Mitochondrial Effects of Hydromethylthionine, Rivastigmine and Memantine in Tau-Transgenic Mice.

Tau protein aggregations are important contributors to the etiology of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Hydromethylthionine (HMT) is a potent inhibitor of tau aggregation in vitro and in vivo and is being developed as a possible anti-dementia medication. HMT was also shown to affect the cholinergic system and to interact with mitochondria. Here, we used tau-transgenic (L1 and L66) and wild-type NMRI mice that were treated with HMT, rivastigmine and memantine and with combinations thereof, for 2-4 weeks. We measured HMT concentrations in both brain homogenates and isolated mitochondria and concentrations of glucose, lactate and pyruvate in brain by microdialysis. In isolated brain mitochondria, we recorded oxygen consumption of mitochondrial complexes by respirometry. While rivastigmine and memantine lowered mitochondrial respiration, HMT did not affect respiration in wild-type animals and increased respiration in tau-transgenic L1 mice. Glucose and lactate levels were not affected by HMT administration. The presence of HMT in isolated mitochondria was established. In summary, traditional anti-dementia drugs impair mitochondrial function while HMT has no adverse effects on mitochondrial respiration in tau-transgenic mice. These results support the further development of HMT as an anti-dementia drug.

Hydromethylthionine enhancement of central cholinergic signalling is blocked by rivastigmine and memantine.

The prevention of tau protein aggregations is a therapeutic goal for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD), and hydromethylthionine (HMT) (also known as leucomethylthioninium-mesylate [LMTM]), is a potent inhibitor of tau aggregation in vitro and in vivo. In two Phase 3 clinical trials in AD, HMT had greater pharmacological activity on clinical endpoints in patients not receiving approved symptomatic treatments for AD (acetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitors and/or memantine) despite different mechanisms of action. To investigate this drug interaction in an animal model, we used tau-transgenic L1 and wild-type NMRI mice treated with rivastigmine or memantine prior to adding HMT, and measured changes in hippocampal acetylcholine (ACh) by microdialysis. HMT given alone doubled hippocampal ACh levels in both mouse lines and increased stimulated ACh release induced by exploration of the open field or by infusion of scopolamine. Rivastigmine increased ACh release in both mouse lines, whereas memantine was more active in tau-transgenic L1 mice. Importantly, our study revealed a negative interaction between HMT and symptomatic AD drugs: the HMT effect was completely eliminated in mice that had been pre-treated with either rivastigmine or memantine. Rivastigmine was found to inhibit AChE, whereas HMT and memantine had no effects on AChE or on choline acetyltransferase (ChAT). The interactions observed in this study demonstrate that HMT enhances cholinergic activity in mouse brain by a mechanism of action unrelated to AChE inhibition. Our findings establish that the drug interaction that was first observed clinically has a neuropharmacological basis and is not restricted to animals with tau aggregation pathology. Given the importance of the cholinergic system for memory function, the potential for commonly used AD drugs to interfere with the treatment effects of disease-modifying drugs needs to be taken into account in the design of clinical trials.

Mechanisms of Anticholinesterase Interference with Tau Aggregation Inhibitor Activity in a Tau-Transgenic Mouse Model.

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic treatments of Alzheimer's Disease (AD) with cholinesterase inhibitors and/or memantine are relatively ineffective and there is a need for new treatments targeting the underlying pathology of AD. In most of the failed disease-modifying trials, patients have been allowed to continue taking symptomatic treatments at stable doses, under the assumption that they do not impair efficacy. In recently completed Phase 3 trials testing the tau aggregation inhibitor leuco-methylthioninium bis (hydromethanesulfonate) (LMTM), we found significant differences in treatment response according to whether patients were taking LMTM either as monotherapy or as an add-on to symptomatic treatments. METHODS: We have examined the effect of either LMTM alone or chronic rivastigmine prior to LMTM treatment of tau transgenic mice expressing the short tau fragment that constitutes the tangle filaments of AD. We have measured acetylcholine levels, synaptosomal glutamate release, synaptic proteins, mitochondrial complex IV activity, tau pathology and Choline Acetyltransferase (ChAT) immunoreactivity. RESULTS: LMTM given alone increased hippocampal Acetylcholine (ACh) levels, glutamate release from synaptosomal preparations, synaptophysin levels in multiple brain regions and mitochondrial complex IV activity, reduced tau pathology, partially restored ChAT immunoreactivity in the basal forebrain and reversed deficits in spatial learning. Chronic pretreatment with rivastigmine was found to reduce or eliminate almost all these effects, apart from a reduction in tau aggregation pathology. LMTM effects on hippocampal ACh and synaptophysin levels were also reduced in wild-type mice. CONCLUSION: The interference with the pharmacological activity of LMTM by a cholinesterase inhibitor can be reproduced in a tau transgenic mouse model and, to a lesser extent, in wild-type mice. Long-term pretreatment with a symptomatic drug alters a broad range of brain responses to LMTM across different transmitter systems and cellular compartments at multiple levels of brain function. There is, therefore, no single locus for the negative interaction. Rather, the chronic neuronal activation induced by reducing cholinesterase function produces compensatory homeostatic downregulation in multiple neuronal systems. This reduces a broad range of treatment responses to LMTM associated with a reduction in tau aggregation pathology. Since the interference is dictated by homeostatic responses to prior symptomatic treatment, it is likely that there would be similar interference with other drugs tested as add-on to the existing symptomatic treatment, regardless of the intended therapeutic target or mode of action. The present findings outline key results that now provide a working model to explain interference by symptomatic treatment.