2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.nbd.2020.105055
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

RNA-mediated toxicity in C9orf72 ALS and FTD

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
32
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 119 publications
2
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Conversely to sense RNA, we did not detect in vitro interaction between antisense RNA and SFPQ by RNA pull-down assay. This could be the consequence of secondary structures formed by sense and antisense RNA, which have been proposed to enable their interaction with various RNA binding proteins ( McEachin et al, 2020 ; Vatovec et al, 2014 ). Sense RNA forms mostly G quadruplexes and hairpins, whereas antisense RNA forms i-motifs along with C-rich hairpins ( Božič et al, 2020 ; Haeusler et al, 2014 ; Kovanda et al, 2016 ; Šket et al, 2015 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conversely to sense RNA, we did not detect in vitro interaction between antisense RNA and SFPQ by RNA pull-down assay. This could be the consequence of secondary structures formed by sense and antisense RNA, which have been proposed to enable their interaction with various RNA binding proteins ( McEachin et al, 2020 ; Vatovec et al, 2014 ). Sense RNA forms mostly G quadruplexes and hairpins, whereas antisense RNA forms i-motifs along with C-rich hairpins ( Božič et al, 2020 ; Haeusler et al, 2014 ; Kovanda et al, 2016 ; Šket et al, 2015 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Importantly, there is a differential distribution regarding the RNA foci formed by sense and anti-sense depending on the brain region, with sense RNA foci being more prevalent throughout the brain of patients (DeJesus-Hernandez et al, 2017), and anti-sense prevalent in Purkinje cells in the cerebellum and in lower motor neurons in the spinal cord and bulb (Cooper-Knock et al, 2015). A lack of correlation is reported between foci distribution and pathological signs of degeneration as they can be detected in both affected and unaffected brain regions (McEachin et al, 2020). Of note, a greater extent of anti-sense RNA foci present in the frontal cortex was statistically associated to a later onset of disease, especially for FTD cases, thus supporting the notion that the formation of such structures is rather neuroprotective (DeJesus-Hernandez et al, 2017).…”
Section: Gain-of-function: Rna Foci and Dpr Toxicitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…RNA foci are able to sequester RNA-binding proteins (RBPs), leading to defects in the processing of RNA Todd & Petrucelli, 2018). Of note, RNA foci are primarily reported in the nucleus, but have also been found in the cytosol, in the edge of the nuclear membrane (McEachin et al, 2020) and also in neurites of C9ALS/FTD patient neurons derived from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) (Burguete et al, 2015). Importantly, there is a differential distribution regarding the RNA foci formed by sense and anti-sense depending on the brain region, with sense RNA foci being more prevalent throughout the brain of patients (DeJesus-Hernandez et al, 2017), and anti-sense prevalent in Purkinje cells in the cerebellum and in lower motor neurons in the spinal cord and bulb (Cooper-Knock et al, 2015).…”
Section: Gain-of-function: Rna Foci and Dpr Toxicitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Repeat-containing transcripts of the mutated C9orf72 gene can form RNA foci enriched with RNA-binding proteins in induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-derived neurons from ALS and FTD patients, as well as in motor neurons of C9orf72-ALS patients [ 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 ]. Even though conflicting evidence remains about the mechanisms of toxicity of C9orf72 mutations [ 19 , 36 , 41 ], RNA foci are believed to sequestrate bound RNA-binding proteins and result in toxicity [ 42 ]. Dipeptide repeat (DPR), glycine-alanine (GA), glycine-arginine (GR), proline-arginine (PR), proline-alanine (PA), and glycine-proline (GP) are generated through repeat-associated non-ATG translation from hexanucleotide repeat expansion-containing transcripts [ 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 ].…”
Section: Rna-binding Proteins and Alsmentioning
confidence: 99%