Advertisement

Molecular Medicine

, Volume 17, Issue 5–6, pp 442–447 | Cite as

The Therapeutic Potential of HDAC Inhibitors in the Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis

  • Giuseppe Faraco
  • Leonardo Cavone
  • Alberto Chiarugi
Review Article

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a devastating autoimmune disorder of the central nervous system (CNS) for which there is no efficacious cure. Thanks to numerous preclinical and clinical studies, drugs able to mitigate the inexorable course of the disease have been made available recently. Still, there is a terrible need for compounds capable of reducing the severity of the autoimmune attack and of blocking progression of the disorder. Also, besides the classic immunosuppressive strategies, it is now appreciated that compounds directly targeting neuronal death can be of relevance to the treatment of MS patients. Acetylation homeostasis is a key regulator of both immune cell activation and neuronal survival. Of note, potent histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) endowed with antiinflammatory and neuroprotective properties have been identified. Efficacy of HDACi in experimental models of MS has been reported consistently. In this review, we provide an appraisal of the literature on HDACi and MS, also discussing the mechanisms by which HDACi can suppress the autoimmune attack to the CNS.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by funds from Fondazione Italiana Sclerosi Multipla.

References

  1. 1.
    Rosati G, et al. (2001) Phase I study of a weekly schedule of oxaliplatin, high-dose leucovorin, and infusional fluorouracil in pretreated patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Ann. Oncol. 12:669–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lovett-Racke AE, et al. (1998) Decreased dependence of myelin basic protein-reactive T cells on CD28-mediated costimulation in multiple sclerosis patients. A marker of activated/memory T cells. J. Clin. Invest. 101:725–30.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Racke MK, et al. (2010) The mechanism of action of glatiramer acetate treatment in multiple sclerosis. Neurology. 74 Suppl 1:S25–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Venken K, et al. (2010) Disturbed regulatory T cell homeostasis in multiple sclerosis. Trends Mol. Med. 16:58–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim JM, et al. (2007) Regulatory T cells prevent catastrophic autoimmunity throughout the lifespan of mice. Nat. Immunol. 8:191–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang X, et al. (2004) IL-10 is involved in the suppression of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis by CD25+CD4+ regulatory T cells. Int. Immunol. 16:249–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kohm AP, et al. (2002) Cutting edge: CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells suppress antigen-specific autoreactive immune responses and central nervous system inflammation during active experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J. Immunol. 169:4712–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bailey SL, et al. (2007) CNS myeloid DCs presenting endogenous myelin peptides ‘preferentially’ polarize CD4+ T(H)-17 cells in relapsing EAE. Nat. Immunol. 8:172–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miller SD, et al. (2007) Antigen presentation in the CNS by myeloid dendritic cells drives progression of relapsing experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1103:179–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lopez-Diego RS and Weiner HL. (2008) Novel therapeutic strategies for multiple sclerosis—a multifaceted adversary. Nat. Rev. Drug. Discov. 7:909–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gandhi R, et al. (2010) Role of the innate immune system in the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis. J. Neuroimmunol. 221:7–14.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bar-Or A, et al. (1999) Molecular pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis. J. Neuroimmunol. 100:252–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Conlon P, et al. (1999) The immunobiology of multiple sclerosis: an autoimmune disease of the central nervous system. Neurobiol. Dis. 6:149–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lublin FD and Reingold SC. (1996) Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: results of an international survey. National Multiple Sclerosis Society (USA) Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials of New Agents in Multiple Sclerosis. Neurology. 46:907–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vanderlugt CL and Miller SD. (2002) Epitope spreading in immune-mediated diseases: implications for immunotherapy. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2:85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    McMahon EJ, et al. (2005) Epitope spreading initiates in the CNS in two mouse models of multiple sclerosis. Nat. Med. 11:335–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Menge T, et al. (2008) Disease-modifying agents for multiple sclerosis: recent advances and future prospects. Drugs. 68:2445–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liblau R. (2009) Glatiramer acetate for the treatment of multiple sclerosis: evidence for a dual antiinflammatory and neuroprotective role. J. Neurol. Sci. 287 Suppl 1:S17–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Polman CH and Killestein J. (2006) Anti-myelin antibodies in multiple sclerosis: clinically useful? J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry. 77:712.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fox EJ. (2010) Emerging oral agents for multiple sclerosis. Am. J. Manag. Care. 16:S219–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Langley B, et al. (2005) Remodeling chromatin and stress resistance in the central nervous system: histone deacetylase inhibitors as novel and broadly effective neuroprotective agents. Curr. DrugTargets CNS Neurol. Disord. 4:41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Saha RN and Pahan K. (2006) HATs and HDACs in neurodegeneration: a tale of disconcerted acetylation homeostasis. Cell Death Differ. 13:539–50.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kazantsev AG and Thompson LM. (2008) Therapeutic application of histone deacetylase inhibitors for central nervous system disorders. Nat. Rev. Drug. Discov. 7:854–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gray SG and Dangond F. (2006) Rationale for the use of histone deacetylase inhibitors as a dual therapeutic modality in multiple sclerosis. Epigenetics. 1:67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dasgupta S, et al. (2003) Sodium phenylacetate inhibits adoptive transfer of experimental allergic encephalomyelitis in SJL/J mice at multiple steps. J. Immunol. 170:3874–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Camelo S, et al. (2005) Transcriptional therapy with the histone deacetylase inhibitor trichostatin A ameliorates experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J. Neuroimmunol. 164:10–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Blanchard F and Chipoy C. (2005) Histone deacetylase inhibitors: new drugs for the treatment of inflammatory diseases? Drug Discov. Today. 10:197–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nencioni A, et al. (2007) Histone deacetylase inhibitors affect dendritic cell differentiation and immunogenicity. Clin. Cancer Res. 13:3933–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Genc K, et al. (1997) Increased CD80(+) B cells in active multiple sclerosis and reversal by interferon beta-1b therapy. J. Clin. Invest. 99:2664–71.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Reddy P, et al. (2008) Histone deacetylase inhibition modulates indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase-dependent DC functions and regulates experimental graft-versus-host disease in mice. J. Clin. Invest. 118:2562–73.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Huang L, et al. (2010) Dendritic cells, indoleamine 2,3 dioxygenase and acquired immune privilege. Int. Rev. Immunol. 29:133–55.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Munn DH, et al. (2005) Dendritic cells have the option to express IDO-mediated suppression or not. Blood. 105:2618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Brogdon JL, et al. (2007) Histone deacetylase activities are required for innate immune cell control of Th1 but not Th2 effector cell function. Blood. 109:1123–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jung ID, et al. (2009) Apicidin, the histone deacetylase inhibitor, suppresses Th1 polarization of murine bone marrow-derived dendritic cells. Int. J. Immunopathol Pharmacol. 22:501–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Minucci S and Pelicci PG. (2006) Histone deacetylase inhibitors and the promise of epigenetic (and more) treatments for cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 6:38–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Moreira JM, et al. (2003) The histone deacetylase inhibitor Trichostatin A modulates CD4+ T cell responses. BMC Cancer. 3:30.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Saemann MD, et al. (2000) Anti-inflammatory effects of sodium butyrate on human monocytes: potent inhibition of IL-12 and up-regulation of IL-10 production. FASEB J. 14:2380–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Koyama Y, et al. (2000) Histone deacetylase inhibitors suppress IL-2-mediated gene expression prior to induction of apoptosis. Blood. 96:1490–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bosisio D, et al. (2008) Blocking TH17-polarizing cytokines by histone deacetylase inhibitors in vitro and in vivo. J. Leukoc. Biol. 84:1540–8.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wang L, et al. (2009) Immunomodulatory effects of deacetylase inhibitors: therapeutic targeting of FOXP3+ regulatory T cells. Nat. Rev. Drug. Discov. 8:969–81.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tao R, et al. (2007) Deacetylase inhibition promotes the generation and function of regulatory T cells. Nat. Med. 13:1299–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Akimova T, et al. (2010) Histone/protein deacetylase inhibitors increase suppressive functions of human FOXP3+ Tregs. Clin. Immunol. 136:348–63.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Koenen HJ, et al. (2008) Human CD25high-Foxp3pos regulatory T cells differentiate into IL-17-producing cells. Blood. 112:2340–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Leoni F, et al. (2002) The antitumor histone deacetylase inhibitor suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid exhibits antiinflammatory properties via suppression of cytokines. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 99:2995–3000.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Leoni F, et al. (2005) The histone deacetylase inhibitor ITF2357 reduces production of pro-inflammatory cytokines in vitro and systemic inflammation in vivo. Mol. Med. 11:1–15.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Suuronen T, et al. (2003) Regulation of microglial inflammatory response by histone deacetylase inhibitors. J. Neurochem. 87:407–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Suuronen T, et al. (2005) Anti-inflammatory effect of selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) in microglial cells. Inflamm. Res. 54:194–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Suuronen T, et al. (2006) Characterization of the pro-inflammatory signaling induced by protein acetylation in microglia. Neurochem. Int. 49:610–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Chen PS, et al. (2007) Valproic acid and other histone deacetylase inhibitors induce microglial apoptosis and attenuate lipopolysaccharide-induced dopaminergic neurotoxicity. Neuroscience. 149:203–12.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kim HJ, et al. (2007) Histone deacetylase inhibitors exhibit anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective effects in a rat permanent ischemic model of stroke: multiple mechanisms of action. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 321:892–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Zhang B, et al. (2008) HDAC inhibitor increases histone H3 acetylation and reduces microglia inflammatory response following traumatic brain injury in rats. Brain Res. 1226:181–91.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Broide RS, et al. (2007) Distribution of histone deacetylases 1–11 in the rat brain. J. Mol. Neurosci. 31:47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Faraco G, et al. (2009) Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors reduce the glial inflammatory response in vitro and in vivo. Neurobiol. Dis. 36:269–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ryu H, et al. (2003) Histone deacetylase inhibitors prevent oxidative neuronal death independent of expanded polyglutamine repeats via an Sp1-dependent pathway. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 100:4281–6.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rivieccio MA, et al. (2009) HDAC6 is a target for protection and regeneration following injury in the nervous system. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 106:19599–604.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Parmigiani RB, et al. (2008) HDAC6 is a specific deacetylase of peroxiredoxins and is involved in redox regulation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 105:9633–8.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Centonze D, et al. (2010) The link between inflammation, synaptic transmission and neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis. Cell Death Differ. 17:1083–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Aktas O, et al. (2010) Neuroprotection, regeneration and immunomodulation: broadening the therapeutic repertoire in multiple sclerosis. Trends Neurosci. 33:140–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Taveggia C, et al. (2010) Signals to promote myelin formation and repair. Nat. Rev. Neurol. 6:276–87.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bolger TA and Yao TP. (2005) Intracellular trafficking of histone deacetylase 4 regulates neuronal cell death. J. Neurosci. 25:9544–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Feinstein Institute for Medical Research 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giuseppe Faraco
    • 1
  • Leonardo Cavone
    • 2
  • Alberto Chiarugi
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of Neurobiology, Department of Neurology and NeuroscienceWeill Cornell Medical CollegeNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Department of Preclinical and Clinical PharmacologyUniversity of FlorenceFirenze, FlorenceItaly

Personalised recommendations