Reduction in muscarinic receptors by antisense oligodeoxynucleotide

Ten years of antisense inhibition of brain G-protein-coupled receptor function

Antisense oligonucleotides (AOs) are widely used as tools for inhibiting gene expression in the mammalian central nervous system. Successful gene suppression has been reported for different targets such as neurotransmitter receptors, neuropeptides, ion channels, trophic factors, cytokines, transporters, and others. This illustrates their potential for studying the expression and function of a wide range of proteins. AOs may even find therapeutic applications and provide an attractive strategy for intervention in diseases of the central nervous system (CNS). However, a lack of effectiveness and/or specificity could be a major drawback for research or clinical applications. Here we provide a critical overview of the literature from the past decade on AOs for the study of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). The following aspects will be considered: mechanisms by which AOs exert their effects, types of animal model system used, detection of antisense action, effects of AO design and delivery characteristics, non-antisense effects and toxicological properties, controls used in antisense studies to assess specificity, and our results (failures and successes). Although the start codon of the mRNA is the most popular region (46%) to target by AOs, targeting the coding region of GPCRs is almost as common (41%). Moreover, AOs directed to the coding region of the GPCR mRNA induce the highest reductions in receptor levels. To resist degradation by nucleases, the modified phosphorothioate AO (S-AO) is the most widely used and effective oligonucleotide. However, the end-capped phosphorothioate AOs (ECS-AOs) are increasingly used due to possible toxic and non-specific effects of the S-AO. Other parameters affecting the activity of a GPCR-targeting AO are the length (mostly an 18-, 20- or 21-mer) and the GC-content (mostly varying from 30 to 80%). Interestingly, one-third of the AOs successfully targeting GPCRs possess a GC/AT ratio of 61-70%. AO-induced reductions in GPCR expression levels and function range typically from 21 to 40% and 41 to 50%, respectively. In contrast to many antisense reviews, we therefore conclude that the functional activity of a GPCR after AO treatment correlates mostly with the density of the target receptors (maximum factor 2). However, AOs are no simple tools for experimental use in vivo. Despite successful results in GPCR research, no general guidelines exist for designing a GPCR-targeting AO or, in general, for setting up a GPCR antisense experiment. It seems that the correct choice of a GPCR targeting AO can only be ascertained empirically. This disadvantage of antisense approaches results mostly from incomplete knowledge about the internalisation and mechanism of action of AOs. Together with non-specific effects of AOs and the difficulties of assessing target specificity, this makes the use of AOs a complex approach from which conclusions must be drawn with caution. Further antisense research has to be carried out to ensure the adequate use of AOs for studying GPCR function and to develop antisense as a valuable therapeutic modality.

Brain-stimulation reward thresholds raised by an antisense oligonucleotide for the M5 muscarinic receptor infused near dopamine cells

Oligonucleotides targeting M5 muscarinic receptor mRNA were infused for 6 d into the ventral tegmental area of freely behaving rats trained to bar-press for lateral hypothalamic stimulation. The bar-pressing rate was determined at a range of frequencies each day to evaluate the effects of infusions on reward. M5 antisense oligonucleotide (oligo) infusions increased the frequency required for bar pressing by 48% over baseline levels, with the largest increases occurring after 4-6 d of infusion. Two control oligos had only slight effects (means of 5 and 11% for missense and sense oligos, respectively). After the infusion, the required frequency shifted back to baseline levels gradually over 1-5 d. Antisense oligo infusions decreased M5 receptors on the ipsilateral, but not the contralateral, side of the ventral tegmentum, as compared with a missense oligo. Therefore, M5 muscarinic receptors associated with mesolimbic dopamine neurons seem to be important in brain-stimulation reward.

Antidepressant effects on GABA-stimulated 36Cl(-) influx in rat cerebral cortex are altered after treatment with GABA(A) receptor antisense oligodeoxynucleotides

Antidepressants act at the GABA(A) receptor to inhibit GABA-stimulated 36Cl(-) influx and GABA reduction of [35S]TBPS binding. This study examined how selective knock-down (via antisense oligodeoxynucleotides, aODNs) of GABA(A) receptor subunits modified antidepressant activity. The specific aODNs used were for the alpha1, beta1, beta2 or gamma2 subunits of the GABA(A) receptor. The aODN microinjections reduced corresponding GABA(A) receptor subunit mRNA levels by 30-40% as assessed by RT-PCR. The inhibitory effect of the antidepressants amitriptyline and mianserin on GABA-stimulated 36Cl(-) influx was decreased after microinjections of alpha1, beta1, or beta2 subunit aODNs but potentiated after microinjections of gamma2 subunit aODNs. This pattern of aODNs effect on amitriptyline and mianserin modulation of GABA-stimulated 36Cl(-) influx was the same for both antidepressants and similar to GABA but different than that of diazepam and bicuculline. We conclude that multiple subunits of the GABA(A) receptor regulate the effect of amitriptyline and mianserin on the GABA(A) receptor chloride ionophore complex. However, the exact identity of the subunit mediating the direct or allosteric modulation of the antidepressant effect on GABA-stimulated 36Cl(-) influx remains unclear.

Loss of muscarinic antinociception by antisense inhibition of M(1) receptors

The effect on cholinergic analgesia of inactivation of the M(1) gene by an antisense oligodeoxyribonucleotide (aODN) was investigated in the mouse hot plate test. Mice received a single intracerebroventricular (i.c.v.) injection of anti-M(1) aODN (0.3, 1. 0 or 2.0 nmol per injection), degenerate ODN (dODN) or vehicle on days 1, 4 and 7. A dose-dependent inhibition of the antinociception induced by the muscarinic agonists oxotremorine (0.1 mg kg(-1) s.c.) and McN-A-343 (30 microg per mouse i.c.v.) and the cholinesterase inhibitor physostigmine (0.2 mg kg(-1) s.c.) was observed 24 h after the last i.c.v. injection of aODN. Time-course experiments revealed that, after the end of the aODN treatment, sensitivity to analgesic drugs progressively appeared reaching the normal range at 96 h. The anti-M(1) aODN was selective against muscarinic antinociception since the enhancement of pain threshold produced by morphine and baclofen were not affected by the above-mentioned treatment. dODN, used as control, did not affect muscarinic antinociception. Binding studies evidenced a selective reduction of M(1) receptor levels in the hippocampus of aODN-treated mice. Neither aODN, dODN nor vehicle produced any behavioural impairment of mice as revealed by the rota-rod and Animex experiments. These results indicate that activation of M(1) muscarinic receptor subtype is fundamental to induce central cholinergic analgesia in mice.

Effects of treatment with GABA(A) receptor subunit antisense oligodeoxynucleotides on GABA-stimulated 36Cl- influx in the rat cerebral cortex

GABA(A) receptor function was studied in cerebral cortical vesicles prepared from rats after intracerebroventricular microinjections of antisense oligodeoxynucleotides (aODNs) for alpha1, gamma2, beta1, beta2 subunits. GABA(A) receptor alpha1 subunit aODNs decreased alpha1 subunit mRNA by 59+/-10%. Specific [3H]GABA binding was decreased by alpha1 or beta2 subunit aODNs (to 63+/-3% and 64+/-9%, respectively) but not changed by gamma2 subunit aODNs (94+/-5%). Specific [3H]flunitrazepam binding was increased by alpha1 or beta2 subunit aODNs (122+/-8% and 126+/-11%, respectively) and decreased by gamma2 subunit aODNs (50+/-13%). The "knockdown" of specific subunits of the GABA(A )receptor significantly influenced GABA-stimulated 36Cl- influx. Injection of alpha1 subunit aODNs decreased basal 36Cl- influx and the GABA Emax; enhanced GABA modulation by diazepam; and decreased antagonism of GABA activity by bicuculline. Injection of gamma2 subunit aODNs increased the GABA Emax; reversed the modulatory efficacy of diazepam from enhancement to inhibition of GABA-stimulation; and reduced the antagonist effect of bicuculline. Injection of beta2 subunit aODNs reduced the effect of diazepam whereas treatment with beta1 subunit aODNs had no effect on the drugs studied. Conclusions from our studies are: (1) alpha1 subunits promote, beta2 subunits maintain, and gamma2 subunits suppress GABA stimulation of 36Cl- influx; (2) alpha1 subunits suppress, whereas beta2, and gamma2 subunits promote allosteric modulation by benzodiazepines; (3) diazepam can act as an agonist or inverse agonist depending on the relative composition of the receptor subunits: and (4) the mixed competitive/non-competitive effects of bicuculline result from activity at alpha1 and gamma2 subunits and the lack of activity at beta1 and beta2 subunits.

Antisense oligodeoxynucleotides against the muscarinic m2, but not m4, receptor supports its role as autoreceptors in the rat hippocampus

Antisense oligodeoxynucleotides against muscarinic m2 and m4 receptors were used to investigate the role of these receptor subtypes as negative autoreceptors in the regulation of acetylcholine (ACh) release in the rat hippocampus. Following the continuous infusion of antisenses into the third ventricle (1 microgram microliter-1 h-1, 3 days), 3H-AF-DX 384/muscarinic M2-like binding was significantly decreased in the medial septum by the antisense against the m2 receptor whereas M2-like binding in the dorsal striatum was decreased by the antisense against the m4 receptor. In contrast, 3H-pirenzepine/muscarinic M1-like binding was unaffected by either antisense treatment in any of the brain areas investigated. When perfused into the hippocampus via a dialysis probe, the purported muscarinic M2 receptor antagonist AF-DX 384 (100 nM) increased hippocampal ACh release in freely moving rats. This effect of AF-DX 384 was significantly attenuated by the m2, but not the m4, receptor antisense treatment. Hippocampal choline acetyltransferase activity was not affected by either antisense treatments. Taken together, these results suggest that the molecularly defined muscarinic m2 receptor regulates hippocampal ACh release by acting as a negative autoreceptor. In contrast, the molecularly defined m4 receptor is unlikely to be directly involved in the negative regulation of ACh release in the rat hippocampus. Therefore, inhibiting muscarinic m2 receptor function may be an alternative approach to regulate the release of ACh in neurodegenerative diseases associated with impaired cholinergic functions.

Antisense 'knockdowns' of M1 receptors induces transient anterograde amnesia in mice

The effect on memory processes of inactivation of the M1 gene by an antisense oligodeoxyribonucleotide (aODN) was investigated in the mouse passive avoidance test. Mice received a single intracerebroventricular (i.c.v.) injection of M1 aODN (0.3, 1.0 or 2.0 nmol per injection), degenerated ODN (dODN) or vehicle on days 1, 4 and 7. An amnesic effect, comparable to that produced by antimuscarinic drugs, was observed 12, 24, 48 and 72 h after the last i.c.v. aODN injection, whereas dODN and vehicle, used as controls, did not produce any effect. Reduction in the entrance latency to the dark compartment induced by aODN disappeared 7 days after the end of aODN treatment, which indicates the absence of any irreversible damage or toxicity caused by aODN. Quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction analysis demonstrated that a decrease in M1 mRNA levels occurred only in the aODN-treated group, being absent in all control groups. Furthermore, a reduction in M1 receptors was observed in the hippocampus of aODN-treated mice. Neither aODN, dODN nor vehicle produced any behavioral impairment of mice. These results indicate that the integrity and functionality of M1 receptors are fundamental in the modulation of memory processes.

Brain as a unique antisense environment

During the last few years, antisense oligodeoxyribonucleotides (asODN) have become a commonly used tool for blocking of gene expression in the mammalian central nervous system. Successful gene inhibition has been reported for such diverse targets as those encoding neurotransmitter receptors, neuropeptides, trophic factors, transcription factors, cytokines, transporters, ion channels, and others. This review presents a discussion of recent studies on ODN in the brain, with a focus on specific approaches taken by the researchers in this field and especially on peculiar features of this organ as a milieu for asODN action. It is concluded that from the presented literature survey no coherent view on how to rationally design ODN for brain studies has emerged.

G protein-coupled receptors: functional and mechanistic insights through altered gene expression

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) comprise a large and diverse family of molecules that play essential roles in signal transduction. In addition to a constantly expanding pharmacological repertoire, recent advances in the ability to manipulate GPCR expression in vivo have provided another valuable approach in the study of GPCR function and mechanism of action. Current technologies now allow investigators to manipulate GPCR expression in a variety of ways. Graded reductions in GPCR expression can be achieved through antisense strategies or total gene ablation or replacement can be achieved through gene targeting strategies, and exogenous expression of wild-type or mutant GPCR isoforms can be accomplished with transgenic technologies. Both the techniques used to achieve these specific alterations and the consequences of altered expression patterns are reviewed here and discussed in the context of GPCR function and mechanism of action.

Antisense strategies in neurobiology

The use of antisense oligodeoxynucleotides, targeted to the transcripts encoding biologically active proteins in the nervous system, provides a novel and highly selective means to further our understanding of the function of these proteins. Recent studies of these agents also suggest the possibility of their being used therapeutically for a variety of diseases involving neuronal tissue. In this paper we review studies showing the in vitro and in vivo effects of antisense oligodeoxynucleotides as they relate to neurobiological functions. Particular attention is paid to the behavioral and biochemical effects of antisense oligodeoxynucleotides directed to the various subtypes of receptors for the neurotransmitter dopamine. An example is also provided showing the effects of a plasmid vector expressing an antisense RNA targeted to the calmodulin mRNAs in the PC12 pheochromocytoma cell line. The advantages of antisense oligodeoxynucleotides over traditional pharmacological treatments are assessed, and the advantages of using vectors encoding antisense RNA over the use of antisense oligodeoxynucleotides are also considered. We also describe the criteria that should be used in designing antisense oligodeoxynucleotides and several controls that should be employed to assure their specificity of action.

Critical issues in the antisense inhibition of brain gene expression in vivo: experiences targetting the 5-HT1A receptor

There have been many recent reports of receptor down-regulation in the brain by antisense oligodeoxynucleotides (ODNs) administered in vivo. However, the literature is inconsistent regarding the experimental criteria that are necessary or sufficient to demonstrate a true antisense effect. Here we review some of the critical conceptual and methodological issues. We highlight the problems of specificity and toxicity encountered in our attempts to down-regulate the 5-HT1A receptor using a phosphorothioate-modified ODN. We also present preliminary data suggestive of a decreased hippocampal 5-HT1AR expression induced by the antisense ODN, but it is a reduction which is of limited extent and which does not provide unequivocal evidence for an antisense-mediated effect. We conclude that antisense ODNs are not yet suitable as tools for routine in vivo neuropharmacological use, although they show considerable promise.