Pagineromane.pmd
Drosophila and Antioxidant Therapy
F. Missirlis1, J.P. Phillips2, H. Jäckle3 and T.A. Rouault1
1Cell biology and Metabolism Branch, National Institute of Child Health and
Human Development, Bethesda, Maryland, U.S.A. 2Molecular Biology and
Genetics, University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada. 3Max-Planck-Institut für
biophysikalische Chemie, Göttingen, Germany
Antioxidant intervention is a potential therapeutic approach to miti-
gate the oxidative stress component of various human diseases. Genetic
studies in the model organism
Drosophila melanogaster indicate that
the major antioxidant defense systems protect from oxidative stress in
a compartment-specific manner. They also suggest that compensation
for the loss of an antioxidant enzyme by experimentally inducing ex-
pression of a second, distinct defense enzyme is possible in a few cases.
However, in other examples, overexpression of an antioxidant enzyme
may also exacerbate an oxidant-sensitive phenotype. Thus, a successful
antioxidant therapy should target the affected tissues, act in the appro-
priate sub-cellular compartments and specifically rectify the underlying
Oxidative stress is characterized by the generation of reactive oxy-
gen species (ROS), primarily including the superoxide anion (O × ),
hydrogen peroxide (H O ) and the hydroxyl radical, which damage proteins,
lipids and nucleic acids. A variety of human pathologies are associated
with oxidative stress, including cancer (Mantovani,
et al. 02; Lincoln,
et al. 03), cardiovascular (Levine,
et al. 96; Meagher and Rader 01),
inflammatory (Cuzzocrea,
et al. 01), viral (Peterhans 97) and neuro-
logical (Lodi,
et al. 01; Pitchumoni and Doraiswamy 98; Halliwell
01) diseases. Nevertheless, despite a variety of antioxidants used for
therapeutic purposes, the response of patients has not always been positive2003 by MEDIMOND S.r.l.
148
Free Radicals and Oxidative Stress: Chemistry, Biochemistry and Pathophysiological Implications
(Ebadi,
et al. 96; Brown,
et al. 01). Here we discuss results from
Drosophila, which underscore the importance of considering ROS
compartmentalization and ROS specificity in the design of such treat-
Many studies have assessed the effects of various antioxidants and
of antioxidant enzyme genetic manipulations on flies (for reviews see
Le Bourg 01 and Missirlis 03). The recent development of fly disease
models permits testing of drugs (Chan and Bonini 00).
Drosophila
contains all major antioxidant defense enzymes that are employed by
mammals, with the notable exception of glutathione reductase (Kanzok,
et al. 01). Two different superoxide dismutase (
Sod) genes encode
cytosolic and mitochondrial proteins (Phillips,
et al. 89; Kirby,
et al.
02). A thioredoxin reductase (
TrxR-1) gene encodes two transcripts
that give rise to cytosolic and mitochondrial isoforms (Missirlis,
et al.
02). Thioredoxin peroxidases (TPxs) are likewise localized in both
these compartments (Radyuk,
et al. 01), whereas a glutathione peroxi-
dase homologue with thioredoxin peroxidase activity (GTPx1) is de-
tected in the secretory pathway (Missirlis,
et al. 03b).
The compartmentalization of antioxidant defense systems might have
a redundant role in oxidative stress physiology, or it might reflect the
existence of independent redox environments within the different com-
partments of the same cell. We investigated the question of independent
redox environments by selectively silencing
Sod in the cytoplasmic or
mitochondrial compartments and concurrently assaying the activity of
cytosolic and mitochondrial aconitases, as markers of O ⋅ reactivity
(Missirlis,
et al. 03a). We showed that diminution of Sod2 results in
mitochondrial, but not cytoplasmic aconitase inactivation and conversely
diminution of Sod1 inactivates cytoplasmic, but not mitochondrial aco-
nitase. In addition, overexpression of Sod2 could not ameliorate the
Sod1 mutant phenotype, implying that enhancing the mitochondrial O ⋅2
scavenging potential of cells is not beneficial if excess O ⋅ is present
in the cytosol. Furthermore, overexpression of Sod2 did not protect
from paraquat, a O ⋅ generating drug, because paraquat acted in the
cytosolic compartment (Missirlis,
et al. 03a). In contrast, overexpression
of Sod1 greatly protects from paraquat toxicity (Parkes,
et al. 98).
These results suggest that O ⋅ is confined
in vivo to the subcellular
compartment in which it is formed and antioxidant treatment needs to
be targeted to that compartment.
We have also generated transcript-specific mutants in the
TrxR-1
gene, impairing the thioredoxin-dependent defense system in mitochon-
dria or cytosol, respectively (Missirlis,
et al. 02). Loss of either activity
resulted in lethality, suggesting that both isoenzymes are required for
Ioannina, Greece, June 26-29, 2003
ROS detoxification. Transgene-dependent rescue experiments indicated
that cytosolic TrxR-1 can compensate only for the lack of cytosolic
TrxR-1 activity (as expected), but cannot substitute for the lack of
mitochondrial TrxR-1 (although the two TrxR-1 isoforms have very
similar biochemical properties) and
vice versa. We conclude that sepa-
rate compartmentalized ROS defense systems operate in the cytoplasm
and mitochondria to sustain cell viability and propose that compromise
of either the Sod-dependent or the thioredoxin-dependent antioxidant
defenses cannot be compensated by isoforms that reside in the wrong
ROS specificity is a second determinant for the appropriate selection
of antioxidants used in different pathological conditions. We have pre-
viously assessed the impact of Sod1 and Cat overexpression in the
mutant for cytosolic TrxR-1 (Missirlis,
et al. 01). The results were
surprisingly contrasting, as Cat offered a substantial rescue of viability
and lifespan, whereas Sod1 impacted further the
TrxR-1 phenotype
(Missirlis,
et al. 01). We also investigated whether overexpression of
GTPx1 is beneficial in flies lacking Sod1 or Cat. Biochemical charac-
terization of GTPx1 shows that this enzyme is highly active with H O
as a substrate,
in vitro (Missirlis,
et al. 03b). We generated transgenic
Drosophila that overexpress
GTPx1, either from its endogenous or from
an inducible promoter. Transgenic flies were resistant to paraquat tox-
icity, implying an important role for GTPx1 in antioxidant defense.
However,
GTPx1 overexpression did not enhance the viability of the
Cat mutant (Missirlis,
et al. 03b). A similar function between two
enzymes
in vitro does not necessarily reflect the actual situation
in vivo.
We then generated flies heterozygous for the genomic
GTPx1+ transgene
on their second chromosome and heterozygous for two different
Sod1
null-activity alleles on the third. Only 5-8% of
Sod1 homozygous flies
successfully eclose from their pupal case as adults and
GTPx1+ segre-
gates at the expected Mendelian ratio in wild type flies. We performed
sibling analysis and counted how many of the viable
Sod1 homozygous
mutants contained zero, one or two copies of the
GTPx1+ transgene.
Table 1 shows that a
GTPx1+-heterozygote,
Sod1 mutant fly is much
less likely to eclose than a sibling
Sod1 mutant with wild type second
chromosomes (d50%; expected ratio is 1:2:1). Two extra copies of
GTPx1 are almost incompatible with viable
Sod1 mutants. This interac-
tion is specific to
Sod1;
Cat mutants are not affected by the presence or
absence of the transgene (see also Missirlis,
et al. 03b). The finding
that
GTPx1 overexpression negatively impacts
Sod1 mutants is even
more surprising when one considers that the same genetic manipulation
confers resistance to the O ⋅ generating herbicide, paraquat. Although
paraquat administration is often considered a pharmacological parallel
to the genetic ablation of
Sod1 (Missirlis,
et al. 03a), its mechanism of
action also implicates O ⋅ independent pathways (Berisha,
et al. 94).
150
Free Radicals and Oxidative Stress: Chemistry, Biochemistry and Pathophysiological Implications
Table 1. Genetic interaction between GTPx1
and Sod1
: Overexpression of GTPx1
enhances the Sod1
mutant phenotype, contrary to the prediction that increasing an
antioxidant enzyme would be beneficial to an oxidatively-stressed individual.
GTPx1+ heterozygote
GTPx1+ homozygote
Further experiments are required to explain these observations, however
they underscore the importance of understanding the substrate specificity,
subcellular location and cofactor requirements for each of the proteins
in question.
By studying the antioxidant defense systems of
Drosophila, we have
shown that oxidative stress in one subcellular compartment is fairly
insensitive to the redox status of adjacent compartments. We have also
observed that, although antioxidant defense systems cooperate to pro-
tect from ROS, we cannot assume that enhancing one system will al-
ways be protective, especially if different antioxidant systems are fail-
ing. Thus, before designing an antioxidant therapy, the source (tissue,
intracellular location) of oxidative stress and the type of oxidative insult
should be clarified. The need for development of antioxidant drugs that
target different aspects of the machinery in different compartments is
crucial. Complementing current efforts of generating drugs that have
multi-enzyme properties or therapies that use antioxidant cocktails, we
should also invest on issues of specificity.
ReferencesBERISHA, H. I., PAKBAZ, H.,
et al., Nitric oxide as a mediator of oxidant
lung injury due to paraquat,
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91, 7445-9, 1994
BROWN, B. G., ZHAO, X. Q.,
et al., Simvastatin and niacin, antioxidant
vitamins, or the combination for the prevention of coronary disease,
New
Engl J Med 345, 1583-92, 2001
CHAN, H. Y. and BONINI, N. M.,
Drosophila models of human neurodegenerative
disease,
Cell Death Dif 7, 1075-80, 2000
CUZZOCREA, S., RILEY, D. P.,
et al., Antioxidant therapy: a new pharmaco-
logical approach in shock, inflammation, and ischemia/reperfusion injury.
Pharmacol Rev 53, 135-59, 2001
EBADI, M., SRINIVASAN, S. K. and BAXI, M. D., Oxidative stress and
antioxidant therapy in Parkinsons disease,
Progress in Neurobiol 48, 1-19,
HALLIWELL, B., Role of free radicals in the neurodegenerative diseases: therapeutic
implications for antioxidant treatment,
Drugs & Aging 18, 685-716, 2001
Ioannina, Greece, June 26-29, 2003
KANZOK, S. M., FECHNER, K.,
et al., Substitution of the thioredoxin system
for glutathione reductase in
Drosophila melanogaster,
Science 291, 643-6,
KIRBY, K., HU, J.,
et al., RNA interference-mediated silencing of Sod2 in
Drosophila leads to early adult-onset mortality and elevated endogenous
oxidative stress,
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99, 16162-7, 2002
LE BOURG, E., Oxidative stress, aging and longevity in
Drosophila melanogaster,
FEBS Let 498, 183-6, 2001
LEVINE, G. N., FREI, B.,
et al., Ascorbic acid reverses endothelial vasomotor
dysfunction in patients with coronary artery disease,
Circulation 93, 1107-
LINCOLN, D. T., ALI EMADI, E. M.,
et al., The thioredoxin-thioredoxin
reductase system: over-expression in human cancer
, Anticancer Res 23,
LODI, R., HART, P. E.,
et al., Antioxidant treatment improves in vivo cardiac
and skeletal muscle bioenergetics in patients with Friedreichs ataxia,
An-
nals Neurol 49, 590-6, 2001
MANTOVANI, G., MACCIO, A.,
et.al., Reactive oxygen species, antioxidant
mechanisms and serum cytokine levels in cancer patients: impact of an
antioxidant treatment,
J Cell Mol Med 6, 570-82, 2002
MEAGHER, E. and RADER, D. J., Antioxidant therapy and atherosclerosis:
animal and human studies,
Trends Card Med 11, 162-5, 2001
MISSIRLIS, F., Understanding the aging fly through physiological genetics,
Advances in Cell Aging and Gerontology, Vol. 14, Cambridge, Elsevier
MISSIRLIS, F., HU, J.,
et al., Compartment-specific protection of iron-sulfur
proteins by superoxide dismutase,
J Biol Chem 278,
in press, 2003a
MISSIRLIS, F., PHILLIPS, J. P. and JACKLE, H., Cooperative action of anti-
oxidant defense systems in
Drosophila,
Curr Biol 11, 1272-7, 2001
MISSIRLIS, F., RAHLFS, S.,
et al., A putative glutathione peroxidase of
Dro-
sophila encodes a thioredoxin peroxidase that provides resistance against
oxidative stress but fails to complement a lack of catalase activity,
Biol
Chem 384, 463-72, 2003b
MISSIRLIS, F., ULSCHMID, J. K.,
et al., Mitochondrial and cytoplasmic
thioredoxin reductase variants encoded by a single
Drosophila gene are
both essential for viability,
J Biol Chem 277, 11521-6, 2002
PARKES, T. L., ELIA, A. J.,
et al., Extension of
Drosophila lifespan by
overexpression of human SOD1 in motorneurons,
Nat Genetics 19, 171-4,
PETERHANS, E., Oxidants and antioxidants in viral diseases: disease mecha-
nisms and metabolic regulation,
J Nutr 127, 962S-5S, 1997
PHILLIPS, J. P., CAMPBELL, S. D.,
et al., Null mutation of copper/zinc
superoxide dismutase in
Drosophila confers hypersensitivity to paraquat
and reduced longevity,
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 86, 2761-5, 1989
PITCHUMONI, S. S. and DORAISWAMY, P. M., Current status of antioxidant
therapy for Alzheimers Disease,
J Amer Ger Soc 46, 1566-72, 1998
RADYUK, S. N., KLICHKO, V. I.,
et al., The peroxiredoxin gene family in
Drosophila melanogaster,
Free Rad Biol Med 31, 1090-100
Source: http://fanis.fisio.cinvestav.mx/resources/Missirlis03d.pdf
Second, updated edition Maija Saxelin, Ph.D. Published byValio Ltd, R&DP.O. Box 30, FIN-00039Helsinki, FinlandTel. +358 10 381 121Fax +358 10 381 3019http://www.valio.com Lay-out by Imageneering Printed in Finland by Hämeen Kirjapaino Oy2002 © Valio Ltd 2002 Table of contents
Clinical MCQs Assessment – Sample Questions The fol owing 20 clinical MCQs are representative of the style and format of MCQs that candidates wil receive as part of the AACP Stage 2 Clinical MCQ Assessment. The answers and explanatory notes are provided at the end of this document. SQ1. Which ONE of the following patients has the HIGHEST calculated creatinine clearance?