Localized vs. Systematic Neurodegeneration: A Paradigm Shift in Understanding Neurodegenerative Diseases
Armin Bayati
Taryn Berman- Department of Neuroscience, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
The categorization of neurodegenerative disorders have yet to be undertaken with regards to their mechanistic progression and their characteristic patterns of degeneration (Przedborski et al., 2003). Most of the categorization in this field is done with regards to patient's symptoms, their behavioral presentations, and deterioration (Reetz et al., 2010; Weintraub, 2011; Blesa et al., 2012; Rohrer et al., 2015; Eberhardt and Topka, 2016). Neurodegeneration and neurodegenerative diseases are one of the most researched and yet the most mysterious disorders in neuroscience. Their popularity is attributed to their ability to cause significant deterioration in behavior within short periods of time, ultimately impairing quality of life, and in some cases shortening life expectancy (Hardiman et al., 2016). Patients with neurodegenerative diseases are essentially given no hope, with no chances of healing, regression of symptoms, or regeneration of the atrophied brain areas conceivable (Wood-Kaczmar et al., 2006). Neurodegenerative diseases often have genetic causes, but repetitive traumatic brain injuries have also been associated with developing neurodegenerative diseases, as in the case of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (Stein et al., 2015). Medications have largely allowed the controlling of symptoms and an increase in the quality of life for inflicted patients, but no targeting of what causes such disorders have been attempted until very recently (Chaudhuri et al., 2006; Kirkeby et al., 2017). The purpose of this article is to suggest very basic, yet fundamental, ways in which neurodegenerative diseases can be categorized. This method of categorization can lead to a significant paradigm shift of neurodegenerative disorders by the public and scientific community. In short, it would allow for neuroscientists to set clear objectives as to what their goal should be in their prospective research areas when considering neurodegeneration.
The concept of localization of function within regions of the telencephalon and the diencephalon has been a major goal in the neuroscientist community (Stelzer et al., 2014). Localization of function allows for better treatments of neurological disorders and for more certainty to be attained regarding the nature and mechanism with which these disorders manifest (Lee et al., 2010; Seidel et al., 2010). Localized neurodegeneration is a label posed by this paper to characterize neurodegenerative disorders that cause dysfunction, atrophy and apoptosis to specific regions of cells in the brain. Localized neurodegeneration has yet to be used as a term to describe such disorders of the nervous system, and it is this lack of categorization that leads to the ambiguity of the nature of these neurological disorders. There are numerous diseases related to localized dysfunction of cells within the brain: Parkinson's Disease, Huntington's Chorea, frontotemporal lobar degeneration, spinocerebellar ataxia, spinomuscular ataxia, and motor neuron diseases (Burvill, 2009; Obeso et al., 2010; Finkbeiner, 2011; van Gaalen et al., 2011; Hamilton and Gillingwater, 2013; Res et al., 2015). Therefore, localized neurodegenerative diseases have a place of origin with causes being traced to a single localized event, and through regenerating the region of origin the afflicted individual can essentially be cured (Cheng et al., 1996; Elliott Donaghue et al., 2014; Kim et al., 2014; Siddiqui et al., 2015). For example, in Parkinson's Disease the replacement of dopaminergic cells in the substantia nigra would restore stimulation to the basal ganglia, theoretically resulting in a decline of the patient's dyskinesia and related movement abnormalities; however, this only holds true provided the integrity of the basal ganglia nuclei are intact (Zhang et al., 2014).
Opposing the category of localized neurodegenerative disorders, and their pathological mechanisms, are systematic neurodegenerative disorders. These are disorders that involve the interaction and breakdown of multiple systems. With these disorders the regeneration of any one region of the brain would not serve as a lasting treatment for the afflicted individuals (Hardy et al., 1992; Herminghaus et al., 2003; Hardy, 2006; Reif et al., 2006; Howes and Kapur, 2009). Systematic neurodegeneration presents a key unifying factor among all the affected cells, which allow for the possibility of these affected cells to be targeted. For instance, in schizophrenia various localized regions of the frontal and the prefrontal cortex are known to be affected and undergo degeneration (Gupta and Kulhara, 2010). Despite the known mechanism of the disease the cause of the disorder, while still under debate, is hypothesized to result from a systematic overactivation of dopamine receptors in the mesolimbic and mesocortical pathways (Howes and Kapur, 2009). This implies that the patient would not be treated via regeneration of the affected region since dopamine overstimulation would remain. Similarly, in Alzheimer's disease the regeneration of the atrophied brain areas would not serve as a viable form of treatment, since atrophy does not cause the disease, but results from it (Uchida, 2010). This indicates that Alzheimer's disease results from a systematic problem within the central nervous system and regeneration of cerebral tissue would not prevent amyloid plaques from forming (Hardy, 2006).
Being able to differentiate between these different types of neurodegenerative disorders allows for simple, explicit, objectives for medical and research professionals in developing treatments for these disorders. Such a paradigm shift is required for the right approach to be taken by medical researchers seeking to find more appropriate treatments for neurodegenerative diseases. In localized neurodegeneration, the regenerative approach can be taken by replacing the damaged region. In systematic degeneration the agent in which causes the degeneration, for instance overtransmission of specific neurotransmitters in the case of schizophrenia, should be addressed and its effects should either be deterred or counteracted using symptom targeted treatments.
Author Contributions
All authors listed, have made substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.
Conflict of Interest Statement
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
Blesa, J., Pifl, C., Sánchez-González, M. A., Juri, C., García-Cabezas, M. A., Adánez, R., et al. (2012). The nigrostriatal system in the presymptomatic and symptomatic stages in the MPTP monkey model: a PET, histological and biochemical study. Neurobiol. Dis. 48, 79–91. doi: 10.1016/j.nbd.2012.05.018
Burvill, E. (2009). The current understanding of motor neuron disease. Curr. Anaesth. Crit. Care 20, 236–239. doi: 10.1016/j.cacc.2009.07.009
Chaudhuri, K. R., Healy, D. G., and Schapira, A. H. (2006). Non-motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease: diagnosis and management. Lancet Neurol. 5, 235–245. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70373-8
Cheng, H., Cao, Y., and Olson, L. (1996). Spinal cord repair in adult paraplegic rats: partial restoration of hind limb function. Science 273, 510–513. doi: 10.1126/science.273.5274.510
Eberhardt, O., and Topka, H. (2016). The preclinical stage of movement disorders. Basal Ganglia 6, 35–44. doi: 10.1016/j.baga.2015.11.002
Elliott Donaghue, I., Tam, R., Sefton, M. V., and Shoichet, M. S. (2014). Cell and biomolecule delivery for tissue repair and regeneration in the central nervous system. J. Control. Release 190, 219–227. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2014.05.040
Finkbeiner, S. (2011). Huntington' s disease. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 3, 1–24. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a007476
Gupta, S., and Kulhara, P. (2010). What is schizophrenia: a neurodevelopmental or neurodegenerative disorder or a combination of both? A critical analysis. Indian J. Psychiatry 52, 21–27. doi: 10.4103/0019-5545.58891
Hamilton, G., and Gillingwater, T. H. (2013). Spinal muscular atrophy: going beyond the motor neuron. Trends Mol. Med. 19, 40–50. doi: 10.1016/j.molmed.2012.11.002
Hardiman, O., Doherty, C. P., Elamin, M., and Bede, P. (2016). Neurodegenerative Disorders. Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-23309-3
Hardy, J. (2006). Alzheimer's disease: the amyloid cascade hypothesis: an update and reappraisal. J. Alzheimers. Dis. 9, 151–153. doi: 10.3233/JAD-2006-9S317
Hardy, J. A., Higgins, G. A., Hardy, J. A., and Higgins, G. A. (1992). Alzheimer' s disease: the amyloid cascade hypothesis published by: American association for the advancement of science Alzheimer' s disease: the amyloid cascade hypothesis. Science 256, 184–185. doi: 10.1126/science.1566067
Herminghaus, S., Frolich, L., Gorriz, C., Pilatusb, U., Dierks, T., Wittsack, H. J., et al. (2003). Brain metabolism in Alzheimer disease and vascular dementia assessed by in vivo proton magnetic resonance spectrosco. Psychiatry Res. 123, 165–170. doi: 10.1016/S0925-4927(03)00071-4
Howes, O. D., and Kapur, S. (2009). The dopamine hypothesis of schizophrenia: version III—the final common pathway. Schizophr. Bull. 35, 549–562. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbp006
Kim, M., Park, S. R., and Choi, B. H. (2014). Biomaterial scaffolds used for the regeneration of spinal cord injury (SCI). Histol. Histopathol. 29, 1395–1408. doi: 10.14670/HH-29.1395
Kirkeby, A., Nolbrant, S., Tiklova, K., Heuer, A., Kee, N., Cardoso, T., et al. (2017). Predictive markers guide differentiation to improve graft outcome in clinical translation of hESC-based therapy for Parkinson's disease. Cell Stem Cell 20, 135–148. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2016.09.004
Lee, H., Melrose, H. L., Yue, M., Pare, J. F., Farrer, M. J., and Smith, Y. (2010). Lrrk2 localization in the primate basal ganglia and thalamus: a light and electron microscopic analysis in monkeys. Exp. Neurol. 224, 438–447. doi: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2010.05.004
Obeso, J. A., Rodriguez-Oroz, M. C., Lanciego, J. L., and Rodriguez Diaz, M. (2010). How does Parkinson's disease begin? The role of compensatory mechanisms. Neuron 31, 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2003.12.006
Przedborski, S., Vila, M., and Jackson-lewis, V. (2003). Neurodegeneration: what is it and where are we? J. Clin. Invest. 111, 3–10. doi: 10.1172/JCI200317522
Reetz, K., Tadic, V., Kasten, M., Brüggemann, N., Schmidt, A., Hagenah, J., et al. (2010). Structural imaging in the presymptomatic stage of genetically determined parkinsonism. Neurobiol. Dis. 39, 402–408. doi: 10.1016/j.nbd.2010.05.006
Reif, A., Fritzen, S., Finger, M., Strobel, A., Lauer, M., Schmitt, A., et al. (2006). Neural stem cell proliferation is decreased in schizophrenia, but not in depression. Mol. Psychiatry 11, 514–522. doi: 10.1038/sj.mp.4001791
Res, M., Sca, S., and Cag, T. (2015). An understanding of spinocerebellar ataxia. Indian J. Med. Res. 141, 148–150. doi: 10.4103/0971-5916.155537
Rohrer, J. D., Nicholas, J. M., Cash, D. M., van Swieten, J., Dopper, E., Jiskoot, L., et al. (2015). Presymptomatic cognitive and neuroanatomical changes in genetic frontotemporal dementia in the Genetic Frontotemporal dementia Initiative (GENFI) study: a cross-sectional analysis. Lancet Neurol. 14, 253–262. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70324-2
Seidel, K., Den Dunnen, W. F. A., Schultz, C., Paulson, H., Frank, S., De Vos, R. A., et al. (2010). Axonal inclusions in spinocerebellar ataxia type 3. Acta Neuropathol. 120, 449–460. doi: 10.1007/s00401-010-0717-7
Siddiqui, A. M., Khazaei, M., and Fehlings, M. G. (2015). Translating mechanisms of neuroprotection, regeneration, and repair to treatment of spinal cord injury. Prog. Brain Res. 218, 15–54. doi: 10.1016/bs.pbr.2014.12.007
Stein, T. D., Montenigro, P. H., Alvarez, V. E., Xia, W., Crary, J. F., Tripodis, Y., et al. (2015). Beta-amyloid deposition in chronic traumatic encephalopathy. Acta Neuropathol. 130, 21–34. doi: 10.1007/s00401-015-1435-y
Stelzer, J., Lohmann, G., Mueller, K., Buschmann, T., and Turner, R. (2014). Deficient approaches to human neuroimaging. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8:462. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00462
Uchida, Y. (2010). Molecular mechanisms of regeneration in Alzheimer's disease brain. Geriatr. Gerontol. Int. 10(Suppl. 1), S158–S168. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0594.2010.00607.x
van Gaalen, J., Giunti, P., and Van De Warrenburg, B. P. (2011). Movement disorders in spinocerebellar ataxias. Mov. Disord. 26, 792–800. doi: 10.1002/mds.23584
Weintraub, D. (2011). Neurodegeneration across stages of cognitive decline in Parkinson disease. Arch. Neurol. 68:1562. doi: 10.1001/archneurol.2011.725
Wood-Kaczmar, A., Gandhi, S., and Wood, N. W. (2006). Understanding the molecular causes of Parkinson's disease. Trends Mol. Med. 12, 521–528. doi: 10.1016/j.molmed.2006.09.007
Keywords: localized neurodegeneration, neurodegenerative diseases, systematic neurodegeneration, Parkinson's disease (PD), Huntington's disease, schizophrenia, motor neuron disease, spinocerebellar degenerations
Citation: Bayati A and Berman T (2017) Localized vs. Systematic Neurodegeneration: A Paradigm Shift in Understanding Neurodegenerative Diseases. Front. Syst. Neurosci. 11:62. doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2017.00062
Received: 21 July 2017; Accepted: 07 August 2017;
Published: 22 August 2017.
Edited by:
Mikhail Lebedev, Duke University, United StatesReviewed by:
Jose L. Lanciego, Universidad de Navarra, SpainMarco Aurelio M. Freire, University of the State of Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil
Copyright © 2017 Bayati and Berman. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Armin Bayati, arminbay@uvic.ca