Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a devastating neurodegenerative disorder without a cure. Most AD cases are sporadic where age represents the greatest risk factor. Lack of understanding of the disease mechanism hinders the development of efficacious therapeutic approaches. The loss of synapses in the affected brain regions correlates best with cognitive impairment in AD patients and has been considered as the early mechanism that precedes neuronal loss. Oxidative stress has been recognized as a contributing factor in aging and in the progression of multiple neurodegenerative diseases including AD. Increased production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) associated with age- and disease-dependent loss of mitochondrial function, altered metal homeostasis, and reduced antioxidant defense directly affect synaptic activity and neurotransmission in neurons leading to cognitive dysfunction. In addition, molecular targets affected by ROS include nuclear and mitochondrial DNA, lipids, proteins, calcium homeostasis, mitochondrial dynamics and function, cellular architecture, receptor trafficking and endocytosis, and energy homeostasis. Abnormal cellular metabolism in turn could affect the production and accumulation of amyloid-β (Aβ) and hyperphosphorylated Tau protein, which independently could exacerbate mitochondrial dysfunction and ROS production, thereby contributing to a vicious cycle. While mounting evidence implicates ROS in the AD etiology, clinical trials with antioxidant therapies have not produced consistent results. In this review, we will discuss the role of oxidative stress in synaptic dysfunction in AD, innovative therapeutic strategies evolved based on a better understanding of the complexity of molecular mechanisms of AD, and the dual role ROS play in health and disease.

Niemann–Pick type C1 (NPC1) is a lysosomal storage disorder, inherited as an autosomal-recessive trait. Mutations in the Npc1 gene result in malfunction of the NPC1 protein, leading to an accumulation of unesterified cholesterol and glycosphingolipids. Beside visceral symptoms like hepatosplenomegaly, severe neurological symptoms such as ataxia occur. Here, we analyzed the sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P)/S1P receptor (S1PR) axis in different brain regions of Npc1−/− mice and evaluated specific effects of treatment with 2-hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin (HPβCD) together with the iminosugar miglustat. Using high-performance thin-layer chromatography (HPTLC), mass spectrometry, quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) and western blot analyses, we studied lipid metabolism in an NPC1 mouse model and human skin fibroblasts. Lipid analyses showed disrupted S1P metabolism in Npc1−/− mice in all brain regions, together with distinct changes in S1pr3/S1PR3 and S1pr5/S1PR5 expression. Brains of Npc1−/− mice showed only weak treatment effects. However, side effects of the treatment were observed in Npc1+/+ mice. The S1P/S1PR axis seems to be involved in NPC1 pathology, showing only weak treatment effects in mouse brain. S1pr expression appears to be affected in human fibroblasts, induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs)-derived neural progenitor and neuronal differentiated cells. Nevertheless, treatment-induced side effects make examination of further treatment strategies indispensable.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Oscillatory rhythms during sleep such as slow oscillations (SO) and spindles, and most importantly their coupling, are thought to underlie processes of memory consolidation. External slow oscillatory transcranial direct current stimulation (so-tDCS) with a frequency of 0.75 Hz has been shown to improve this coupling and memory consolidation, however, effects varied quite markedly between individuals, studies and species. Objective: Here, we aimed to determine how precisely the frequency of stimulation has to match the naturally occurring SO frequency in individuals to optimally improve SO-spindle coupling. Moreover, we systematically tested stimulation durations necessary to induce changes. Methods: We addressed these questions by comparing so-tDCS with individually adapted SO frequency to standardized frequency of 0.75Hz in a cross-over design with 28 healthy older participants during napping while systematically varying stimulation train durations between 30s, 2min and 5min. Results: Stimulation trains as short as 30s were sufficient to modulate the coupling between SOs and spindle activity. Contrary to our expectations, so-tDCS with standardized frequency indicated stronger aftereffects with regard to SO-spindle coupling in comparison to individualized frequency. Angle and variance of spindle maxima occurrence during the SO cycle were similarly modulated. Conclusion: Short stimulation trains were sufficient to induce significant changes in sleep physiology allowing for more trains of stimulation, which provides methodological advantages and possibly even larger effects in future studies. With regard to individualized stimulation frequency, further options of optimization need to be investigated, such as closed-loop stimulation to calibrate stimulation frequency to the SO frequency at time of stimulation onset.