Tight junctional abnormality in multiple sclerosis white matter affects all calibres of vessel and is associated with blood–brain barrier leakage and active demyelination
Abstract
Blood–brain barrier (BBB) hyperpermeability in multiple sclerosis (MS) is associated with lesion pathogenesis and has been linked to pathology in microvascular tight junctions (TJs). This study quantifies the uneven distribution of TJ pathology and its association with BBB leakage. Frozen sections from plaque and normal‐appearing white matter (NAWM) in 14 cases were studied together with white matter from six neurological and five normal controls. Using single and double immunofluorescence and confocal microscopy, the TJ‐associated protein zonula occludens‐1 (ZO‐1) was examined across lesion types and tissue categories, and in relation to fibrinogen leakage. Confocal image data sets were analysed for 2198 MS and 1062 control vessels. Significant differences in the incidence of TJ abnormalities were detected between the different lesion types in MS and between MS and control white matter. These were frequent in oil‐red O (ORO) + active plaques, affecting 42% of vessel segments, but less frequent in ORO − inactive plaques (23%), NAWM (13%), and normal (3.7%) and neurological controls (8%). A similar pattern was found irrespective of the vessel size, supporting a causal role for diffusible inflammatory mediators. In both NAWM and inactive lesions, dual labelling showed that vessels with the most TJ abnormality also showed most fibrinogen leakage. This was even more pronounced in active lesions, where 41% of vessels in the highest grade for TJ alteration showed severe leakage. It is concluded that disruption of TJs in MS, affecting both paracellular and transcellular paths, contributes to BBB leakage. TJ abnormality and BBB leakage in inactive lesions suggests either failure of TJ repair or a continuing pathological process. In NAWM, it suggests either pre‐lesional change or secondary damage. Clinically inapparent TJ pathology has prognostic implications and should be considered when planning disease‐modifying therapy. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In multiple sclerosis, blood-brain barrier dysfunction has been confirmed by decreased levels of tight junction proteins (occludin, ZO-1, and claudin-5) and basement membrane abnormalities.
“BBB dysfunction has also been confirmed by decreased levels of TJ proteins (i.e., occludin, ZO-1, and claudin-5) and basement membrane abnormalities (317).”
From Blood-Brain Barrier: From Physiology to Disease and Back (2019) · cites this paper as [317]
Fibrinogen perivascular deposition occurs in developing multiple sclerosis lesions.
“This is supported by evidence of fibrinogen perivascular deposition in the developing lesions (317, 626).”
From Blood-Brain Barrier: From Physiology to Disease and Back (2019) · cites this paper as [317]
TJ loss is observed in the white matter of MS lesions and is positively correlated with BBB breakdown.
“TJ loss was also observed in the white matter of MS lesions and positively correlated with BBB breakdown [124].”
From Designing and optimizing AAV-mediated gene therapy for neurodegenerative diseases: from bench to bedside (2024) · cites this paper as [124]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 44 · Cited by 375
- Authors
- Kirk, J., Plumb, J., Mirakhur, M., & McQuaid, S.
- Affiliations
- Queen's University Belfast (GB)
- Royal Victoria Hospital (GB)
- Corresponding author
- McQuaid, Stephen
- ORCID
- McQuaid, Stephen
- Venue
- The Journal of Pathology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-07-07
- Volume
- 201
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 319-327
- ISSN
- 0022-3417 (ISSN-L)
- 1096-9896
- OpenAlex
- W2143452090
- Cited by
- 375
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 6.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journal of Pathology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
- Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Brain Research Trust
- Multiple Sclerosis Society
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Barrier Structure and Function Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Cell Adhesion Molecules Research
- Keywords
- multiple sclerosis, tight junctions, blood-brain barrier disruption, zonula occludens-1, demyelination, normal-appearing white matter, vessel size, inflammatory mediators, disease-modifying therapy
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Blood-Brain Barrier, Brain, Capillary Permeability, Cerebrovascular Circulation, Female, Fibrinogen, Fluorescent Antibody Technique, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Multiple Sclerosis, Nervous System Diseases, Biomarkers, Case-Control Studies, Microscopy, Confocal, Statistics, Nonparametric, Tight Junctions
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