Mohammed Salman Shazeeb1, Nellwyn Hagan2, Xiaoyou Ying1, and Andrea Edling2
1DSAR Bioimaging, Sanofi, Framingham, MA, United States, 2Neuroimmunology, Sanofi, Framingham, MA, United States
Synopsis
Blood
brain barrier (BBB) dysregulation is one of the earliest signs of multiple sclerosis
(MS) and the mechanism underlying BBB breakdown in not completely understood. The
non-obese diabetic experimental allergic encephalomyelitis (NOD-EAE) mouse
model of secondary progressive MS offers a preclinical tool to understand BBB
breakdown and explore potential therapeutics. MRI is capable of quantifying BBB
permeability using gadolinium contrast agent. In this study we quantified the
spatial and temporal characterization of BBB permeability in NOD-EAE mice with
progressing disease using MRI. These quantifying parameters can potentially be
used to test the effect of therapeutic agents on BBB breakdown.Introduction
Multiple
sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory demyelinating disease of the central nervous
system that leads to pathologic changes in the brain. Blood brain barrier (BBB)
dysregulation and transendothelial migration of activated leukocytes are among
the earliest cerebrovascular abnormalities seen in MS and parallel the release
of inflammatory cytokines [1]. However, the precise mechanisms
underlying BBB breakdown have not been completely elucidated. MRI, a widely used
non-invasive tool for diagnosing and characterizing MS pathology, is capable of
quantifying BBB permeability. Gadolinium (Gd), an intravascular contrast agent,
can be injected into the circulatory system and only extravasates into the
brain parenchyma in regions of BBB compromise. Subsequently, T1-weighted (T1W) MRI
can be used to visualize contrast agent uptake. In this study, we used MRI and
lysine fixable dextran tracers to characterize the spatial and temporal profile
of BBB permeability in the non-obese diabetic experimental allergic encephalomyelitis
(NOD-EAE) mouse model of secondary progressive MS (SPMS). Together, the NOD-EAE
model and MRI offer an invaluable toolbox to not only quantify BBB breakdown in
disease contexts and test the efficacy of potential therapeutic interventions,
but also to validate therapeutic benefit for translational purposes in the
clinic.
Methods
10-week-old female NOD/ShlTJ mice
were immunized with an emulsion of MOG
35-55 peptide (150 µg/mouse)
in complete Freund’s adjuvant containing 0.6 mg Mycobacterium tuberculosis delivered by subcutaneous injection. Bordetella pertussis toxin was administered
via intraperitoneal (IP) injection on Day 0 and Day 2 at 150 ng/animal in 200
µL of PBS. Following EAE induction, the mice were monitored and scored daily
for paralytic symptoms. MRI was performed using a 7T-Bruker scanner and 50-mm
volume coil at 35 (n=4), 50 (n=5), and 80 (n=3) days post-induction. Naïve NOD
mice served as the control group (n=3). At each time-point, T1W images were
acquired pre-injection and from 3 minutes up to 1 hour after IP injection of Gd
(0.5 mmol/kg) using RARE sequence (TR/TE=800/8.5 ms, 10 coronal slices, 0.75 mm
thickness, matrix size=256×256, FOV=25 mm). The mice were then injected with 1
mg dextran tracer (biotin,
10000 mw) via cardiac injection to assess the BBB functionality using histology.
For data analysis, 1-hour
post-Gd injection was chosen to compare contrast uptake in the brain for all
the time-points due to longer retention of contrast especially at the later
disease stages. Regions of interest (ROI) were drawn around the contrast-enhanced
regions within the brain parenchyma (excluding the pituitary gland) in all
slices that exhibited contrast uptake relative to the corresponding pre-injection
slice. The percent change in signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR) of the ROI relative to
pre-contrast and the approximate volume of contrast extravasation (product of
ROI area and slice thickness) was calculated for each animal at the respective time-points.
Results and Discussion
The mean disease scores followed the
appropriate clinical course for the NOD-EAE model of SPMS (Fig. 1). The NOD-EAE
mice displayed varying degrees of Gd uptake into the brain parenchyma at
different time-points after disease induction indicating a compromise of the
BBB (Fig. 2). Previous works have characterized brain lesions in the NOD-EAE
model at single time-points in late disease [2,3]. However, BBB permeability
across disease progression has yet to be investigated. We quantified the extent
of Gd uptake into the brain parenchyma extending from the corpus callosum to
the cerebellum. One-way ANOVA demonstrated a significant difference in the volume
of extravasation (p<0.001) and percent change in SNR at 1-hour post-Gd injection
(p<0.05) between the mice at different days post-induction (Fig. 3). Naïve
mice showed minimal Gd uptake primarily around the ventricles. Larger volumes
of Gd extravasation were observed with disease progression (Fig. 3A), suggesting
either a significant increase in area of BBB breakdown or an enhanced ability
for Gd to diffuse from sites of BBB compromise through the brain parenchyma. SNR
changes at the 1-hour time-point showed significant increase in signal
intensities at days 50 and 80 compared to naïve (Fig. 3B). This clearly demonstrates
that a greater concentration of Gd extravasated into the brain parenchyma,
suggesting an increase in either paracellular or transcellular transport. Following
MRI, the dextran tracer was easily visualized using immunohistochemistry (Fig.
4). The NOD-EAE mice clearly exhibited tracer extravasation into the brain
parenchyma indicating a compromised BBB.
Conclusion
The
NOD-EAE mouse model showed an increase in extravasation volume of the contrast
agent across the BBB with progressing disease after EAE induction which
correlates with the clinical score pattern. SNR change in late disease stage
clearly indicates a difference in the transport mechanism across the BBB. The
quantifications presented herein can be used to potentially test the effect of
therapeutic agents on BBB breakdown.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
[1]
Minagar and Alexander (2003). Multiple Sclerosis 9: 540-549; [2] Levy et al.
(2010). Experimental Neurology 226:
148-158. [3] Barazany et al. (2014). Experimental Neurology 255: 63-70.