmed: 22101365
Mol Neurodegener. 2019 Aug 2;14(1):32
pubmed: 31375134
J Biol Chem. 2013 Feb 8;288(6):4056-65
pubmed: 23264626
Annu Rev Pathol. 2019 Jan 24;14:239-261
pubmed: 30355155
Nat Protoc. 2013 Oct;8(10):1961-84
pubmed: 24051959
J Neurochem. 2003 Aug;86(3):582-90
pubmed: 12859672