Search

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is characterized by numerous sexual dimorphisms that impact the development, progression, and probably the strategies to prevent and treat the most common form of dementia. In this review, we consider this topic from a female perspective with a specific focus on how women's vulnerability to the disease is affected by the individual and interactive effects of estrogens and apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype. Importantly, APOE appears to modulate systemic and neural outcomes of both menopause and estrogen-based hormone therapy. In the brain, dementia risk is greater in APOE4 carriers, and the impacts of hormone therapy on cognitive decline and dementia risk vary according to both outcome measure and APOE genotype. Beyond the CNS, estrogen and APOE genotype affect vulnerability to menopause-associated bone loss, dyslipidemia and cardiovascular disease risk. An emerging concept that may link these relationships is the possibility that the effects of APOE in women interact with estrogen status by mechanisms that may include modulation of estrogen responsiveness. This review highlights the need to consider the key AD risk factors of advancing age in a sex-specific manner to optimize development of therapeutic approaches for AD, a view aligned with the principle of personalized medicine.

Over the last several decades, a number of mouse models have been generated for mechanistic and preclinical therapeutic research on Alzheimer's disease (AD)-like behavioral impairments and pathology. Acceptance or rejection of these models by the scientific community is playing a prominent role in how research findings are viewed and whether grants get funded and manuscripts published. The question of whether models are useful has become an exceptionally contentious issue. Much time and effort have gone into investigators debating comments such as “there are no mouse models of AD,” “…nice work but needs to be tested in another mouse model,” or “only data from humans is valid.” This leads to extensive written justifications for the choice of a model in grant applications, to the point of almost apologizing for the use of models. These debates also lead to initiatives to create new, better models of AD without consideration of what “better” may mean in this context. On the “other side,” an argument supporting the use of mouse models is one cannot dissect a biological mechanism in postmortem human tissue. In this chapter, we examine issues that we believe must be addressed if in vivo AD research is to progress. We opine that it is not the models that are the issue, but rather a lack of understanding the aspects of AD-like pathology the models were designed to mimic. The goal here is to improve the utilization of models to address critical issues, not to offer a critique of existing models or make endorsements.

The focus on amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles has yielded no Alzheimer’s disease (AD) modifying treatments in the past several decades, despite successful studies in preclinical mouse models. This inconsistency has caused a renewed focus on improving the fidelity and reliability of AD mouse models, with disparate views on how this improvement can be accomplished. However, the interactive effects of the universal biological variables of AD, which include age, APOE genotype, and sex, are often overlooked. Age is the greatest risk factor for AD, while the e4 allele of the human APOE gene, encoding apolipoprotein E, is the greatest genetic risk factor. Sex is the final universal biological variable of AD, as females develop AD at almost twice the rate of males and, importantly, female sex exacerbates the effects of APOE4 on AD risk and rate of cognitive decline. Therefore, this review evaluates the importance of context for understanding the role of APOE in preclinical mouse models. Specifically, we detail how human AD pathology is mirrored in current transgenic mouse models (“What”) and describe the critical need for introducing human APOE into these mouse models (“Who”). We next outline different methods for introducing human APOE into mice (“How”) and highlight efforts to develop temporally defined and location-specific human apoE expression models (“When” and “Where”). We conclude with the importance of choosing the human APOE mouse model relevant to the question being addressed, using the selection of transgenic models for testing apoE-targeted therapeutics as an example (“Why”).

Background: Since APOE alleles represent the most impactful genetic risk factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD), their differential mechanism(s) of action are under intense scrutiny. APOE4 is robustly associated with increased AD risk compared to the neutral APOE3 and protective APOE2. APOE alleles have also been associated with differential inflammation and gastrointestinal recovery after insult in human and murine studies, leading us to hypothesize that APOE alleles impact the gut microbiome. Methods: To assess this hypothesis, we compared 16S ribosomal RNA gene amplicon-based microbiome profiles in a cohort of mice that were homozygous for APOE2, APOE3, or APOE4, and included both males and females as well as carriers and non-carriers of five familial AD (5xFAD) mutations. Fecal samples were analyzed from mice at 4 and 6 months of age. APOE genotype, as well as sex and 5xFAD status, was then tested for influence on alpha diversity (Shannon H index) and beta diversity (principal coordinate analyses and PERMANOVA). A Random Forest analysis was used to identify features that predicted APOE, sex and 5xFAD status. Results: The richness and evenness (alpha diversity) of the fecal microbiome was not robustly associated with APOE genotype, 5xFAD status or sex. In contrast, microbial community composition (beta-diversity) was consistently and strongly associated with APOE genotype. The association between beta-diversity and sex or 5xFAD status was less consistent and more modest. Comparison of the differences underlying APOE effects showed that the relative abundance of multiple bacterial taxa was significantly different as a function of APOE genotype. Conclusions: The structure of the gut microbiome was strongly and significantly associated with APOE alleles in this murine model. Further evaluation of these findings in humans, as well as studies evaluating the impact of the APOE-associated microbiota on AD-relevant phenotypes in murine models, will be necessary to determine if alterations in the gut microbiome represent a novel mechanism whereby APOE genotype impacts AD.

Identified in 1993, APOE4 is the greatest genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD), increasing risk up to 15-fold compared to the common variant APOE3. Since the mid 1990's, transgenic (Tg) mice have been developed to model AD pathology and progression, primarily via expression of the familial AD (FAD) mutations in the presence of mouse-APOE (m-APOE). APOE4, associated with enhanced amyloid-β (Aβ) accumulation, has rarely been the focus in designing FAD-Tg mouse models. Initially, FAD-Tg mice were crossed with human (h)-APOE driven by heterologous promoters to identify an APOE genotype-specific AD phenotype. These models were later supplemented with FAD-Tg mice crossed with APOE-knockouts (APOE-/- or APOE-KO) and h-APOE-targeted replacement (h-APOE-TR) mice, originally generated to study the role of APOE genotype in peripheral lipid metabolism and atherosclerotic lesion development. Herein, we compare the m- and h-APOE multi-gene clusters, and then critically review the relevant history and approaches to developing a Tg mouse model to characterize APOE-dependent AD pathology, in combination with genetic (sex, age) and modifiable (e.g., inflammation, obesity) risk factors. Finally, we present recent data from the EFAD mice, which express 5xFAD mutations with the expression of the human apoE isoforms (E2FAD, E3FAD and E4FAD). This includes a study of 6- and 18-month-old male and female E3FAD and E4FAD, a comparison that enables examination of the interaction among the main AD risk factors: age, APOE genotype and sex. While no single transgenic mouse can capture the effects of all modifiable and genetic risk factors, going forward, a conscious effort needs to be made to include the factors that most significantly modulate AD pathology.