SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Macrophages and Natural Killers Degrade α-Synuclein Aggregates.

Mol Pharm · 2024-04-18

DOI: 10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.4c00160PMID: 38635186

Open accessresearch-article; Journal Article; Research Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Amyloid oligomers and fibrils are protein aggregates that exert a high cell toxicity. Efficient degradation of these protein aggregates can minimize the spread and progression of neurodegeneration. In this study, we investigate the properties of natural killer (NK) cells and macrophages in the degradation of α-synuclein (α-Syn) aggregates grown in a lipid-free environment and in the presence of phosphatidylserine and cholesterol (PS/Cho), which are lipids that are directly associated with the onset and progression of Parkinson's disease. We found that both types of α-Syn aggregates were endocytosed by neurons, which caused strong damage to cell endosomes. Our results also indicated that PS/Cho vesicles drastically increased the toxicity of α-Syn fibrils formed in their presence compared to the toxicity of α-Syn aggregates grown in a lipid-free environment. Both NK cells and macrophages were able to degrade α-Syn and α-Syn/Cho monomers, oligomers, and fibrils. Quantitative analysis of protein degradation showed that macrophages demonstrated substantially more efficient internalization and degradation of amyloid aggregates in comparison to NK cells. We also found that amyloid aggregates induced the proliferation of macrophages and NK cells and significantly changed the expression of their cytokines and chemokines.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.