Tag: GBA

GCase: Mutants matter?

~ Simon ~ 7 Comments

# # # #

Tiny genetic variations in a region of DNA called the GBA gene are associated with an increased risk of developing Parkinson’s. The information in the GBA gene provides the instructions for making an enzyme (called GCase) which is involved with waste disposal inside of cells.

Individuals with Parkinson’s who carry a variation in their GBA gene typically have low levels of GCase activity, so researchers have been attempting to identify therapeutic molecules that will enhance the level and activity of GCase as an approach towards slowing the progression of Parkinson’s.

Recently, however, new research has provide novel insights into how the biology of GCase pathway may be affected in individuals with Parkinson’s who carry a GBA genetic variation. 

In today’s post, we will explain what the GBA gene and GCase enzyme are, review the new research, and consider the potential implications of these findings.

# # # #

Prof Sulzer. Source: Youtube

Professor David Sulzer is one individual in the scientific research community who truly fascinates me.

In addition to being at the absolute top of his game academically (he is a professor of Psychiatry, Neurology, Pharmacology at Columbia University and maintains a very large research group investigating neurodegenerative conditions), he is also a composer and musician with a discography that any professional artists would be extremely proud of (his recording alias is Dave Soldier).

He’s also written books (for example “Music Math and Mind“).

Source: Twitter

Where he finds the time to do all of these thing I do not know, but I really like the combination of art and science.

Oh, and did I forget to mention the Thai Elephant Orchestra?

I’m sorry: The what?!?

Just watch:

They have released three CDs and the band grew up to 14 elephants.

Fascinating, but what does this have to do with Parkinson’s?

Continue reading “GCase: Mutants matter?” →

The influence of influenza

~ Simon ~ 3 Comments

# # # #

The potential long-term consequences of viral infections is not a popular topic for a research blog in the middle of a pandemic (and yes, we are still in the middle of it!), but there is a recent Parkinson’s-related report that is worth discussing.

Researchers have recently looked at medical records dating back several decades and noticed something interesting about influenza infections: They are associated with diagnoses of Parkinson’s more than 10 years after infection.

NOTE: The data does not indicate a causal link, just an association.

In today’s post, we will discuss what influenza is, how it has previously been associated with PD, what the new report found, and we will speculate on potential mechanisms by which viral infections could be playing a role in Parkinson’s.

# # # #

photo_66943_landscape_650x433

1918 Spanish flu. Source: Chronicle

Between January 1918 and December 1920, there were two outbreaks of an influenza virus during an event that became known as the 1918 flu pandemic.

Approximately 500 million people across the globe were infected by the H1N1 influenza virus, and this resulted in 50 to 100 million deaths (approximately 3-5% of the world’s population). Given that it occurred during World War 1, censors limited the media coverage of the pandemic in many countries in order to maintain morale.

The Spanish media were not censored, however, and this is why the 1918 pandemic is often referred to as the ‘Spanish flu’.

At the same time that H1N1 was causing havoc, a Romanian born neurologist named Constantin von Economo reported a number of cases involving unusual symptoms. The collection of symptoms was eventually given a name: encephalitis lethargica (EL).

Economo

Constantin von Economo. Source: Wikipedia

This disease left victims in a statue-like condition, speechless and motionless. By 1926, EL had spread around the world, with nearly five million people being affected.

vonecomo-parkinson

An individual with encephalitis lethargica. Source: Baillement

Was influenza causing EL?

Continue reading “The influence of influenza” →

Making a (G)case for quetiapine

~ Simon ~ 8 Comments

# # # #

Drug repurposing (repositioning, reprofiling or re-tasking) is a strategy of identifying novel uses for clinically approved (or experimental) drugs that fall outside the scope of the original medical indication.

Many drug repurposing efforts have started with screening experiments, looking for drugs with certain properties.

Recently, researchers conducted a drug repurposing screening experiment for molecules that enhance a Parkinson’s protein (called GCase) and they found an interesting result: the antipsychotic medication quetiapine.

In today’s post, we will explain what GCase does, review what the new study found, and consider what could happen next.

# # # #

At the recent “Rallying to the Challenge” meeting (which was conducting in parallel with the Van Andel Institute‘s “Grand Challenges in Parkinson’s Disease“), I was asked by Cure Parkinson’s to present on why the biology surrounding genetic risk factors – like variation in the GBA and LRRK2 genes – are important targets for potential therapeutic intervention in Parkinson’s (my presentation starts at 2 hours & 10 minutes into the video above).

Specifically, I was asked to discuss why they are important targets not just for individuals carrying the genetic variations in these genes, but for the wider Parkinson’s community in general. And it is a good question.

How could inhibitors of LRRK2 or enhancers of GCase activity possibly be useful to individuals with idiopathic (spontaneous or not associated with a genetic risk factor) Parkinson’s?

My answer was rather simple.

What was it?

Continue reading “Making a (G)case for quetiapine” →

Trying to LIMP-2 the lysosome

~ Simon ~ 7 Comments

# # # #

Lysosomes are small bags of enzymes that are used to break down material inside of cells – digesting newly absorbed food or recycling old/used proteins and rubbish. Recently researchers have been discovering increasing evidence that points towards dysfunction in lysosomes as a key influential player in neurodegenerative conditions, like Parkinson’s.

There are several Parkinson’s genetic risk factors associated with lysosomal function (GBA being the obvious one), that can increase one’s risk of developing Parkinson’s.

But there is also data indicating that individuals without any of these risk factors may also have reduced lysosomal activity. And recently researchers have identified one possible explanation.

In today’s post, we will explore what lysosomes are, investigate how they maybe involved with Parkinson’s, review what the new data reports, and discuss how this information might be useful.

# # # #

Type of endocytosis. Source: Slidemodel

On a continual basis, cells inside your body are absorbing material from the world around them with the aim of collecting all that they need to survive. They do this predominantly via a process called endocytosis, in which a small part of the cell membrane envelopes around an object (or objects) and it is brought inside the cell.

As the section of cell membrane enters the interior of the cell, it detaches from the membranes and forms what is called an endosomes (sometimes it is also called a vacuole). Once inside, the endosome transported deeper into the interior of the cells where it will bind to another small bag that is full of digestive enzymes that help to break down the contents of the endosome.

This second bag is called a lysosome.

Lysosomes

How lysosomes work. Source: Prezi

Once bound, the lysosome and the endosome/vacuole will fuse together and the enzymes from the lysosome will be unleashed on the material contained in the vacuole. The digestion that follows will break down the material into more manageable components that the cell needs to function and survive.

This enzymatic process works in a very similar fashion to the commercial products that you use for washing your clothes.

Enzymatic degradation. Source: Samvirke

The reagents that you put into the washing machine with your clothes contain a multitude of enzymes, each of which help to break down the dirty, bacteria, flakes of skin, etc that cling to your clothes. Each enzyme breaks down a particular protein, fat or such like. And this situation is very similar to the collection of enzymes in the lysosome. Each enzyme has a particular task and all of them are needed to break down the contents of the endosome.

Interesting, but what does this have to do with Parkinson’s?

Continue reading “Trying to LIMP-2 the lysosome” →

Prevail lands on a Lilly pad

~ Simon ~ 5 Comments

# # # #

2020 has been a dreadful year for most of the world – burdened by the outbreak and consequences of COVID-19. Despite this, there has been a steady stream of biotech acquisitions related to Parkinson’s which have helped to keep morale high in the PD research community.

In October alone, we saw the Portuguese pharmaceutical company Bial purchase GBA-associated Parkinson’s biotech firm Lysosomal Therapeutics (Click here to read more about this) and the acquisition of the inflammasome-focused biotech firm Inflazome was being bought by Roche (Click here to read more about this).

Today brought news of yet another pharmaceutical company – this time Eli Lilly – purchasing a Parkinson’s-focused biotech company (Prevail Therapeutics).

In today’s post, we will explore what Prevail Therapeutics does, why Eli Lilly might be so interested in this company, and why it could be an encouraging move for individuals with a sub-type of Parkinson’s.

# # # #

Colonel Eli Lilly. Source: SS

The civil war veteran, Colonel Eli Lilly started his pharmaceutical career in a drug store in Greencastle (Indiana) in 1869.

Several years later (in 1873) he shifted into the manufacturing of pharmaceuticals (in association with John F Johnston). Two years after that, Lily disolved their partnership, sold his assets, and used the proceeds to set up “Eli Lilly and Co” in Indianapolis.

Source: Wikimedia

He started the company in a rented building on the 10th May, 1876. He was 38 years old, with working capital of $1400 and just three employees. The first medicine that he produced was quinine – a drug used to treat malaria.

Since that humble start, the company (now more commonly known as just “Lilly”) has grown to become one of the 20 largest pharmaceutical companies in the world (Source), with offices in 18 countries and products sold in 125 countries (Source).

Lilly was the first company to mass-produce the polio vaccine and it was also one of the first pharmaceutical companies to produce human insulin using recombinant DNA. Lilly is currently the largest manufacturer of psychiatric medications, including Prozac (Source).

Today, the company employs approximately 38,000 people worldwide, and operates through two key business divisions:

  • Human Pharmaceutical Products, which involves the production and sale of prescription medications in the fields of endocrinology, oncology, cardiovascular health, and neuroscience
  • Animal Health Products, comprising the development and sale of treatments for domestic and farm animals

This is all very interesting, but what does any of it have to do with Parkinson’s?

This week the biotech world was alerted to the news that Eli Lilly was purchasing a biotech company that is focused on developing a novel treatment for a subtype of Parkinson’s.

That company is called Prevail Therapeutics.

What does Prevail Therapeutics do?

Continue reading “Prevail lands on a Lilly pad” →

GBA: Wider regulation = wider implications

~ Simon ~ 11 Comments

# # # #

Tiny variations our DNA can have a significant impact on our lives.

For the last 20 years, Parkinson’s researchers have been collecting data highlighting ‘genetic risk factors’ that are associated with increasing one’s risk of developing the condition.

More recently, however, these same scientists have started shifting their attention to the factors that modulate these genetic risk factors – and some of those influences are also genetic.

In today’s post, we will look at new research exploring genetic variations that influence the effect of the Parkinson’s-associated GBA genetic variants, and discuss why this research has huge implications not only on how we conduct clinical trials, but also on how we will treat Parkinson’s in the future.

# # # #

Prof Craig Venter. Source: ScienceMag

In June 2000, when the results of the first human genome sequencing were announced during a ceremony at the White House, the DNA sequencing pioneer Prof Craig Venter observed that “The concept of race has no genetic or scientific basis“.

He was suggesting that due to genetic variations among human individuals and populations, the term ‘race’ cannot be biologically defined. There was simply no evidence that the broad groups we commonly refer to as “races” have any distinct or unifying genetic identities (Click here for interesting additional reading on this).

Source: Phillymag

Prof Venter’s words were a powerful statement regarding the incredible variability within our genetic make up.

And that variability is even more remarkable considering that we are all 99.9 percent genetically identical.

So how do we explain the variability then?

Continue reading “GBA: Wider regulation = wider implications” →

Too much LRRK2 begets too little GCase?

~ Simon ~ 1 Comment

 

New research from multiple independent research groups proposes that one Parkinson’s associated protein (LRRK2) may be affecting the activity of another Parkinson’s associated protein (GCase).

Specifically, when LRRK2 becomes hyperactive (as is the situation in some cases of Parkinson’s), it causes is associated with a reduction in the amount of GCase activity.

In today’s post, we will discuss what LRRK2 and GCase both do, what the new research suggests, and how this news could influence efforts to treat Parkinson’s in the future.

         

Connections. Source: Philiphemme

For a long time, the Parkinson’s research community had a set of disconnected genetic risk factors – tiny errors in particular regions of DNA that were associated with an increased risk of developing Parkinson’s – but there seemed to be little in the way of common connections between them.

Known genetic associations with PD. Source: PMC

The researchers studied the biological pathways associated with these risk factors, trying to identify potential therapeutic angles as well as looking for connections between them.

The therapies are currently being clinically tested (Click here to read more about these), but the connections have taken a lot longer to find.

Recently one important connection has been identified by several research groups and it could have important implications for how Parkinson’s will be treated in the future.

What’s the connection?

Continue reading “Too much LRRK2 begets too little GCase?” →

The Ambroxol Results

~ Simon ~ 52 Comments

 

The new year has started with some pleasing clinical trial news for the Parkinson’s community: The results of the “Ambroxol in Disease Modification in Parkinson Disease” (AiM-PD study) have been published.

This is a clinically available drug that is used for the treatment of respiratory issues, which researchers are re-purposing for Parkinson’s based on some interesting properties the drug has.

The results of the clinical trial suggest that ambroxol was safe and well tolerated in people with Parkinson’s for the length of the 6 month study. It accessed the brain and increased levels of target proteins while there.

In today’s post, we will discuss what ambroxol is, what research has been conducted on it, and what the results of this study suggest.

 

The author of this blog is the deputy director of research at The Cure Parkinson’s Trust, and as such he feels that it is necessary to start this post with a very clear declaration –  FULL DISCLOSURE: The Cure Parkinson’s Trust (in partnership with the Van Andel Institute) was a funder of the ambroxol clinical trial which is going to be discussed in this post.

Right. That said, let’s try and do a completely unbiased review of the ambroxol trial results 🙂

In one particular SoPD post last year we discussed the Linked Clinical Trials initiative, which is an international program that was set up 8 years ago with the goal of rapidly repurposing clinically available drugs exhibiting disease modifying potential in models of Parkinson’s (Click here to read the previous SoPD post on this topic).

What is meant by repurposing?

Drug repurposing (repositioning, reprofiling or re-tasking) is a strategy of identifying novel uses for clinically approved drugs that fall outside the scope of the original medical indication.

An example of this is “Viagra”.

It was originally developed as an anti-hypertensive medication, but was hugely more successful in the treatment of erectile dysfunction.

The strategy has been adopted and applied by many organisations because it allows for the by-passing of large parts of the drug discovery process, saving time and resources in getting new treatments to the clinic.

Source: Austinpublishinggroup

By repurposing a clinically approved drug – for which we may know a great deal about already in terms of safety, tolerability and dose range – we can skip large parts of the clinical trial process and jump straight to testing the drug in our population of interest (in this case people with Parkinson’s).

And this is what the Linked Clinical Trials (or LCT) program was set up to do in Parkinson’s.

The first drug that was prioritised by the LCT committee for repurposing was a diabetes drug called exenatide (also known as Bydureon).

It is fair to say this LCT-initiated clinical trial program has provided interesting results thus far (Click here and here to read a SoPD post on this) and the exenatide program is now entering Phase III testing in Parkinson’s (Click here to read more about the Phase III trial).

In late 2014, the LCT committee prioritised another clinically available drug for repurposing to Parkinson’s.

That drug is called ambroxol.

What is ambroxol?

Continue reading “The Ambroxol Results” →

ROPAD + LIPAD = NOT BAD :)

~ Simon ~ 6 Comments

 

 

 

Approximately 10-20% of Parkinson’s cases are associated with a genetic risk factor which raises the chances of developing the condition.

Tremendous efforts are being made to not only better understand the underlying biology of these associations, but also to identify individuals who may be affected and invite them to take part in innovative new clinical trials.

The challenge is significant, however, as some genetic risk factors only affect less than 1% of the Parkinson’s community, meaning that hundreds of individuals must be genetically screened in order to identify 1 or 2 who might be eligible to take part in any subsequent study.

In today’s post, we will look at one such project (called the “Rostock International Parkinson’s Disease” (or ROPAD) study, and how it is helping to facilitate a second effort called the “LRRK2 International Parkinson’s Disease” (or LIPAD) project.

 

Rostock: Source: Lerbs

With 200,000+ inhabitants, Rostock was the third largest coastal city in Germany (after Kiel and Lübeck). The city lies on the estuary of the River Warnow in the Bay of Mecklenburg.

Each year, during the second weekend in August, Rostock holds one of the largest yachting events in the world: The Hanse Sail. It is a maritime celebration which attracts more than a million visitors and traditional sailing boats from all over the world.

Source: Hansetag-rostock

Rostock is also home to a company called Centogene.

What does Centogene do?

In 2006, neurologist Arndt Rolfs wanted to speed up the diagnosis of rare diseases. To do this, he founded Centogene. The company now has more than 300 employees and has built up one of the world’s largest data repository for genetic information on rare hereditary diseases. It sells genetic testing products and helps pharmaceutical firms develop new drugs for rare conditions.

It is also an instrumental part of a new Parkinson’s research project called ROPAD.

What is ROPAD?

Continue reading “ROPAD + LIPAD = NOT BAD :)” →

Making a strong case for GCase

~ Simon ~ 6 Comments

Novel therapies are increasing being developed to focus on specific subtypes of Parkinson’s. The hope is that if they work on one type of Parkinson’s, then maybe they will also work on others.

Many of these new experimental treatments are focused on specific genetic subtypes of the condition, which involve having a specific genetic variation that increases one’s risk of developing Parkinson’s.

Increasing amounts of data, however, are accumulating that some of the biological pathways affected by these genetic variations, are also dysfunctional in people with sporadic (or idiopathic) Parkinson’s – where a genetic variation can not explain the abnormality.

In today’s post, we will review some new research that reports reductions in a specific Parkinson’s-associated biological pathway, and discuss what it could mean for future treatment of the Parkinson’s.

Source: Medium

I was recently at a conference on Parkinson’s research where a prominent scientist reminded the audience that just because a person with Parkinson’s carries certain genetic risk factor (an error in a region of their DNA that increases their risk of developing Parkinson’s), does not mean that their Parkinson’s is attributable that genetic variation. Indeed, lots of people in the general population carry Parkinson’s associated genetic risk factors, but never go on to develop the condition.

And this is a really important idea for the Parkinson’s community to understand: Most of the genetics of Parkinson’s deals with ‘association’, not with ‘causation’.

But that begs the question ‘if we do not know that these errors in our DNA are causing Parkinson’s, then why should we be trying to develop therapies based on their biology?’

It is a fair question (it is also a very deep and probing question to start a post off with!).

The genetics of Parkinson’s has been extremely instructive in providing us with insights into the potential underlying biology of the condition. We have learnt a great deal about what many of the biological processess thatare associated with these genetic risk factors, and (yes) various experimental therapies have been developed to target them.

These novel treatments are clinically tested in the hope that they will have beneficial effects not just on individuals carrying certain genetic risk factors, but also on the wider Parkinson’s community.

And recently, there has been increasing evidence supporting this possibility. Some of the biological pathways associated with these genetic mutations appear to also be abnormal in people with Parkinson’s who do not carry the genetic variation.

What do you mean?

Continue reading “Making a strong case for GCase” →