Rescue of behavioral and electrophysiological phenotypes in a Pitt-Hopkins syndrome mouse model by genetic restoration of Tcf4 expression

Abstract

Pitt-Hopkins syndrome (PTHS) is a neurodevelopmental disorder caused by monoallelic mutation or deletion in the transcription factor 4 (TCF4) gene. Individuals with PTHS typically present in the first year of life with developmental delay and exhibit intellectual disability, lack of speech, and motor incoordination. There are no effective treatments available for PTHS, but the root cause of the disorder, TCF4 haploinsufficiency, suggests that it could be treated by normalizing TCF4 gene expression. Here we performed proof-of-concept viral gene therapy experiments using a conditional Tcf4 mouse model of PTHS and found that postnatally reinstating Tcf4 expression in neurons improved anxiety-like behavior, activity levels, innate behaviors, and memory. Postnatal reinstatement also partially corrected EEG abnormalities, which we characterized here for the first time, and the expression of key TCF4-regulated genes. Our results support a genetic normalization approach as a treatment strategy for PTHS, and possibly other TCF4-linked disorders.

Data availability

Numerical data used to generate all figures are provided in the Figure Source Data files that correspond to figure labels. Single-cell transcriptomic data from the neonatal mouse cortex and the adult mouse nervous system were obtained from GEO accession GSE123335 and from http://mousebrain.org/downloads.html. All code to reproduce the plots is provided at https://github.com/jeremymsimon/Kim_TCF4.

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Hyojin Kim

    Department of Cell Biology and Physiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8690-5617
  2. Eric B Gao

    Department of Cell Biology and Physiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Adam Draper

    Department of Cell Biology and Physiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Noah C Berens

    Neuroscience Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7792-0142
  5. Hanna Vihma

    Department of Cell Biology and Physiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Xinyuan Zhang

    Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Bates College, Lewiston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Alexandra Higashi-Howard

    Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Bates College, Lewiston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Kimberly D Ritola

    Neuroscience Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Jeremy M Simon

    Neuroscience Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3906-1663
  10. Andrew J Kennedy

    Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Bates College, Lewiston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Benjamin Philpot

    Department of Cell Biology & Physiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    For correspondence
    bphilpot@med.unc.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2746-9143

Funding

Pitt Hopkins Research Foundation (Ann D. Bornstein Grant)

  • Hyojin Kim
  • Benjamin Philpot

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS114086)

  • Hyojin Kim
  • Benjamin Philpot

Estonian Research Competency Council (PUTJD925)

  • Hanna Vihma

The Orphan Disease Center (MDBR-21-105-Pitt Hopkins)

  • Andrew J Kennedy

The funder (Ben Philpot) had a role in the conceptualization, supervision, data curation, manuscript writing, and the decision to submit the work for publication. The funder (Hyojin Kim) had a role in the investigation, project administration, data curation, analysis, and manuscript writing. Other funders (Hanna Vihma and Andrew J Kennedy) had roles in data acquisition.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All research procedures using mice were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (IACUC protocol# 20-156.0) and Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at Bates College (IACUC protocol# 21-05) and conformed to National Institutes of Health guidelines.

Copyright

© 2022, Kim et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,547
    views
  • 400
    downloads
  • 14
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Hyojin Kim
  2. Eric B Gao
  3. Adam Draper
  4. Noah C Berens
  5. Hanna Vihma
  6. Xinyuan Zhang
  7. Alexandra Higashi-Howard
  8. Kimberly D Ritola
  9. Jeremy M Simon
  10. Andrew J Kennedy
  11. Benjamin Philpot
(2022)
Rescue of behavioral and electrophysiological phenotypes in a Pitt-Hopkins syndrome mouse model by genetic restoration of Tcf4 expression
eLife 11:e72290.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.72290

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.72290

Further reading

    1. Genetics and Genomics
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Dániel Molnár, Éva Viola Surányi ... Judit Toth
    Research Article

    The sustained success of Mycobacterium tuberculosis as a pathogen arises from its ability to persist within macrophages for extended periods and its limited responsiveness to antibiotics. Furthermore, the high incidence of resistance to the few available antituberculosis drugs is a significant concern, especially since the driving forces of the emergence of drug resistance are not clear. Drug-resistant strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis can emerge through de novo mutations, however, mycobacterial mutation rates are low. To unravel the effects of antibiotic pressure on genome stability, we determined the genetic variability, phenotypic tolerance, DNA repair system activation, and dNTP pool upon treatment with current antibiotics using Mycobacterium smegmatis. Whole-genome sequencing revealed no significant increase in mutation rates after prolonged exposure to first-line antibiotics. However, the phenotypic fluctuation assay indicated rapid adaptation to antibiotics mediated by non-genetic factors. The upregulation of DNA repair genes, measured using qPCR, suggests that genomic integrity may be maintained through the activation of specific DNA repair pathways. Our results, indicating that antibiotic exposure does not result in de novo adaptive mutagenesis under laboratory conditions, do not lend support to the model suggesting antibiotic resistance development through drug pressure-induced microevolution.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Sanjarbek Hudaiberdiev, Ivan Ovcharenko
    Research Article

    Enhancers and promoters are classically considered to be bound by a small set of transcription factors (TFs) in a sequence-specific manner. This assumption has come under increasing skepticism as the datasets of ChIP-seq assays of TFs have expanded. In particular, high-occupancy target (HOT) loci attract hundreds of TFs with often no detectable correlation between ChIP-seq peaks and DNA-binding motif presence. Here, we used a set of 1003 TF ChIP-seq datasets (HepG2, K562, H1) to analyze the patterns of ChIP-seq peak co-occurrence in combination with functional genomics datasets. We identified 43,891 HOT loci forming at the promoter (53%) and enhancer (47%) regions. HOT promoters regulate housekeeping genes, whereas HOT enhancers are involved in tissue-specific process regulation. HOT loci form the foundation of human super-enhancers and evolve under strong negative selection, with some of these loci being located in ultraconserved regions. Sequence-based classification analysis of HOT loci suggested that their formation is driven by the sequence features, and the density of mapped ChIP-seq peaks across TF-bound loci correlates with sequence features and the expression level of flanking genes. Based on the affinities to bind to promoters and enhancers we detected five distinct clusters of TFs that form the core of the HOT loci. We report an abundance of HOT loci in the human genome and a commitment of 51% of all TF ChIP-seq binding events to HOT locus formation thus challenging the classical model of enhancer activity and propose a model of HOT locus formation based on the existence of large transcriptional condensates.