Animal models of alzheimer's disease and drug development
Editors-in-ChiefKelvin Lam – Simplex Pharma Advisors, Inc., Arlington, MA, USA
Henk Timmerman – Vrije Universiteit, The Netherlands
Animal models of Alzheimer's disease
and drug development
Bart LaurijssensFabienne , Anisur
1BEL Pharm Consulting, Moulin d'Ozil, 07140 Chambonas, France
2CNRS UMR 7179, MNHN, 1 Av du Petit Chaˆteau, 91800 Brunoy, France
Animal disease models are considered important in the
development of drugs for Alzheimer's disease. This
Oscar Della Pasqua – Leiden/Amsterdam Center for Drug
brief review will discuss possible reasons why their
Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.
success in identifying efficacious treatments has been
limited, and will provide some thoughts on the role of
loss in brain regions involved in learning and memory pro-
animal experimentation in drug development. Specifi-
cally, none of the current models of Alzheimer's dis-
The interest in finding a cure or prevention for AD is
ease have either construct or predictive validity, and no
understandably great. Proper animal models of human AD
model probably ever will. Clearly, specific animal
are considered desirable if not essential in this process and
much research effort has been put into that effect. As no
experiments contribute to our understanding of the
perfect model exists, the question becomes whether ‘the best
disease and generate hypotheses. Ultimately, however,
models available' are good enough. What exactly can be
the hypothesis can only be tested in human patients
inferred from the results and what not? Or, differently put,
and only with the proper tools. These tools are a
how do they contribute to our understanding and decision-
pharmacologically active intervention (in humans)
The objective, therefore, of this brief review is to discuss the
and a clinical trial suited to evaluate the mechanism
potential role of the current animal disease models for AD in
of action. Integration of knowledge in quantitative
drug development. Specifically, the aim is to discuss why the
(sub) models is considered important if not essential
animal models of AD should have such a limited success in
predicting successful treatments in the clinic (or rather,
in this process.
clinical trials), and to provide some thoughts on how to
use animal experiments in drug development.
IntroductionAlzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disease
Animal models of Alzheimer's disease
affecting an estimated 5.4 million people globally, mainly
The aetiology of AD is unknown, but there is still a general
the elderly. There is currently no cure for AD, but some
consensus in favour of the ‘amyloid hypothesis' even if
symptomatic treatments are available. The disease is charac-
it has been questioned ]. A wide range of animal models
terized by its hallmark histopathological findings of extra-
have been developed to mimic the human context of the
disease for the purpose of developing therapeutics or disease
neurofibrillary tangles of tau and by neuronal and synaptic
modifying agents. In fact, in most of the animal models the
*Corresponding author.: B. Laurijssens (
first goal is to simulate the neuropathological findings of AD
1740-6749/$ ß 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Drug Discovery Today: Technologies Translational pharmacology
Vol. 10, No. 3 2013
followed by the correlation of cognitive function without
animal models reviewed in this section either show major
knowing whether the neuropathological agents have similar
AD-related neuropathology or are in close phylogenetic
biological consequences in humans and in animal models. It
proximity to humans. In recent years dogs have been con-
is beyond the scope of this review to discuss all the different
sidered as a useful animal model for AD due to the close
models. Here we will briefly summarize some potential ani-
proximity of canine and human brain aging. Dogs develop
mal models and their translation towards the clinical settings
extensive Ab and diffuse plaque deposition and the extent of
(). Animal models used in AD can be broadly divided
Ab deposition correlates with the decline of some measures of
into three categories: Natural models, Genetic models and
cognitive function in the absence of neurofibrillary tangles
(NFTs). Moreover, the amino acid sequence of Ab is fully
conserved between dogs and humans []. Because of sponta-
neous age-related Ab deposition and relative ease of cognitive
Several animals including polar bears, dogs, cats, goats and
function assessment, aged dogs were used to evaluate inter-
sheep and some non-human primates spontaneously develop
ventions with the aim of reduction of Ab load and subsequent
some AD-related neuropathological features []. The few
cognitive improvement (
Table 1. Some animal models of AD and clinical trials
Treatment active in model
Active immunization with Ab
Trial stopped due to CNS side effects ]
Acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, Donepezil []
Nicotinic receptor agonist ABT-418 ]
Discontinued for side effects
Glutamate receptor blocker Memantine ]
Mouse lemur, Octodon,
No pharmacological trial has been reported yet.
Polar bear, Cat, Sheep,
Active immunization with aggregated Ab
Trial stopped due to CNS side effects ]
Passive immunization with IgG [
Vasogenic oedema and microhaemorrhage
in some patients, no significant cognitive
benefit, Phase-III trials underway ]
b-Secretase inhibitor []
Reduce plasma Ab significantly, Under
phase-III clinical trial [
g-Secretase inhibitors ]
Trial halted because the drug failed to
stop disease progression, associated
with worsening cognitive function
and increased risk of skin cancer []
g-Secretase modulators ]
No benefit, trial discontinued [
Acetylcholinesterase inhibitor [
Cognitive decline cannot be
prevented, cognitive benefits
with treatment associated
adverse effects reported [
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs ]
Negative results [
No cognitive benefit [
Ttpa / APPsw mice
Together with Rifampin. Some positive
effect on cognitive performance [
Interventional models
Intrahippocampal amyloid infusion model
Intracerebroventricular Ab infusion model
Marginal benefits, larger trial ongoing ]
a PDAPP mice: Mutation of human APP with valine at residue 717 substituted by phenylalanine under the control of human platelet derived growth factor promoter. APP mice:
Mutation of three isoforms [695, 751 and 770] of human APP under the control of various promoters. Tg2576 mice: Swedish double mutation [K670N/M671L] on the 695 human
APP under the control of hamster prion protein promoter. PSAPP mice: Swedish double mutation [K670N/M671L] plus Presenilin 1 exon 9 deleted. Tg-tau mice: Human
normal shortest 3R tau isoform inserted into the mouse genome under the promoter. Ttpa / APPsw mice: Tg2576 mice crossed with a-tocopherol transfer protein knockout
Vol. 10, No. 3 2013
Drug Discovery Today: Technologies Translational pharmacology
Among the non-human primate models, mouse lemurs
Another interesting finding is the presence of extensive astro-
seem to be a potential animal model that exhibit amyloid
gliosis in the aged octodon brain, which is a characteristic
plaque, NFTs and some other AD related neuropathology ].
feature of human AD brain. It has been hypothesized that
This small prosimian primate lives 8–10 years in captivity and
high homology (97.5%) of octodon Ab and human Ab might
shows age-related changes similar to those of aging humans
be an important factor in the appearance of AD markers in
[]. About 20% of mouse lemurs aged five years or older show
this rodent. Breeding difficulty and comparatively longer life-
significant brain atrophy ], extensive accumulation of amy-
span are limitations of this rodent model ].
loid plaques, neurodegeneration [] and/or loss of cholinergic
neurons []. The genes responsible for the formation of senile
plaques are highly similar between mouse lemurs and
Transgenic technology provides unique opportunity to repro-
humans The presence of amyloid deposition has been
duce the cause of familial AD by transfecting a mutant human
recently linked to cerebral atrophy in aged individuals, giving
amyloid precursor protein (APP). Mice have extensively been
new insight into the understanding of pathological aging in
used as transgenic models and facilitated our understanding of
this non-human primate species Moreover, a compar-
the molecular mechanisms associated with Ab-production,
able decline in declarative memory and executive function
deposition and clearance and the effects of Ab on neuronal
has been reported in both aged human and aged mouse lemur
network and synapses that play important role in cognitive
whereas procedural memory appears to be conserved in both
function. The APP mouse model successfully produced a wide
species []. In a recent study it has been shown that cogni-
range of parenchymal and vascular amyloid deposits similar to
tively impaired aged mouse lemurs have cerebral atrophy
those of human AD []. Although morphological similarity
especially those brain regions that are responsible for cogni-
does exist, there is a difference in biochemical composition of
tive functions []. It should be noted that there is a differ-
deposited Ab between mouse models and AD brain More-
ence in distribution of Ab deposits and plaques between
over, these transgenic mouse models failed to develop neuro-
human and mouse lemur. In humans the Ab depositions
fibrillary tangles (NFTs), an important histopathological
usually start in the hippocampus but in mouse lemur they
hallmark of AD result from intraneuronal aggregation of
appear first in cortical regions []. As with human AD,
hyperphosphorylated tau protein ]. Oddo and colleagues
currently no diagnostic tools are available that can predict
presented for the first time a triple transgenic mouse model
which adult mouse lemur will develop AD-like symptoms.
where both plaques and NFTs were found in AD-relevant brain
However, this model provides an opportunity to search for
regions. These mice also developed extracellular amyloid beta
these predictors.
deposits before the formation of NFTs and exhibited impaired
Rhesus monkeys and humans share many diseases of aging
synaptic plasticity including long-term potentiation, the key
and probably are the most successful models to identify
basis for cognitive function. Furthermore, transgenic mouse
diagnostic markers and the development of safe and effective
models also provided valuable information regarding the role
treatments for human brain disorders. Monkeys of over 19
of inflammation, oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunc-
years old showed significant amyloid-plaque-like lesions in
tion in the pathogenesis of AD However, progressive
areas of brain responsible for cognitive function. However,
neuronal loss in hippocampus and specific neocortical regions
most of the aged monkeys do not show an Alzheimer's-like
of the human AD brain [is not evident in most of the
syndrome and age-related rapid cognitive decline commonly
transgenic mouse models, and this is a major limitation of
found in AD patients is not usually found in them either [].
these murine models. In addition, these transgenic mice repre-
Moreover, their long developmental period, low reproductive
sent only those who are suffering from familial AD, which is
output, long captive life and risk of serious zoonotic disease
<1% of all AD patients. There is no mouse model that can fully
transmission are major disadvantages for using these animals
reproduce the features of disease progression of vast majority of
in a wider range of AD research
AD cases that is sporadic/late-onset AD.
Octodon degu, a rodent of South American origin has
The fruit-fly Drosophila melanogaster is a widely used and
recently been found to have spontaneous development of
well-appreciated animal model of neurodegeneration includ-
AD-related neuropathology at older age. Localisation of both
ing AD []. The fruit-fly is small in size, has a simple well-
intracellular and extracellular amyloid deposits and NFTs-like
studied anatomy and possesses a well-organized brain.
intracellular deposition has been detected in different layers
Although the fruit-fly brain has only a fraction of the cells
of cortex and hippocampus of old animals. Adult octodon
of the human brain and a different neuroanatomical organi-
cortex shows the presence of cholinergic neurons as in
zation, it is similar in the fundamental aspects of cell biology,
humans but with a different distribution. They also demon-
in terms of regulation of gene expression, membrane traffick-
strate age-associated cognitive impairment but whether these
ing, neuronal connectivity, cell signalling, synaptogenesis
cognitive deficits are also associated with cholinergic neuro-
and cell death []. Moreover, its short life cycle and
degeneration similar to AD patients is not known yet.
completely sequenced genomes are added experimental
Drug Discovery Today: Technologies Translational pharmacology
Vol. 10, No. 3 2013
advantages of this model. Importantly, the transparent cuti-
Animal models of disease
cle of the larvae of fruit-fly allows the study of the disease
It is obvious that many of the animal models of AD have
progression in living intact animals which is rather difficult
contributed, and continue to contribute, to our understand-
in vertebrates []. The task for associative learning and
ing of the processes that may or may not underlie human AD.
memory such as Pavlovian olfactory conditioning can be
But can they really be called animal models of AD, and can
measured in this model, which is homologous to the classical
they therefore be used as such?
conditioning of the eyeblink response found to be impaired
The perfect animal model of a disease would be a scaled
in patients diagnosed with AD []. The fact that hippocam-
down replica of the human disease, representing all impor-
pal-dependant cognitive functions, which are impaired early
tant components from cause via structural damage to symp-
in human AD, cannot be tested in invertebrates due to the
toms (). It would be structurally and quantitatively
lack of these brain structures is a major limitation of this
identical to the human. For this, both the animal model
animal model. In spite of the lack in homology between fruit-
and the human disease need to be very well understood.
fly and human brain, this simple invertebrate animal pro-
Such a model would have face-, predictive- and construct
vided insight in the disease mechanism ranging from genetics
validity [] (see ). None of the models above satisfy this
to some cognitive functions that could be followed in living
criterion and no animal model probably ever will, especially
intact animals.
for a disease such as AD, given its complexity ]. It could
be argued, therefore, that such a model should not even be an
Interventional models
Introduction of pharmacological or chemical substances into
Even predictive validity, although very useful, is not trivial
the brain or the induction of lesions in specific brain regions
to establish. It requires effective drugs in the clinic, ideally
may replicate some of the characteristic features of AD. Many
with different mechanisms, and a good understanding of the
models involve the introduction of Ab peptide into the brain
false positives and false negatives. The latter is particularly
of, for example, the rat [] or rhesus monkey []. Although
hard to evaluate because compounds that do not work in the
these models induce some of the clinical signs, they do not
animal model are often not tested in the clinic (or reported).
directly resemble AD pathology Other chemical inter-
In a way, one could say that the availability of an animal
ventional models include scopolamine-induced amnesia,
model with established good predictive validity is unfortu-
introduction of inflammation with endotoxins or interfer-
nately inversely correlated with the unmet medical need.
ence with brain metabolism [].
All the disease models for AD listed have at best face
The lesion models involve the chemical or physical
validity, where the animal model merely shares phenomen-
destruction of specific brain areas, which are generally either
ological similarities with the disorder under study. Hence the
cholinergic (i.e. the nucleus basalis magnocellularis in
problem of ‘translation' and recent interest in ‘translational
rodents, e.g. ]) or involved in cognition (i.e. hippocampus,
striatal and cortical brain regions). Major disadvantages of the
The schematic in illustrates the complexity and the
lesion models include non-specificity of the lesion, and their
many possible pitfalls in trying to create an animal analogue
failure to capture the disease progression and the more global
for human disease. A single relevant difference, whether
aspects of the disease (too specific)
structural or quantitative, can ‘invalidate' the model. This
As a model of disease, interventional models would gen-
is, when it is not understood and considered in the transla-
erally be better at identifying symptomatic or corrective
tion to the human condition.
treatments, rather than disease modifying therapies that halt
By contrast, many of the single components of the sche-
or slow down progression, unless the ‘intervention' repre-
matic in will be preserved across species (normal
sents a damage early in the disease progression.
physiology). Thus, whereas it is probably impossible to repli-
Furthermore, a wide range of variability including species,
cate the full sequence from cause to symptoms in animals, the
animal husbandry, site of injection or induction, model
study of components of the hypothesized sequence could
protocol and concentration and volume of substances may
influence the experimental outcome. However, these models
Box 1. Validation criteria for animal models ]
can provide important insights such as scopolamine-induced
amnesia model contributed to the role of cholinergic system
Face validity: The animal model resembles the human disease condition
on a superficial level, for example, biochemistry or symptomatology.
in cognition [], specific brain lesions induced memory
Predictive validity: The animal model can successfully discriminate
deficit models and the neuronal mechanism underlying
between successful and unsuccessful treatments for the human disease
memory dysfunction and the Ab/pharmaco-chemical
Construct validity: The animal model is based on a sound theoretical
substance induced model and the understanding of inflam-
rationale, requiring good understanding of the human disease condition.
mation, neurotoxicity, neurodegeneration and synaptic
Notably, construct validity does not require superficial similarity.
Vol. 10, No. 3 2013
Drug Discovery Today: Technologies Translational pharmacology
Drug Discovery Today: Technologies
Figure 1. A theoretical framework for a disease model. The disease cause, which can be an event or a continuous process, would result in some primary
damage, followed possibly by a downstream damage cascade, the result of which may be the disruption of function, observed as a symptom. For AD this could be
a genetic defect generating an excess of Ab, downstream resulting in death of cholinergic neurons causing memory impairment, observed as a poor ADAScog
score. The diagnosis of the disease may involve some or all of these components.There may be parallel paths, interacting at different stages. A different cause may
either generate the same secondary damage, or independently show the same symptoms. Depending on how the disease is defined this may represent
heterogeneity. Also, the same cause and primary damage can have multiple secondary damages (in multiple anatomical locations) and subsequently, multiple
dysfunctions and symptoms. Importantly, these cascades are part of a system, which defines such elements as the turnover rates of components, repair (i.e.
reversibility) and response (i.e. immune system), and robustness (i.e. feedback loops, collateral pathways, compensatory mechanisms). All the elements of such a
model have anatomical locations, and can be described quantitatively in terms of capacity, sensitivity and rate constants. In addition, the cause has an intensity and
time course associated with it. Furthermore, most if not all relationships between elements are non-linear.
identify potential rate-limiting steps, suggest possible inter-
are an unavoidable part of drug development. A properly
ventions and provide a rationale for the translation to
conducted negative clinical trial would suggest that a
revision of the hypothesis is necessary. Appropriate bio-
markers can help to understand the nature of the required
Reasons animal models of disease can fail
revision. Some possible reasons are:
So far the animal models for AD have not been very successful
a. Incorrect basic structure of the model. Key elements of
in identifying effective treatments (see and []).
the animal model are not major players on the causal
Why? It is possible to highlight specific weaknesses (and
path in humans. There is some similarity with reasons
strengths) for each animal model (e.g. ]). Some of the
why biomarkers fail In addition, a key element
issues have been raised in the previous sections. More gen-
could be regulated differently in the model species.
erally, one can identify three categories of reasons why
b. The model is quantitatively wrong. Critical species
clinical trial results do not match the animal model results,
differences in the capacity, sensitivity or rate constants
and not only because of the animal model per se. In our
governing the relationship between elements are not
discussion it is assumed that the animal experimentation is
technically sound, potential issues with that being discussed
2. Incorrect (quantitative) translation of the intervention to
the patient. Thus the target is relevant but not appropri-
ately engaged. Without the appropriate pharmacological
1. The animal disease model does not truly reflect the disease
biomarkers this is difficult to identify, and very little useful
or represents an incorrect hypothesis. Hence the drug
inferences can be made after a negative clinical trial. One
target is not relevant to human disease. This can ulti-
cannot distinguish between wrong target and wrong dose.
mately only be addressed in patients, and failures like this
Possible explanations are:
Drug Discovery Today: Technologies Translational pharmacology
Vol. 10, No. 3 2013
a. Incorrect dosing regimen because of species differences
engage multiple targets to treat complex disorders ]. Multi-
in pharmacokinetics, distribution to target site and/or
ple targets may be required to significantly affect one aspect
target affinity, duration of treatment required.
of the disease, or to address the multidimensionality of the
b. Physiology of the primary target is different between
disorder. In addition, animal models can be used to screen
species, or altered in human disease (not captured in
series of compounds, and identify potential targets by their
the animal model), for example, interventions that
ability to modulate an aspect of the hypothesized disease
significantly lower brain Ab in mice can fail to do so
in AD patients because of species differences in Ab
The main objective for the pharmacological intervention is
to ensure that the dose regimen that will be tested in the
3. Clinical trial design not appropriate to test the interven-
human patient does what it pharmacologically is meant to
tion under investigation. A negative clinical trial risks
do: sufficiently, long enough and at the right place. Animal
abandoning a correct hypothesis and a beneficial inter-
experimentation can contribute to our understanding of the
vention. Although not the objective of this review, some
pharmacokinetics of the compound and the target pharma-
cology, as long as properly scaled between species, and pro-
a. Wrong dosing regimen. For example, the translation
vide guidance on what may be the required target
may be adequate, but target engagement is limited by
engagement. One objective is to verify this in humans early
safety and tolerability.
on in clinical development, as is done for pharmacokinetics
b. Study too short to be able to notice effects
and, if possible, with biomarkers of pharmacology.
c. Wrong patient population. The patients are too
Animal experimentation does not seem to contribute
advanced to allow significant benefit of the interven-
directly to the clinical trial design. However, as mentioned
tion or only a subpopulation would benefit.
above, the right experiments can provide guidance regarding
d. Insensitive or not relevant endpoints. The modality
the timing of treatment and regarding which modalities
affected by the treatment may not, or poorly so, be
would be consistent with the target pharmacology.
captured by the study endpoints.
Thus, animal experimentation remains part of the scien-
e. Other factors such as placebo response and data ana-
tific method that iterates between hypothesis generation,
predictions and experimentation. The hypothesis is in fact
conceptual and should be a human disease model, attempt-
The first two categories are failures to translate animal
ing to address the components mentioned in Given the
results to human patients. One cannot translate if the crucial
complexity, describing and connecting parts of the model
components leading up to a particular endpoint are not
quantitatively is an important part of this process
identified. This is where a conceptual framework such as
Among other benefits, modelling and simulation provide a
shown in would help by capturing the current state
way of integrating currently available facts and beliefs, iden-
of knowledge and assumptions explicitly. One could argue
tifying gaps and raising questions [] and, for drug devel-
that this understanding could also contribute to avoid some
opment, ultimately some sense of the uncertainties of a
failures of the third category, for example, timing of the
particular development program.
intervention, identification of surrogate or biomarkers or
For drug development some specific quantitative aspects of
the modality monitored for treatment effect.
a theoretical human model to consider are suggested below,
all of which are a potential source of critical species differ-
Animal experimentation and Alzheimer's disease
How can animal experimentation contribute to some of the
challenges facing drug development in general and our
Target selection:
search for a cure for AD in particular? Three major challenges
mirror the reasons for failure listed above and they are: first,
Relationship between target modulation and subsequent
target selection, second, the (pharmacological) intervention
events. How much ‘change' of the target is required to
and third, the clinical patient trials.
cause changes downstream (sensitivity) and when can
Target selection is probably the most difficult challenge in
these changes be observed? What is the relative contribu-
AD and is directly related to our, limited, understanding of
tion of the target pathway to the endpoint of interest? Is
the disease. An obvious role of animal experiments is to
there a rationale for multiple targets?
increase this understanding, as they already greatly have,
The homeostasis of the target and/or critical downstream
and to generate hypotheses. However, the correctness of
elements, for example, Ab, or memory function. How is it
the hypothesis can only be addressed in human patients with
maintained and can it be modulated?
the right tool. Some have suggested to focus more on research
Related to the above, robustness and redundancies in the
in human patients [and the need to simultaneously
Vol. 10, No. 3 2013
Drug Discovery Today: Technologies Translational pharmacology
Evaluation of the intervention:
example is some modelling and simulation of brain atro-
phy as biomarker []. Multiple competing factors contri-
Pharmacokinetics
buting to brain volume loss measurements were identified
Can the intervention modulate the component(s) of inter-
and incorporated in a model. These included, for example,
est (target engagement), and if so, what is the required
normal aging, disease, volume of amyloid deposits and
timing of the intervention? And, again, how long does it
inflammation. The model could explain why treatment
take before these changes can be observed, which also
with an anti-amyloid vaccine would result in a temporary
depends on the endpoint? In other words, pharmacoki-
acceleration of brain volume loss, as was observed in clin-
netic–pharmacodynamic relationships for the target phar-
ical trials.
Are there bio- or surrogate markers that can inform on the
Another example is the complexity underlying interven-
target pharmacology, and, if so, what is the relationship
tions attempting to lower soluble Ab in the CNS of patients,
between target function and biomarker level? Again, con-
suggested as potentially beneficial by the Ab hypothesis (e.g.
sidering relative contributions and time courses. A recent
]). The relationships between the different forms of Ab
Effect of Q PB Variability
Fraction of Plasma or Brain Basal A
Blood Brain Barrier
Koff · Cx
Koff · Cx + UP0
K01 + Kon · P
KP0 + Kon · D
Total Plasma Aβ = P + Cx
Kon· D · P
Drug Discovery Today: Technologies
Figure 2. A model of the Ab system in the presence of an antibody restricted to the peripheral circulation. The model describes the relationships between
free soluble Ab in the brain (BS), in the CSF (CSF) and in the plasma (P), separated by the blood brain and blood CSF barrier. An anti-Ab antibody (D) can form a
complex with the plasma Ab (Cx). The relationships were parameterised by rate constants (K and U) and between compartmental clearances (Q). The Kon and
Koff represent the association and dissociation rate constants for the antibody with Ab.The inset shows the simulation results for a normal rat after once weekly
dosing with the antibody with the fraction of basal Ab levels in the brain (dashed) and plasma (solid). The distribution of lines represents the impact of varying the
value of the (unknown) parameter Q
which is the clearance from plasma to brain. Although the impact of this parameter value is significant (between 10% and
40% reduction of brain Ab), it suggests that nearly 90% reduction in plasma is matched by only about 20% reduction in the brain.
Reproduced with permission from ].
Drug Discovery Today: Technologies Translational pharmacology
Vol. 10, No. 3 2013
across the different compartments of interest, for example,
hypotheses, it is crucial to identify a pharmacologically active
brain, CSF and plasma, are not immediately obvious. This
dosing regimen to test in patients. Then a negative clinical
issue was highlighted for the rational selection of biomarkers
patient study, although disappointing, will at least increase
by Thompson and Lockhart for example Ab concentra-
our knowledge regarding the disease.
tions in the CSF as marker for CNS concentrations, but is
equally important for the rationalization of interventions.
Preliminary work attempting to address this was presented by
Simeoni et al. and an example of the model, with an
FA and AR are funded as part of the Pharma-Cog consortium
intervention included, is shown in Interestingly, the
by the European Community's Seventh Framework Pro-
preliminary simulations with the model suggest that an anti-
gramme for the Innovative Medicine Initiative under Grant
body against Ab, restricted to the systemic circulation, would
Agreement no. 115009. For further information please refer
only modestly lower CNS levels of Ab, even if plasma levels
were greatly reduced ). This is clearly a red flag when in
the process of developing such an antibody, and merits
further investigation of the system and assumptions. The
Mattson, M.P. (2004) Pathways towards and away from Alzheimer's
model made specific assumptions about the structure of
disease. Nature 430, 631–639
the model and some of the parameters and ignored some
Hardy, J.A. and Higgins, G.A. (1992) Alzheimer's disease: the amyloid
cascade hypothesis. Science 256, 184–185
non-linearities that must be present in the system. Never-
Schnabel, J. (2011) Little proteins, big clues. Nature 475, S12–S14
theless, this work could guide specific future experiments and
Van Dam, D. and De Deyn, P.P. (2011) Animal models in the drug
the impact of parameter assumptions can be explored by
discovery pipeline for Alzheimer's disease. Br. J. Pharmacol. 164,
sensitivity analysis (as was done for this presentation).
Johnstone, E. et al. (1991) Conservation of the sequence of the Alzheimer's
Thus, even if animal models of AD cannot be considered
disease amyloid peptide in dog, polar bear and five other mammals by
models of disease with construct (or even predictive) validity,
cross-species polymerase chain reaction analysis. Mol. Brain Res. 10,
it is not to so that animal experiments have not been or will
Languille, S. et al. (2012) The grey mouse lemur: a non human primate
not be useful in understanding of the disease or that the
model for ageing studies. Ageing Res. Rev. 11, 150–162
hypotheses they aim to reflect are incorrect. The challenge is
Dhenain, M. et al. (2003) Regional atrophy in the brain of lissencephalic
to identify which part of the overall human disease model a
mouse lemur primates: measurement by automatic histogram-based
segmentation of MR images. Magn. Reson. Med. 50, 984–992
particular animal experiment addresses.
Bons, N. et al. (2006) Microcebus murinus: a useful primate model for
Lastly, although not specifically addressed here, anticipat-
human cerebral aging and Alzheimer's disease? Genes Brain Behav. 5,
ing safety issues of the intervention under study is obviously
important. In particular, adverse pharmacology associated
Mestre, N. and Bons, N. (1993) Age-related cytological changes and
neuronal loss in basal forebrain cholinergic neurons in Microcebus murinus
with the primary and/or secondary targets of the compound
(Lemurian, Primate). Neurodegeneration 2, 25–32
can, should, be addressed applying similar principles as for
Kraska, A. et al. (2011) Age-associated cerebral atrophy in mouse lemur
primates. Neurobiol. Aging 32, 894–906
Picq, J.L. (2007) Aging affects executive functions and memory in mouse
lemur primates. Exp. Gerontol. 42, 223–232
Picq, J-L. et al. (2012) Age-related cerebral atrophy in nonhuman primates
The value of many of the so-called animal models for AD lies
predicts cognitive impairments. Neurobiol. Aging 33, 1096–1109
Giannakopoulos, P. et al. (1997) Quantitative analysis of tau protein-
not in the fact that they attempt to replicate the full spectrum
immunoreactive accumulations and b amyloid protein deposits in the
of the human disease, but in that they could help us, together
cerebral cortex of the mouse lemur, Microcebus murinus. Acta Neuropathol.
with clinical data, to generate hypotheses and understand the
complex physiology relevant to the human disease. In that
Buccafusco, J.J. (2008) Estimation of working memory in macaques for
studying drugs for the treatment of cognitive disorders. J. Alzheimer's Dis.
sense, they are not really animal models of disease but ‘just'
animal experiments. These experiments, then, need to
De Magalhaes, J. and Costa, J. (2009) A database of vertebrate longevity
address specific questions that allow the construction of
records and their relation to other life-history traits. J. Evol. Biol. 22,
the hypotheses for the whole or parts of a quantitative human
Braidy, N. et al. (2012) Recent rodent models for Alzheimer's disease:
disease model. The conceptual human model is where inter-
clinical implications and basic research. J. Neural Transm. 119, 173–195
ventions should be evaluated: for example, target selection,
Inestrosa, N.C. et al. (2005) Human-like rodent amyloid-b-peptide
determines Alzheimer pathology in aged wild-type Octodon degu.
dosing regimen and timing, biomarker and clinical endpoint
Neurobiol. Aging 26, 1023–1028
selection and safety. Integration of information and ideas
Games, D. et al. (1995) Alzheimer-type neuropathology in transgenic mice
into a quantitative conceptual (sub) model of human disease
overexpressing V717F b-amyloid precursor protein. Nature 373, 523–527
and pharmacology is therefore considered essential.
Kalback, W. et al. (2002) APP transgenic mice Tg2576 accumulate Ab
peptides that are distinct from the chemically modified and insoluble
For drug development, whereas there is likely to remain
peptides deposited in Alzheimer's disease senile plaques. Biochemistry 41,
great uncertainty around target selection and the associated
Vol. 10, No. 3 2013
Drug Discovery Today: Technologies Translational pharmacology
Goedert, M. et al. (2006) Tau protein, the paired helical filament and
Cedarbaum, J.M. and Wagg, J.K. (2011) Predicting initial changes in brain
Alzheimer's disease. J. Alzheimer's Dis. 9, 195–207
volume with effective anti-amyloid agents: just ask alice. Alzheimer's
Oddo, S. et al. (2003) Triple-transgenic model of Alzheimer's disease with
plaques and tangles: intracellular A [beta] and synaptic dysfunction.
Thompson, P.W. and Lockhart, A. (2009) Monitoring the amyloid beta-
Neuron 39, 409–421
peptide in vivo-caveat emptor. Drug Discov. Today 14, 241–251
Du, H. et al. (2008) Cyclophilin D deficiency attenuates mitochondrial and
Simeoni M, et al. (2008) Modelling beta amyloid system: sensitivity
neuronal perturbation and ameliorates learning and memory in
analysis at steady state and in dynamic conditions. Population Analysis
Alzheimer's disease. Nat. Med. 14, 1097–1105
Group Europe (PAGE) Meeting, Marseille, France (Abstract 1396)
Lee, Y.J. et al. (2010) Inflammation and Alzheimers disease. Arch. Pharm.
Cotman, C.W. and Head, E. (2008) The canine (dog) model of human
Res. 33, 1539–1556
aging and disease: dietary, environmental and immunotherapy
Gomez-Isla, T. et al. (1996) Profound loss of layer II entorhinal cortex
approaches. J. Alzheimers Dis. 15, 685–707
neurons distinguishes very mild Alzheimers disease from nondemented
Check, E. (2002) Nerve inflammation halts trial for Alzheimer's drug.
aging. J. Neurosci. 16, 4450–4491
Driscoll, M. and Gerstbrein, B. (2003) Dying for a cause: invertebrate
Fillenbaum, G.G. et al. (2005) Dementia and Alzheimer's disease in
genetics takes on human neurodegeneration. Nat. Rev. Genet. 4,
community-dwelling elders taking vitamin C and/or vitamin E. Ann.
Pharmacother. 39, 2009–2014
Iijima, K. and Iijima-Ando, K. (2008) Drosophila models of Alzheimer's
Schenk, D. (2002) Amyloid-b immunotherapy for Alzheimer's disease: the
amyloidosis: the challenge of dissecting the complex mechanisms of
end of the beginning. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 3, 824–828
toxicity of amyloid-b 42. J. Alzheimers Dis. 15, 523–540
Morgan, D. (2011) Immunotherapy for Alzheimers disease. J. Intern. Med.
Sang, T.K. and Jackson, G.R. (2005) Drosophila models of
neurodegenerative disease. NeuroRx 2, 438–446
Hussain, I. et al. (2007) Oral administration of a potent and selective non-
Sinadinos, C. et al. (2009) Live axonal transport disruption by mutant
peptidic BACE-1 inhibitor decreases b-cleavage of amyloid precursor
huntingtin fragments in Drosophila motor neuron axons. Neurobiol. Dis.
protein and amyloid-b production in vivo. J. Neurochem. 100, 802–809
Townsend, M. et al. (2010) Oral treatment with a g-secretase inhibitor
Nakamura, S. et al. (2001) Progressive brain dysfunction following
improves long-term potentiation in a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease.
intracerebroventricular infusion of beta1-42-amyloid peptide. Brain Res.
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 333, 110–119
Kounnas, M.Z. et al. (2010) Modulation of [gamma]-secretase reduces
Li, W. et al. (2010) A nonhuman primate model of Alzheimer's disease
[beta]-amyloid deposition in a transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer's
generated by intracranial injection of amyloid-beta42 and thiorphan.
disease. Neuron 67, 769–780
Metab. Brain Dis. 25, 277–284
Dong, H. et al. (2009) Effects of donepezil on amyloid-[beta] and synapse
Duyckaerts, C. et al. (2008) Alzheimer disease models and human
density in the Tg2576 mouse model of Alzheimer's disease. Brain Res.
neuropathology: similarities and differences. Acta Neuropathol. (Berl.) 115,
Choi, J.K. et al. (2010) Anti-inflammatory treatment in AD mice protects
Fine, A. et al. (1985) Cholinergic ventral forebrain grafts into the neocortex
against neuronal pathology. Exp. Neurol. 223, 377–384
improve passive avoidance memory in a rat model of Alzheimer disease.
Boimel, M. et al. (2009) Statins reduce the neurofibrillary tangle burden in
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 82, 5227–5230
a mouse model of tauopathy. J. Neuropathol. Exp. Neurol. 68, 314–325
Ebert, U. and Kirch, W. (1998) Scopolamine model of dementia:
Nishida, Y. et al. (2009) Depletion of vitamin E increases Amyloid b
electroencephalogram findings and cognitive performance. Eur. J. Clin.
accumulation by decreasing its clearances from brain and blood in a
Invest. 28, 944–949
mouse model of Alzheimer disease. J. Biol. Chem. 284, 33400–33408
Castane, A. et al. (2010) Selective lesions of the dorsomedial striatum
Costa, R. et al. (2011) Testing the therapeutic potential of doxycycline in a
impair serial spatial reversal learning in rats. Behav. Brain Res. 210,
Drosophila melanogaster model of Alzheimer's disease. J. Biol. Chem. 286,
Frautschy, S. et al. (2001) Phenolic anti-inflammatory antioxidant reversal
Golde, T.E. et al. (2010) Targeting A [beta] and tau in Alzheimer's disease,
of A [beta]-induced cognitive deficits and neuropathology. Neurobiol.
an early interim report. Exp. Neurol. 223, 252–266
Aging 22, 993–1005
Extance, A. (2010) Alzheimer's failure raises questions about disease-
Willner, P. (1986) Validation criteria for animal models of human mental
modifying strategies. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 9, 749–751
disorders: learned helplessness as a paradigm case. Prog.
Sabbagh, M. and Cummings, J. (2011) Progressive cholinergic decline in
Neuropsychopharmacol. Biol. Psychiatry 10, 677–690
Alzheimer's disease: consideration for treatment with donepezil 23 mg in
Horrobin, D.F. (2003) Modern biomedical research: an internally self-
patients with moderate to severe symptomatology. BMC Neurol. 11, 21
consistent universe with little contact with medical reality? Nat. Rev. Drug
Imbimbo, B.P. (2009) An update on the efficacy of non-steroidal anti-
Discov. 2, 151–154
inflammatory drugs in Alzheimer's disease. Expert Opin. Invest. Drugs 18,
Geerts, H. (2009) Of mice and men: bridging the translational disconnect
in CNS drug discovery. CNS Drugs 23, 915–926
Feldman, H. et al. (2010) Randomized controlled trial of atorvastatin in
van der Worp, H.B. et al. (2010) Can animal models of disease reliably
mild to moderate Alzheimer disease. Neurology 74, 956–964
inform human studies? PLoS Med. 7, e1000245
Isaac, M. et al. (2008) Vitamin E for Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive
Frank, R. and Hargreaves, R. (2003) Clinical biomarkers in drug discovery
impairment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (Online) CD002854
and development. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2, 566–580
Loeb, M.B. et al. (2004) A randomized, controlled trial of doxycycline and
Dollery, C.T. (2010) The challenge of complexity. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther.
rifampin for patients with Alzheimer's disease. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 52,
Aderem, A. (2005) Systems biology: its practice and challenges. Cell 121,
Ahmed, T. et al. (2010) Curcuminoids enhance memory in an amyloid-
infused rat model of Alzheimer's disease. Neuroscience 169, 1296–1306
Butcher, E.C. et al. (2004) Systems biology in drug discovery. Nat.
Hu, S. et al. (2009) GSK3 inhibitors show benefits in an Alzheimer's disease
Biotechnol. 22, 1253–1259
(AD) model of neurodegeneration but adverse effects in control animals.
Boxenbaum, H. (1992) Pharmacokinetics: philosophy of modeling. Drug
Neurobiol. Dis. 33, 193–206
Metab. Rev. 24, 89–120
Martinez, A. et al. (2011) Glycogen synthase kinase 3 inhibitors in the next
Massoud, T.F. et al. (1998) Principles and philosophy of modeling in
horizon for Alzheimer's disease treatment. Int. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2011,
biomedical research. FASEB J. 12, 275–285
Source: http://www.oltrelasperimentazioneanimale.eu/archivio_pubmed/critica_scientifica/Laurijssens,%20Aujard,%20Rahman%20-%202013%20-%20Animal%20models%20of%20Alzheimer's%20disease%20and%20drug%20development.pdf
EVALUATION OF ANTIOXIDANT ACTIVITY OF DADIM (PUNICA GRANATUM LINN.) IN ESSENTIAL HYPERTENTION. Dr. Shelke Rajshree D.1*, Dr. Ramteke Ashok D2, Dr.Pravin Patil 3, Dr. Dinesh Gavand4 1. Assistant Professor, Department of Dravyaguna, Ayurved Mahavidyalaya, Sion, Mumbai-22, India. Contact no: 9819835440, Email ID:
BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (2000) 23, 793–1121Printed in the United States of America Dreaming and REM sleep are controlled by different brain mechanisms Mark SolmsAcademic Department of Neurosurgery, St. Bartholomew's and Royal London School of Medicine, Royal London Hospital, London E1 1BB, United Kingdom Abstract: The paradigmatic assumption that REM sleep is the physiological equivalent of dreaming is in need of fundamental revision.A mounting body of evidence suggests that dreaming and REM sleep are dissociable states, and that dreaming is controlled by forebrainmechanisms. Recent neuropsychological, radiological, and pharmacological findings suggest that the cholinergic brain stem mechanismsthat control the REM state can only generate the psychological phenomena of dreaming through the mediation of a second, probablydopaminergic, forebrain mechanism. The latter mechanism (and thus dreaming itself) can also be activated by a variety of nonREM trig-gers. Dreaming can be manipulated by dopamine agonists and antagonists with no concomitant change in REM frequency, duration,and density. Dreaming can also be induced by focal forebrain stimulation and by complex partial (forebrain) seizures during nonREMsleep, when the involvement of brainstem REM mechanisms is precluded. Likewise, dreaming is obliterated by focal lesions along a spe-cific (probably dopaminergic) forebrain pathway, and these lesions do not have any appreciable effects on REM frequency, duration, anddensity. These findings suggest that the forebrain mechanism in question is the final common path to dreaming and that the brainstemoscillator that controls the REM state is just one of the many arousal triggers that can activate this forebrain mechanism. The "REM-on"mechanism (like its various NREM equivalents) therefore stands outside the dream process itself, which is mediated by an independent,forebrain "dream-on" mechanism.