APOE genotype modulates latency, symptom progression, and pathology burden in a mouse model of prion disease
The latency period of prion disease was determined through serial locomotor testing, and the differences across animals of different APOE genotypes were compared using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. The ε4/ε422L mice were the first to show neurological signs of the prion disease with a median latency of 115.0 days in females and 113.5 days in males. The ε2/ε222L mice were second to be affected with a median latency of 135.0 days in females and 131.5 days in males, followed by ε3/ε322L mice, where the median latency was 136.0 days for both sexes. Differences across APOE genotypes both for female and male animals were statistically significant (Fig. 1a), while female and male mice of the same APOE genotype showed no significant differences (Supplementary File 1; Fig. S1). To quantify progression and severity of neurological symptoms we conducted serial assessments using the Total Scrapie Score (TSS) in a subset of 22L-infected mice. The TSS is a 15-point cumulative scale, accounting for five scorable behavioral metrics: animal alertness (somnolence), hind limb weakness, posture (kyphosis), walking competency, and body condition. Both ε4/ε422L females and males showed the most aggressive tempo of disease progression compared to mice of other APOE genotypes. At 23 weeks post inoculation (wpi.), which was the final time point of the experiment, ε4/ε422L females scored on average 13.8 ± 0.1 pts. on the TSS scale (p < 0.0001 vs. ε2/ε222L and ε3/ε322L), while ε4/ε422L males scored 13.1 ± 0.1 pts. (p < 0.0001 vs. ε2/ε222L and ε3/ε322L) (Fig. 1b). ε2/ε222L mice scored worse than ε3/ε322L mice, with females and males scoring an average of 9.8 ± 0.1 pts. (p < 0.0001 vs. ε3/ε322L) and 9.7 ± 0.2 pts. (p < 0.0001 ε3/ε322L), respectively. At 23 wpi. TSS scores in ε3/ε322L females and males were 7.8 ± 0.1 pts. and 8.3 ± 0.1 pts., respectively. The ε4 > > ε2 > ε3 APOE allele gradient effect was consistent across all five individual components of the TSS, with the most prominent differences in respect to alertness, walk, and body condition (Supplementary File 1: Fig. S2 a, b). Differences in the TSS and its individual components between APOE genotype matched female and male mice were not statistically significant.
To ensure that differences in disease latency and the tempo of symptoms progression across mice of different APOE genotypes are not caused by variable accumulation of PrPSc in the LRS, we assayed the level of PK-resistant PrPSc in the spleen homogenate. In presymptomatic 22L-infected mice, which were killed at 15 wpi., PrPSc was readily detectable in the spleen, but its level did not significantly differ across APOE genotypes (Supplementary File 1: Fig. S3 a, b). In NBH-inoculated control animals no PK-resistant PrPSc signal was detectable.
To determine the effect of the APOE genotype on the burden of prion pathology in the brain we quantified the load of spongiform lesions in the M1 motor cortex. Presymptomatic 22L-infected mice showed only a limited number of spongiform lesions. In contrast, symptomatic mice, euthanized at 23 wpi. featured numerous spongiform lesions, which load was significantly affected by the APOE genotype. In ε4/ε422L mice the spongiform lesion load was 1.24- and 1.44-fold higher than that in ε2/ε222L and ε3/ε322L animals (p < 0.0001), respectively; with the difference between the two latter groups being significant (p < 0.05) (Fig. 1c, d). We also analyzed, the integrated density (ID) of anti-PrP immunostaining in the S1 somatosensory cortex. Not presymptomatic, but symptomatic 22L-infected mice showed a significant increase in the anti-PrP ID values relative to NBH controls, and this effect was APOE genotype dependent (Fig. 1e, f). ε4/ε422L mice had 2.0 and 2.6- fold higher values of anti-PrP ID compared to ε2/ε222L and ε3/ε322L animals (p < 0.0001), respectively; with the difference between the latter two groups not reaching statistical significance. Differences in the spongiform lesion load and the anti-PrP ID values between female and male animals for matching APOE genotypes, inoculum type, and the survival time were not statistically significant (Supplementary File 1: Fig. S4 a, b).
The APOE ε4 allele is associated with greater PrP accumulation, PrPSc conversion, and aggregation
Prion pathology is invariably associated with an increase in the brain total PrP protein level and the appearance of its PK-resistant conformer PrPSc. The total PrP level showed no differences across NBH-inoculated control mice of various APOE genotypes and no significant increase in presymptomatic 22L-infected mice, at 15 wpi. In contrast, symptomatic 22L-infected mice, euthanized at 23 wpi., featured a marked increase in the total brain PrP level by ~ 4- to ~ 5- folds compared to APOE matched NBH controls (p < 0.0001) (Fig. 2a, b). The highest total PrP level was found in ε4/ε422L mice, and it was 1.2- and 1.3-fold higher than those in ε2/ε222L (p < 0.01) and ε3/ε322L (p < 0.0001) animals, respectively; with the difference between the two latter groups not reaching statistical significance. The PrPSc conformer was undetectable by the PK-digestion assay in the brains of NBH-controls and presymptomatic 22L-infected mice. In contrast, in symptomatic 22L-infected mice PrPSc was abundantly detected, and its level was significantly potentiated by the presence of the ε4 allele (Fig. 2c, d). ε4/ε422L mice featured 1.24- and 1.37-fold higher PrPSc level compared to ε2/ε222L (p < 0.01) and ε3/ε322L mice (p < 0.001), respectively; with the difference between the two latter groups not reaching statistical significance.
Using the detergent solubility assay, we characterized solubility changes the PrP protein undergoes during the PrPC to PrPSc transformation. Brains from NBH and presymptomatic 22L-infected mice showed no evidence of detergent insoluble PrP protein. In symptomatic, 22L-infected mice detergent insoluble PrP, was not only abundantly present, but its amount well exceeded that detected in the detergent soluble fraction. The highest ratio of detergent insoluble to detergent soluble PrP was in ε4/ε422L mice (9.4 ± 0.8) and it was significantly higher than those in ε2/ε222L mice (6.7 ± 0.4) (p < 0.001) and in ε3/ε322L mice (5.7 ± 0.7) (p < 0.0001) (Fig. 2e, f). The difference between ε2/ε222L and ε3/ε322L mice was not statistically significant. Differences in the total PrP level, PrPSc level, and the insoluble to soluble PrP ratio between female and male mice for matching APOE genotype, inoculum, and survival time were not statistically significant (Supplementary File 1: Fig. S5 a-c).
We also investigated the effect of APOE genotype on PrP oligomerization by subjecting brain cortex homogenate to sucrose gradient centrifugation. The resulting 14 fractions were individually collected and resolved using SDS-PAGE under reducing conditions and immunoblotted for PrP (Fig. 3a, b). Brains from NBH-inoculated and symptomatic, 22L-infected ε2/ε2, ε3/ε3, and ε4/ε4 mice were examined along with those from Apoe−/− mice. In NBH controls, the PrP signal was detectable only in fractions 1–4 and its distribution showed no statistically significant differences across APOE genotype (Fig. 3c; Supplementary File 2: Table S1). In contrast, in 22L-infected mice, the PrP signal was detected across all 14 fractions, and its distribution bore a significant ε4 effect (Fig. 3d). The ε4/ε422L mice featured the most pronounced, right-sided shift in the PrP signal distribution across the 14 fractions compared to any other 22L-infected APOE genotype or Apoe−/− animals (p < 0.0001). Differences in the PrP signal distribution pattern between Apoe−/−22L and ε2/ε222L or ε3/ε322L mice were insignificant. A statistically significant difference was noted only between ε2/ε222L and ε3/ε322L mice (p < 0.01) owing to the most left-sided shift in the signal distribution in the latter group. To better visualize the ε4 effect in 22L-infected mice we grouped the fractions into four clusters 1–4, 5–7, 8–10, and 11–14, and showed the proportional contribution of each cluster to the total PrP signal in all 14 fractions using pie charts (Fig. 3e). In ε4/ε422L mice, the cluster 11–14 contributed 25.7% of the total PrP signal, while for comparison in ε2/ε222L, ε3/ε322L, and Apoe−/−22L groups its contribution ranged from 12.4% to 13.8%. Conversely, the cluster 1–4 in ε4/ε422L mice constituted 32.3% of the total PrP signal, while in ε2/ε222L, ε3/ε322L, and Apoe−/−22L groups its contribution ranged from 41.7% to 49.8%. This experiment demonstrates that while PrP oligomerization is an inherent feature of the prion proteinopathy, it is promoted only in the presence of the ε4 allele, as there are no significant differences between Apoe−/−22L and ε2/ε222L or ε3/ε322L animals.
Increase in the apoE protein level and formation of the PrP/apoE complexes during prion infection is APOE genotype dependent
Consistently with previously published data, we found a significant effect of the APOE genotype on the brain apoE protein level in NBH control mice. ε2/ε2NBH animals featured 1.2- and 1.5- fold higher apoE level compared to ε3/ε3NBH (p < 0.05) and ε4/ε4NBH mice (p < 0.0001) (Fig. 4a; Supplementary File 1: Fig. S6), respectively; with the difference between ε3/ε3NBH and ε4/ε4NBH mice being statistically significant (p < 0.01). Prion infection gave rise to a significant increase in the brain apoE level in symptomatic (23 wpi.) but not in presymptomatic (15 wpi.) animals (Fig. 4a, b). The magnitude of this increase varied across APOE genotypes, and it was the highest in ε4/ε422L mice, where the level of apoE protein rose 1.6-fold relative to ε4/ε4NBH controls (p < 0.0001). Both in ε2/ε222L and ε3/ε322L mice the increase in apoE level was 1.3-fold relative to ε2/ε2NBH (p < 0.01) and ε3/ε3NBH (p < 0.05) controls, respectively. Animal sex had no significant effect on the brain apoE level, neither in NBH-controls nor in 22L-infected mice (Supplementary File 1: Fig. S7).
To determine whether apoE directly interacts with PrP, we immunoprecipitated the apoE/PrP complexes from the brain cortex homogenate using magnetic beads coated with HJ15.3 mAb, which reacts with the human apoE sequence. Captured complexes were resolved on SDS-PAGE under reducing conditions and the resulting monomeric PrP was detected using anti-CD230 clone 6D11 mAb (Fig. 4c). The PrP signal was detected in symptomatic ε2/ε222L, ε3/ε322L, and ε4/ε422L mice, but not in NBH-inoculated controls. Optical density (OD) of the PrP protein band released from the complexes in ε4/ε422L mice was ~ 1.6-fold higher compared to ε2/ε222L or ε3/ε322L mice (p < 0.0001) (Fig. 4d), while the difference between the latter two groups was not statistically significant. We also quantified the PrP/apoE OD ratio by dividing the PrP protein band OD by that of apoE, which was detected on the same membrane as PrP, following membrane stripping and re-probing with goat polyclonal anti-human apoE antibody. The PrP/apoE OD ratio in ε4/ε422L mice was 2.8- and 1.7- fold higher than those in ε2/ε222L and ε3/ε322L mice (p < 0.05) (Fig. 4e), respectively, while the difference between the latter two groups was not statistically significant. As additional negative experimental controls, we used brain cortex homogenate from Apoe−/−NBH and Apoe−/−22L animals, in which no apoE/PrP complexes were detected. Our findings indicate that the apoE protein directly interacts with PrP but only in prion disease and not under physiological conditions.
Microglia activation is differentially regulated by the APOE genotype
Microglia activation was characterized by unbiased quantification of IBA1- and CD68-positive microglia load in the S1 somatosensory cortex alongside transcriptomic analysis of microglia specific genes. Presymptomatic, 22L-infected mice (15 wpi.) already showed a modest, but statistically insignificant increase in the IBA1 and CD68 load relative to NBH-inoculated controls. A robust and significant increase in the IBA1 and CD68 load was observed in symptomatic 22L-infected mice (23 wpi.), and this effect was APOE genotype dependent (Fig. 5a-d). The strongest activation of microglia was noted in ε4/ε422L mice, which had a 1.32- and 1.64-fold greater IBA1 load relative to the ε2/ε222L (p < 0.0001) and ε3/ε322L (p < 0.0001) mice, respectively. Likewise, ε4/ε422L mice showed 1.04-fold and 1.17-fold greater CD68 load relative to ε2/ε222L (non-significant) and ε3/ε322L (p < 0.05) mice, respectively. The value of IBA1 load in ε2/ε222L mice was significantly higher than that in ε3/ε322L mice (p < 0.0001), while the difference in the CD68 load insignificantly favored ε2/ε222L animals. It is noteworthy that the increase in the IBA1 load in symptomatic 22L-infected mice relative to their APOE-matched NBH controls ranged between 1.7-fold and 2.8-fold, while the increase in the CD68 load ranged between 16.4-fold and 22.7-fold. Differences in the IBA1 and CD68 load values between female and male animals for matching APOE genotypes, inoculum type, and the survival time were not statistically significant (Supplementary File 1: Fig. S8 a, b).
Transcriptomic analysis included microglial genes, which were significantly upregulated in at least one APOE genotype within the symptomatic 22L-infected group compared to APOE-matched NBH controls (Supplementary File 2: Table S2). Significantly upregulated genes were grouped into three functional categories 1) activated microglia markers (Aif1, Csf1r, Cst7, P2ry12, Siglech, and Tmem119), 2) genes involved in immune response (C1qa, C1qb, C1qc, C4a/b, C3ar1, Csf3r, Csf1, and Ccl3), 3) and those encoding various microglia recognition receptors (Axl, Cx3cr1, Fcrls, Clec7a, Mertk, P2ry6, Stab1, Trem2, and Tyrobp). Hierarchical cluster analysis of all genes showed no systematic clustering across individual NBH animals. In contrast, 22L-infected animals featured a strong hierarchical signal (Fig. 6a). First, the animals clustered within their APOE genotypes, and then ε2/ε222L and ε4/ε422L animals clustered together separate from ε3/ε322L animals. We also compared differences in the fold increase of individual gene expression across APOE genotypes. ε4/ε422L mice showed significantly higher upregulations of all genes compared to ε3/ε322L mice and Aif1, C1qa, C1qb, C1qc, C4a/b, C3ar1, Csf1, Fcrls, Mertk, P2ry6, Stab1 genes compared to ε2/ε222L mice (Fig. 6b-d). Aif1, Cst7, P2ry12, Tmem119, C1qb, C1qc, Ccl3, Cx3cr1, Fcrls, Clec7a, Trem2, and Tyrobp genes were expressed at significantly higher level in ε2/ε222L mice compared to ε3/ε322L mice. Cst7, C4a/b, Ccl3, and Clec7a were found to be upregulated at particularly high level (≥ 10-fold relative to NBH controls) in at least one of the APOE genotypes (Supplementary File 2: Table S2).
APOE genotype differentially modulates activation of astrocytes during prion infection
Astrocytic activation was characterized by determining changes in the GFAP protein level by quantitative immunoblotting, unbiased quantification of GFAP and C3-positive astrocyte load in the S1 somatosensory cortex and transcriptomic analysis of astrocyte specific genes. GFAP protein level showed no differences across APOE genotypes in NBH-inoculated controls. In presymptomatic 22L-infected mice (15 wpi.), it was modestly, albeit insignificantly increased (1.1-1.2-fold), while in symptomatic 22L-infected mice (23 wpi.) its level ranged between 2.2-fold and 3.1-fold relative to APOE-matched NBH controls (p < 0.0001) (Fig. 7a, b). Differences across APOE genotypes in symptomatic 22L-infected mice were statistically significant with ε4/ε422L mice featuring 1.3- and 1.4-fold higher GFAP protein level compared to ε2/ε222L (p < 0.001) and ε3/ε322L mice (p < 0.0001), respectively; while the difference between the latter two groups was not significant.
The load of GFAP positive astrocytes in the S1 somatosensory cortex was already significantly increased in presymptomatic 22L-infected mice (15 wpi.) (p < 0.0001) (Fig. 7c, d), but without any significant APOE genotype effect. Symptomatic 22L-infected mice (23 wpi.) featured further increase in the GFAP load, which ranged between 20.1- and 32.1-fold relative to NBH controls (p < 0.0001). ε4/ε422L mice had a 1.3- and 1.4-fold higher GFAP load compared to ε2/ε222L (p < 0.0001) and ε3/ε322L mice (p < 0.0001), respectively, and the difference between the latter two groups was statistically significant (p < 0.01). We also quantified the load of C3-positive astrocytes and analyzed it in relation to the GFAP load (Fig. 7e, f). In NBH-inoculated control mice, C3-positive astrocytes were absent. For the first time, expression of C3 in astrocytes was noted in presymptomatic 22L-infected mice, where the C3/GFAP ratio ranged between 0.08 and 0.11 across APOE genotypes (p < 0.01 to p < 0.0001 vs. NBH). In symptomatic 22L-infected mice, the C3 expression increased further with C3/GFAP ratio reaching values of 0.49 to 0.71 across APOE genotypes (p < 0.0001 vs. NBH or 22L at 15 wpi). Differences in the C3/GFAP ratio showed a significant APOE-genotype effect in symptomatic but not in presymptomatic animals. Symptomatic ε4/ε422L mice featured 1.2- and 1.4-fold higher values of the C3/GFAP ratio compared to ε2/ε222L (p < 0.0001) and ε3/ε322L mice (p < 0.0001), respectively; with the difference between the latter two groups also being statistically significant (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in respect to the GFAP protein level, the GFAP-positive astrocyte load, and the C3/GFAP ratio between female and male animals for matching APOE genotype, inoculum type, and survival time (Supplementary File 1: Fig. S9 a-c).
Transcriptomic analysis included those astrocytic genes, which were significantly upregulated in at least one APOE genotype in symptomatic 22L-infected mice relative to their APOE-matched NBH controls (Supplementary File 2; Tab S3). Analyzed genes were grouped into four functional categories: 1) markers of reactive astrocytes (Aldh1l1, Aqp4, Gfap, Serpina3n, Slc1a3, Sox9, Vim), 2) genes involved in antigen presenting and processing (H2-D1, H2-T23, Tap1), 3) genes involved in immune response (Ccl12, Cd14), and 4) those encoding astrocytic markers, whose expression is induced by interferons (Stat1, Stat2, Stat3, Gbp2, Psmb8). Hierarchical cluster analysis of all genes showed no systematic clustering across individual NBH-inoculated animals. ε3/ε322L mice clustered separately from ε2/ε222L and ε4/ε422L mice, which clustered together. All NBH animals clustered separately from 22L-infected animals (Fig. 8a). We also compared differences in the fold increase of individual genes across APOE genotypes. ε4/ε422L mice showed significantly greater expression of all genes compared to ε3/ε322L mice except for Tap1 and Gbp2 (Fig. 8b-e). ε4/ε422L mice also showed significantly greater expression of Aldh1l1, Gfap, Serpina3n, Vim, H2-D1, H2-T23, Ccl12, Stat2, and Stat3 compared to ε2/ε222L mice. Aldh1l1, Aqp4, Tap1, Ccl12, Cd14, and Psmb8 genes were upregulated at significantly higher level in ε2/ε222L mice compared to ε3/ε322L mice. Gfap, Serpina3n, Vim, and Ccl12 were upregulated at particularly high level (≥ 10-fold relative to NBH controls) in at least one of the APOE genotypes (Supplementary File 2: Table S3).
APOE genotype differentially regulates reciprocal proinflammatory crosstalk between microglia and astrocytes
Chronically reactive microglia secrete a triad of cytokines IL1-α, TNFα, and C1QA, which stimulate reactive astrocytes. These in turn secrete C3, which reciprocally stimulates neurodegenerative microglia. We explored the effect of APOE genotype on this pathway in prion infected mice using qRT-PCR (Fig. 9a-c). We compared the expression of Il1α, Tnfα, C1qa, and C3 genes alongside expression of genes which are considered transcriptomic markers of neurodegenerative microglia phenotype (Aif1, C3ar1, and Cx3cr1) and those specifically associated with chronically reactive astrocytes (Gfap, Ccl12, and Ccl2). No changes in expression level of any of these genes were found in presymptomatic 22L-inoculated mice (15 wpi.) compared to NBH-inoculated controls for matching APOE genotypes. In contrast, symptomatic 22L-inoculated mice (23 wpi.) showed significant upregulation of all interrogated genes with significant differences across the APOE genotypes. The highest expression of all the genes was found in ε4/ε422L mice with differences between ε4/ε422L mice and ε2/ε222L and ε3/ε322L mice being statistically significant for all genes (p < 0.05 to p < 0.0001) except for Cx3cr1 (ε4/ε422L vs. ε3/ε322L). Expression of Il1α, C1qa, C3, Aif1, Cx3cr1 and Ccl12 genes was significantly higher in ε2/ε222L mice compared to ε3/ε322L animals (p < 0.05 to p < 0.01).