|
|
||||||||
From the Department of Neurobiology, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel.
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
It is now well established that the primary causative factor in glaucoma, as in any neurodegenerative disease, initiates a series of biochemical events in the affected tissue. These events may arrest or impede the supply of essential neurotrophic factors. They also may lead to the appearance of compounds and processes that are toxic to the tissue and, by contributing to its progressive degeneration, act as tissue-derived risk factors (Fig. 1) , even if the primary causative factor is no longer present.3 4 5 6 Such events are likely to lead to a self-perpetuating process of degeneration. Some of these events, on the contrary, may signify the onset of a self-repair mechanism (Fig. 1) , which appears, however, to be insufficient to counteract effectively the destructive processes occurring in the nerve.
|
| Self-destructive Processes |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Another potentially lethal risk factor triggered by the degenerating nerve itself is an uncontrollable increase in the levels of certain biochemical compounds, with harmful consequences for the tissue. One such compound is the excitatory amino acid glutamate, which normally acts as a major neurotransmitter but is neurotoxic when its physiological levels are exceeded. Glutamate levels were found to be increased in the vitreous of glaucomatous patients7 and in animal models of glaucoma8 or of crush-injured optic nerves.9 Similarly, the retinas of damaged optic nerves of both human eyes and animal models were found to contain increased concentrations of nitric oxide, a compound whose toxicity is evident from the fact that inhibition of the enzymes that mediate its increase arrests or at least slows down the degeneration.10 The presence of these biochemical compounds in abnormally high amounts may cause the death of neighboring neurons that were not destroyed or damaged by IOP or any other primary insult. As discussed in the next section, it should be noted that even if the level of environmental toxicity is not high enough to cause cell death directly, it may nevertheless lead to death because of enhanced susceptibility of any viable neurons within the damaged nerve to glutamate and other toxic mediators. At this stage, however, as emphasized by Johnson et al. regarding target-derived trophic factor deprivation, the chronology of action of these and other mediators, as well as their relative contribution to degeneration, is not clear.
| Self-repair Mechanisms |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In this connection, it is interesting to note that for glutamate, which exhibits essential physiological activity or lethal neurotoxicity depending on its concentration, there is an intermediate level at which it is not only not detrimental but is even beneficial in triggering an intracellular mechanism of self-protection. We found that in naive neurons exposed to above-normalalthough subtoxiclevels of glutamate, increased resistance develops to further toxicity and not necessarily to glutamate toxicity only.12 That the resistance induced by such glutamate levels is not restricted to glutamate toxicity has a number of implications: A ubiquitous amino acid that is potentially neurotoxic may be safe at a certain intermediate level; a mechanism of self-repair may operate constitutively after insults to the nerve; and by gaining an understanding of a physiologically beneficial mechanism of repair, such as that mediated by glutamate, it may be possible to simulate it by appropriate drug therapy.
Another possible mechanism of intracellular self-repair is the induction of immediate early genes (such as c-jun), which are found to be triggered immediately after optic nerve injury,13 apparently as a result of trophic factor deprivation. The increase is transient and can be sustained by a peripheral nerve graft, known to increase the survival rate and to promote regrowth of injured optic nerve axons. A transient increase in BDNF was also found to occur soon after optic nerve mechanical insult or as an early response of the retina to low levels of N-methyl-D-aspartate.14
In the course of our studies we recently came across another mechanism, traditionally viewed as detrimental, that may be similar to the physiological self-repair mechanisms describedthat is, normally too weak to be effective, yet amenable to exogenous boosting, and potentially lethal to the tissue if it gets out of control. The self-repair mechanism in this case is mediated by autoimmune T cells directed against myelin-associated proteins of the central nervous system (CNS). We suggested that the endogenous T cell immune response to optic nerve damage is beneficial, but limited. Our findings showed, against all expectations, that exogenous administration of T cells directed against the CNS self-antigen, myelin basic protein (MBP), significantly reduces the injury-induced spread of degeneration.15 16 Interestingly, the observed protection of neurons from secondary degeneration was not related to the intrinsic pathogenicity of the anti-MBP T cells. Thus, induction of clinical autoimmune disease was not a prerequisite for the protection against secondary degeneration mediated by the anti-MBP T cells. It is conceivable that the endogenous T cells that accumulate spontaneously at sites of CNS injury arise from an injury-triggered autoimmune response.17 Such a response may be beneficial but too weak to be effective and in need of boosting. It may therefore be worth seeking ways to augment therapeutically a beneficial autoimmune response without triggering a persisting autoimmune disease. Such boosting might be achieved, for example, by using T cells specific to the self-antigenic epitopes normally sequestered in the intact CNS. These autoimmune T cells would not accumulate in or interact with undamaged sites and thus would not induce disease, yet they might be able to assist in the repair of injured CNS tissue, if the covert epitope is exposed by the injury.
T cells can synthesize cytokines and neurotrophic factors.18 19 We have suggested that the accumulated autoimmune T cells may provide a source of neurotrophic factors. If so, these could compensate for the deprivation in supply or local production of trophic factors after injury to the optic nerve. Such an effect would illustrate the advantage of immune neuroprotection mediated by cells, rather than by pharmaceutical or physiological compounds. The immune neuroprotection may represent an extracellular mechanism of self-repair.
| Conclusions |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Acknowledgements |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
Submitted for publication October 12, 1999; accepted November 4, 1999.
Commercial relationships policy: N.
Corresponding author: Michal Schwartz, Department of Neurobiology, The Weizmann Institute of Science, 76100 Rehovot, Israel. bnschwar{at}wicc.weizmann.ac.il
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. Bakalash, A. Kessler, T. Mizrahi, R. Nussenblatt, and M. Schwartz Antigenic Specificity of Immunoprotective Therapeutic Vaccination for Glaucoma Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., August 1, 2003; 44(8): 3374 - 3381. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
U. Schiefer, M. Flad, F. Stumpp, A. Malsam, J. Paetzold, R. Vonthein, P. O. Denk, and P. A. Sample Increased Detection Rate of Glaucomatous Visual Field Damage With Locally Condensed Grids: A Comparison Between Fundus-Oriented Perimetry and Conventional Visual Field Examination Arch Ophthalmol, April 1, 2003; 121(4): 458 - 465. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Boden, P. A. Sample, A. G. Boehm, C. Vasile, R. Akinepalli, and R. N. Weinreb The Structure-Function Relationship in Eyes With Glaucomatous Visual Field Loss That Crosses the Horizontal Meridian Arch Ophthalmol, July 1, 2002; 120(7): 907 - 912. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Schori, J. Kipnis, E. Yoles, E. WoldeMussie, G. Ruiz, L. A. Wheeler, and M. Schwartz Vaccination for protection of retinal ganglion cells against death from glutamate cytotoxicity and ocular hypertension: Implications for glaucoma PNAS, March 1, 2001; (2001) 41609498. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
W. W. Hauswirth and L. Beaufrere Ocular Gene Therapy: Quo Vadis? Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., September 1, 2000; 41(10): 2821 - 2826. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
J. Kipnis, E. Yoles, Z. Porat, A. Cohen, F. Mor, M. Sela, I. R. Cohen, and M. Schwartz T cell immunity to copolymer 1 confers neuroprotection on the damaged optic nerve: Possible therapy for optic neuropathies PNAS, June 20, 2000; 97(13): 7446 - 7451. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Schori, J. Kipnis, E. Yoles, E. WoldeMussie, G. Ruiz, L. A. Wheeler, and M. Schwartz Vaccination for protection of retinal ganglion cells against death from glutamate cytotoxicity and ocular hypertension: Implications for glaucoma PNAS, March 13, 2001; 98(6): 3398 - 3403. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |