Controlling Cellular Gates Curbs Damage after Strokes

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

In a symposium at the Society for Neuroscience in Atlanta on October 18, University of Milan researcher Maria Abbracchio announced that she had managed to prevent almost all damage from stroke in lab rats by blocking the action of an obscure gatekeeper in cell walls. The finding reveals important dynamics about stroke mechanisms and could eventually lead to drugs that prevent brain damage from occurring after a stroke. Given that treatment at present can only try to compensate for post-stroke damage rather than repair it, "this is real news," says Douglas Fields, a National Institute of Health researcher who chaired the symposium. "This is just the sort of insight we've been hoping to create through these lines of research."

Abbracchio's work combines two emerging trends--a biochemical focus on a cellular gate known as a GPCR (for G-protein-coupled receptor) and a neuroscientific focus on glial cells. GPCRs were shown in the 1990s to play key roles in admitting signals through cell walls of all sorts, thus controlling cellular behavior. Hundreds of types of GPCRs serve as gatekeepers around the body. Scientists figured that if they could find the keys that open crucial cellular gates, they might alter cell behaviors that do damage in disease or injury.

This was precisely Abbracchio's approach. She knew that ATP, a major chemical transmitter, was released in great quantities after a stroke, and that glial cells called astrocytes and microglia responded by swarming the injury site to clean up. Glial cells, of which there are several types, outnumber neurons nine to one; research in the labs of Abbracchio, Fields and many others are proving them to be crucial to many brain functions. Unfortunately, the glia swarming a stroke site don't just clean up; they also kill other glial cells as well as neurons, inflicting most of the stroke's actual damage.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Abbracchio found one particular GPCR--GPR17, which responded to ATP--that was widespread, and amassed in numbers after stroke damage. She also found that GPR17 was sensitive to cysteinuyl-leukotrienes, fatty, hormonelike molecules known to be active in causing inflammation. This dual responsiveness at GPR17 was itself news, as researchers had previously thought that each GPRC opened to only one key. That insight could pay other dividends later. In the meantime, the bigger news is that when Abbracchio developed ways to block both the action and post-stroke spread of GPR17 in rats in which she induced strokes (by tying off the middle carotid artery), she found that doing so even as late as an hour after the stroke almost completely eliminated the damage.

Abbracchio is now working to try see if the technique might transfer to human stroke victims--keeping in mind the usual caveats about concluding too much from animal studies. "There's a lot we still don't know," she remarks. "We don't know what these receptors do on normal days, for instance. But it's clear they play a big role in stroke damage. The ability to control this in rats is clearly encouraging."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe