CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 201Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Modeling Sporadic Alzheimer's Disease in Human Brain Organoids under Serum Exposure

Open access
Chen, Xianwei, Sun, Guoqiang, Tian, E, Zhang, Mingzi, Davtyan, Hayk, Beach, Thomas G., Reiman, Eric M., Blurton‐Jones, Mathew, Holtzman, David M., Shi, Yanhong·2021·Advanced Science
DOI 10.1002/advs.202101462PMC PMC8456220
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease with no cure. Huge efforts have been made to develop anti‐AD drugs in the past decades. However, all drug development programs for disease‐modifying therapies have failed. Possible reasons for the high failure rate include incomplete understanding of complex pathophysiology of AD, especially sporadic AD (sAD), and species difference between humans and animal models used in preclinical studies. In this study, sAD is modeled using human induced pluripotent stem cell (hiPSC)‐derived 3D brain organoids. Because the blood–brain barrier (BBB) leakage is a well‐known risk factor for AD, brain organoids are exposed to human serum to mimic the serum exposure consequence of BBB breakdown in AD patient brains. The serum‐exposed brain organoids are able to recapitulate AD‐like pathologies, including increased amyloid beta (A β ) aggregates and phosphorylated microtubule‐associated tau protein (p‐Tau) level, synaptic loss, and impaired neural network. Serum exposure increases A β and p‐Tau levels through inducing beta‐secretase 1 (BACE) and glycogen synthase kinase‐3 alpha / beta (GSK3 α / β ) levels, respectively. In addition, single‐cell transcriptomic analysis of brain organoids reveals that serum exposure reduced synaptic function in both neurons and astrocytes and induced immune response in astrocytes. The human brain organoid‐based sAD model established in this study can provide a powerful platform for both mechanistic study and therapeutic development in the future.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/advs.202101462

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Generation and characterization of hiPSCs‐derived brain organoids. A) Schematic illustration of brain organoid protocol and representative phase images at different stages. Scale bar, 100 µm. B) Immunostaining of the neural progenitor marker SOX2 and the neuronal marker TUJ1 in brain organoids at day 50–60. C) Immunostaining of SOX2, the intermediate progenitor marker TBR2, and the cortical deep layer marker CTIP2 in brain organoids at day 50–60. D) Images of immunostaining of SOX2, CTIP2, and the cortical upper layer marker SATB2 in brain organoids at day 50–60. E) Immunostaining of the neuronal marker MAP2 in brain organoids at day 90. F) Immunostaining of the astrocyte marker GFAP in brain organoids at day 110. B–F) Scale bar, 20 µm.
Figure 1 Generation and characterization of hiPSCs‐derived brain organoids. A) Schematic illustration of brain organoid protocol and representative phase images at different stages. Scale bar, 100 µm. B) Immunostaining of the neural progenitor marker SOX2 and the neuronal marker TUJ1 in brain organoids at day 50–60. C) Immunostaining of SOX2, the intermediate progenitor marker TBR2, and the cortical deep layer marker CTIP2 in brain organoids at day 50–60. D) Images of immunostaining of SOX2, CTIP2, and the cortical upper layer marker SATB2 in brain organoids at day 50–60. E) Immunostaining of the neuronal marker MAP2 in brain organoids at day 90. F) Immunostaining of the astrocyte marker GFAP in brain organoids at day 110. B–F) Scale bar, 20 µm.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Serum exposure induces Aβ‐like pathology through increasing BACE abundance. A) Schematics of modeling AD pathologies using BOs. B) Schematics of amyloidogenic APP processing pathway. IV: BACE inhibitor. C) Western blot of Aβ (D54D2), BACE and GAPDH in BOs treated without (control) or with serum. Each lyaste was from pooled 3–5 individual BOs. D) Quantification of Aβ (D54D2) and BACE levels and normalized to GAPDH. n = three experiments in BO1 and BO2. E) ELISA of Aβ 1‐40 in control and serum‐treated BO6. Each lysate was from pooled 5–10 individual BOs. n = three experimental repeats. F) Western blot of soluble and insoluble Aβ (D54D2) in control and serum‐treated BO1. Each lysate was from pooled 7–10 individual BOs. G) Quantification of insoluble Aβ and normalized to GAPDH. n = 3 quantitative repeats. H) Immunostaining of Aβ (D54D2) and MAP2 in control and serum‐treated BO1. I) Counts of Aβ aggregates in (H). n = 3 images from three individual BOs. J) Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) of control and serum‐treated BO2. n: nucleus, c: cytoplasm; arrowhead: extracellular aggregate. K) Western blot of Aβ (D54D2) and GAPDH in BO2 treated with vehicle, or inhibitor IV under serum exposure. Each lysate was from pooled 6–7 individual BOs. L) Quantification of Aβ level in (K) and normalized to GAPDH. n = 3 quantitative repeats. M) Immunostaining of Aβ (D54D2) and BACE in BO1 of control, serum‐treated, and serum plus vehicle or inhibitor IV treatment. N) Immunostaining for Aβ (6E10) and BACE in cortex of AD patients and healthy controls (HC). D,E,G,I,L) Error bars are SD of the mean, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 and ****p < 0.0001 by unpaired two‐tailed t‐test. Scale bar: 20 µm for panels (H, M, N); 1 µm for panel (J).
Figure 2 Serum exposure induces Aβ‐like pathology through increasing BACE abundance. A) Schematics of modeling AD pathologies using BOs. B) Schematics of amyloidogenic APP processing pathway. IV: BACE inhibitor. C) Western blot of Aβ (D54D2), BACE and GAPDH in BOs treated without (control) or with serum. Each lyaste was from pooled 3–5 individual BOs. D) Quantification of Aβ (D54D2) and BACE levels and normalized to GAPDH. n = three experiments in BO1 and BO2. E) ELISA of Aβ 1‐40 in control and serum‐treated BO6. Each lysate was from pooled 5–10 individual BOs. n = three experimental repeats. F) Western blot of soluble and insoluble Aβ (D54D2) in control and serum‐treated BO1. Each lysate was from pooled 7–10 individual BOs. G) Quantification of insoluble Aβ and normalized to GAPDH. n = 3 quantitative repeats. H) Immunostaining of Aβ (D54D2) and MAP2 in control and serum‐treated BO1. I) Counts of Aβ aggregates in (H). n = 3 images from three individual BOs. J) Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) of control and serum‐treated BO2. n: nucleus, c: cytoplasm; arrowhead: extracellular aggregate. K) Western blot of Aβ (D54D2) and GAPDH in BO2 treated with vehicle, or inhibitor IV under serum exposure. Each lysate was from pooled 6–7 individual BOs. L) Quantification of Aβ level in (K) and normalized to GAPDH. n = 3 quantitative repeats. M) Immunostaining of Aβ (D54D2) and BACE in BO1 of control, serum‐treated, and serum plus vehicle or inhibitor IV treatment. N) Immunostaining for Aβ (6E10) and BACE in cortex of AD patients and healthy controls (HC). D,E,G,I,L) Error bars are SD of the mean, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 and ****p < 0.0001 by unpaired two‐tailed t‐test. Scale bar: 20 µm for panels (H, M, N); 1 µm for panel (J).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Serum exposure induces p‐Tau through GSK3α/β. A) Western blot of p‐Tau (AT8), Tau, p‐GSK3α/β, GSK3α/β and GAPDH in BOs treated without (control) or with serum. Each lyaste was from pooled 3–5 individual BOs. B) Quantification of p‐Tau (AT8), p‐GSK3α, p‐GSK3β, GSK3α, and GSK3β levels. p‐Tau was normalized to total Tau and the others were normalized to GAPDH. n = three experiments in BO1 and BO2. C) Western blot of p‐Tau (AT270), Tau and GAPDH in control and serum‐treated BO1. Each lyaste was from pooled 3–5 individual BOs. D) Quantification of p‐Tau (AT270) level and normalized to total Tau. n = 3 quantitative repeats. E) Immunostaining for p‐Tau (AT8) in control and serum‐treated BO2. F) Western blot of p‐Tau (AT8), Tau, p‐GSK3α/β, GSK3α/β and GAPDH in BO2 treated with vehicle, or GSK3α/β inhibitor CHIR99021 (CHIR) under serum exposure. G) Quantification of p‐GSK3α/β, GSK3α/β and p‐Tau (AT8) levels. p‐Tau (AT8) was normalized to total Tau and the others were normalized to GAPDH. n = 3 quantitative repeats. H) Immunostaining for p‐Tau (AT8) and p‐GSK3α/β in BO2 treated with vehicle control, serum, serum plus vehicle or serum plus CHIR treatment. I) Immunostaining for p‐Tau (AT8) and p‐GSK3α/β in cortex of AD patients and healthy controls (HC). E,H,I) Scale bar, 20 µm. B,D,G) Error bars are SD of the mean; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, and ****p < 0.0001 by unpaired two‐tailed t‐test.
Figure 3 Serum exposure induces p‐Tau through GSK3α/β. A) Western blot of p‐Tau (AT8), Tau, p‐GSK3α/β, GSK3α/β and GAPDH in BOs treated without (control) or with serum. Each lyaste was from pooled 3–5 individual BOs. B) Quantification of p‐Tau (AT8), p‐GSK3α, p‐GSK3β, GSK3α, and GSK3β levels. p‐Tau was normalized to total Tau and the others were normalized to GAPDH. n = three experiments in BO1 and BO2. C) Western blot of p‐Tau (AT270), Tau and GAPDH in control and serum‐treated BO1. Each lyaste was from pooled 3–5 individual BOs. D) Quantification of p‐Tau (AT270) level and normalized to total Tau. n = 3 quantitative repeats. E) Immunostaining for p‐Tau (AT8) in control and serum‐treated BO2. F) Western blot of p‐Tau (AT8), Tau, p‐GSK3α/β, GSK3α/β and GAPDH in BO2 treated with vehicle, or GSK3α/β inhibitor CHIR99021 (CHIR) under serum exposure. G) Quantification of p‐GSK3α/β, GSK3α/β and p‐Tau (AT8) levels. p‐Tau (AT8) was normalized to total Tau and the others were normalized to GAPDH. n = 3 quantitative repeats. H) Immunostaining for p‐Tau (AT8) and p‐GSK3α/β in BO2 treated with vehicle control, serum, serum plus vehicle or serum plus CHIR treatment. I) Immunostaining for p‐Tau (AT8) and p‐GSK3α/β in cortex of AD patients and healthy controls (HC). E,H,I) Scale bar, 20 µm. B,D,G) Error bars are SD of the mean; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, and ****p < 0.0001 by unpaired two‐tailed t‐test.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Serum exposure induces synaptic loss and reduces neural function. A) Schematics of modeling AD pathologies using brain organoids. B) Immunostaining for SYN1 and MAP2 in control and serum‐treated BO1. Scale bar, 20 µm. C) Quantification of SYN1+ synaptic punctas. n = 9 images from three individual BOs, with 3 sections per BO. D) Calcium imaging of BO4 treated without (control) or with serum for 7 days. The fluorescence intensity in five regions of interest (ROI) is shown. E) MEA analysis of BO2 treated without (control) or with serum for 7 days. Graphs illustrate MEA recording generated from the raw data of a spike raster plot, using the number of spikes recorded over 100 s. F–I) Quantification of the MEA parameters. n = 3 experimental repeats. C,F–I) Error bars are SD of the mean; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and ****p < 0.0001 by unpaired two‐tailed t‐test.
Figure 4 Serum exposure induces synaptic loss and reduces neural function. A) Schematics of modeling AD pathologies using brain organoids. B) Immunostaining for SYN1 and MAP2 in control and serum‐treated BO1. Scale bar, 20 µm. C) Quantification of SYN1+ synaptic punctas. n = 9 images from three individual BOs, with 3 sections per BO. D) Calcium imaging of BO4 treated without (control) or with serum for 7 days. The fluorescence intensity in five regions of interest (ROI) is shown. E) MEA analysis of BO2 treated without (control) or with serum for 7 days. Graphs illustrate MEA recording generated from the raw data of a spike raster plot, using the number of spikes recorded over 100 s. F–I) Quantification of the MEA parameters. n = 3 experimental repeats. C,F–I) Error bars are SD of the mean; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and ****p < 0.0001 by unpaired two‐tailed t‐test.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Response of brain organoids to compound treatment under serum exposure. A) Immunostaining for p‐Tau (AT8) in BO1 treated with control (no serum), serum, serum plus vehicle or serum plus inhibitor IV. B) Immunostaining for Aβ (D54D2) and MAP2 in BO5 treated with control (no serum), serum, serum plus vehicle or serum plus inhibitor CHIR. C) Immunostaining for SYN1 and MAP2 in BO1 (upper panel) and BO5 (lower panel) treated with control (no serum), serum, serum plus vehicle, serum plus inhibitor IV (upper panel) or serum plus CHIR (lower panel). D) Quantification of SYN1+ synaptic punctas. Error bars are SD of the mean; n = 9 images from three individual BOs, with 3 sections per BO. ns: not significant, ****p < 0.0001 by unpaired two‐tailed t‐test. A–C) Scale bars, 20 µm.
Figure 5 Response of brain organoids to compound treatment under serum exposure. A) Immunostaining for p‐Tau (AT8) in BO1 treated with control (no serum), serum, serum plus vehicle or serum plus inhibitor IV. B) Immunostaining for Aβ (D54D2) and MAP2 in BO5 treated with control (no serum), serum, serum plus vehicle or serum plus inhibitor CHIR. C) Immunostaining for SYN1 and MAP2 in BO1 (upper panel) and BO5 (lower panel) treated with control (no serum), serum, serum plus vehicle, serum plus inhibitor IV (upper panel) or serum plus CHIR (lower panel). D) Quantification of SYN1+ synaptic punctas. Error bars are SD of the mean; n = 9 images from three individual BOs, with 3 sections per BO. ns: not significant, ****p < 0.0001 by unpaired two‐tailed t‐test. A–C) Scale bars, 20 µm.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 Serum exposure reduced synaptic function in neurons of brain organoids revealed by scRNA‐seq. A) Schematics of scRNA‐seq of BOs treated without (control) and with serum for 13–14 days. Single cells of each group were from pooled 3–5 individual BOs. B) UMAP visualization showing subcluster of neurons (N), astrocytes (AS) and neuroepithelial cells (NEC) in BO2 and BO3. C) UMAP visualization showing clustering of single cell colored by cell types. The composition of cells is shown in each sample. D) Number of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in neurons (N) and neural subclusters that were up‐ or down‐regulated in serum‐treated BOs. E) GSEA result (Gene Ontology, GO) using DEGs of neural c1 subcluster in BO2. p‐Value < 0.05. F) Three GO categories related to synaptic function are shown in neuron and neural subclusters of BOs and AD cortex published by Grubman et al. Colored by NES value for each category. p‐value < 0.05 except labeled with #. #: p‐Value larger than 0.05 and less than 0.1. G) Neural DEGs involved in synaptic functions from both BOs (p‐value < 0.05) and AD cortex (FDR < 0.05) published by Grubman et al. Colored by Log2(FC) values. FC: fold change.
Figure 6 Serum exposure reduced synaptic function in neurons of brain organoids revealed by scRNA‐seq. A) Schematics of scRNA‐seq of BOs treated without (control) and with serum for 13–14 days. Single cells of each group were from pooled 3–5 individual BOs. B) UMAP visualization showing subcluster of neurons (N), astrocytes (AS) and neuroepithelial cells (NEC) in BO2 and BO3. C) UMAP visualization showing clustering of single cell colored by cell types. The composition of cells is shown in each sample. D) Number of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in neurons (N) and neural subclusters that were up‐ or down‐regulated in serum‐treated BOs. E) GSEA result (Gene Ontology, GO) using DEGs of neural c1 subcluster in BO2. p‐Value < 0.05. F) Three GO categories related to synaptic function are shown in neuron and neural subclusters of BOs and AD cortex published by Grubman et al. Colored by NES value for each category. p‐value < 0.05 except labeled with #. #: p‐Value larger than 0.05 and less than 0.1. G) Neural DEGs involved in synaptic functions from both BOs (p‐value < 0.05) and AD cortex (FDR < 0.05) published by Grubman et al. Colored by Log2(FC) values. FC: fold change.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 7 Serum exposure induces AD features in astrocytes of brain organoids as revealed by scRNA‐seq. A) The DEG numbers of astrocytes (AS) and AS subclusters that was up‐ or down‐regulated in serum‐treated BOs. B) GSEA result using DEGs of AS in BO2. FDR < 0.05. C) Multiple GO categories related to immune response and synaptic function are shown in astrocytes (AS) and AS subclusters of serum‐treated BOs and AD cortex published by Grubman et al. Colored by NES value for each category. p‐value < 0.05 except labeled with #. #: p‐value larger than 0.05 and less than 0.1. * indicates full name: cell activation involved in immune response. D) DEGs of AS involved in immune response from both serum‐treated BOs and AD cortex published by Grubman et al. Colored by Log2(FC) values. E) DEGs of AS involved in synaptic functions from both serum‐treated BOs (p‐value < 0.05) and AD cortex (FDR<0.05) published by Grubman et al. Colored by Log2(FC) values. FC: fold change.
Figure 7 Serum exposure induces AD features in astrocytes of brain organoids as revealed by scRNA‐seq. A) The DEG numbers of astrocytes (AS) and AS subclusters that was up‐ or down‐regulated in serum‐treated BOs. B) GSEA result using DEGs of AS in BO2. FDR < 0.05. C) Multiple GO categories related to immune response and synaptic function are shown in astrocytes (AS) and AS subclusters of serum‐treated BOs and AD cortex published by Grubman et al. Colored by NES value for each category. p‐value < 0.05 except labeled with #. #: p‐value larger than 0.05 and less than 0.1. * indicates full name: cell activation involved in immune response. D) DEGs of AS involved in immune response from both serum‐treated BOs and AD cortex published by Grubman et al. Colored by Log2(FC) values. E) DEGs of AS involved in synaptic functions from both serum‐treated BOs (p‐value < 0.05) and AD cortex (FDR<0.05) published by Grubman et al. Colored by Log2(FC) values. FC: fold change.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 71 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Yoon S. J., 2019, Nat. Methods, 75, 1675

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Chen, X., Sun, G., Tian, E., Zhang, M., Davtyan, H., Beach, T. G., Reiman, E. M., Blurton‐Jones, M., Holtzman, D. M., & Shi, Y.
Affiliations
  • City Of Hope National Medical Center (US)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • Banner Sun Health Research Institute (US)
  • Banner Alzheimer’s Institute (US)
  • Department of Neurobiology &amp; Behavior Institute for Memory Impairments &amp; Neurological Disorders and Sue &amp; Bill Gross Stem Cell Research Center University of California Irvine Irvine CA 92697 USA
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Shi, Yanhong
ORCID
Venue
Advanced Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-08-02
Volume
8
Issue
18
Pages
e2101462-e2101462
ISSN
2198-3844 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1002/advs.202101462
PMC
PMC8456220
OpenAlex
W3190034604
Cited by
200
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 3
FWCI
18.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Advanced Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG056305, P30AG019610, RF1AG061794, R56AG061171, P30AG066519, R01AG056303)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (RF1DA048813)
  • National Cancer Institute (P30CA033572)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (U24NS072026)
  • Louise and Herb Horvitz Charitable Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Pluripotent Stem Cells Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Keywords
sporadic Alzheimer's disease, brain organoids, human induced pluripotent stem cells, serum exposure, blood-brain barrier disruption, amyloid-beta, tau phosphorylation, beta-secretase 1, glycogen synthase kinase-3, synaptic loss, disease modeling, single-cell transcriptomics
MeSH terms
Alzheimer Disease, Brain, Humans, Organoids, Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review