Back

Alternating hemiplegia of childhood associated mutations in Atp1a3 reveal diverse neurological alterations in mice.

Terrey, M.; Krivoshein, G.; Adamson, S. I.; Arystarkhova, E.; Anderson, L.; Szwec, J.; McKee, S.; Jones, H.; Perkins, S.; Selvam, V.; Piec, P.-A.; Chhaya, D.; Dehn, A.; Zuberi, A.; Murray, S. A.; Morsci, N. S.; Sweadner, K. J.; Knowles, D. A.; Tolner, E. A.; van den Maagdenberg, A. M. J. M.; Lutz, C. M.

2024-12-24 neuroscience
10.1101/2024.12.24.630241 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Pathogenic variants in the neuronal Na+/K+ ATPase transmembrane ion transporter (ATP1A3) cause a spectrum of neurological disorders including alternating hemiplegia of childhood (AHC). The most common de novo pathogenic variants in AHC are p.D801N ([~]40% of patients) and p.E815K ([~]25% of patients), which lead to early mortality by spontaneous death in mice. Nevertheless, knowledge of the development of clinically relevant neurological phenotypes without the obstacle of premature death, is critical for the identification of pathophysiological mechanisms and ultimately, for the testing of therapeutic strategies in disease models. Here, we used hybrid vigor attempting to mitigate the fragility of AHC mice and then, performed behavioral, electrophysiological, biochemical, and molecular testing to comparatively analyze mice that carry either of two most common AHC patient observed variants in the Atp1a3 gene. Collectively, our data reveal the presence but also the differential impact of the p.D801N and p.E815K variants on disease relevant alterations such as spontaneous and stress-induced paroxysmal episodes, motor function, behavioral and neurophysiological activity, and neuroinflammation. Our alternate AHC mouse models with their phenotypic deficits open novel avenues for the investigation of disease biology and therapeutic testing for ATP1A3 research.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.