Table_1_Transcriptomic analysis reveals sex-specific patterns in the hippocampus in Alzheimer’s disease.xlsx

Background

The hippocampus, vital for memory and learning, is among the first brain regions affected in Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) and exhibits adult neurogenesis. Women face twice the risk of developing AD compare to men, making it crucial to understand sex differences in hippocampal function for comprehending AD susceptibility.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive analysis of bulk mRNA postmortem samples from the whole hippocampus (GSE48350, GSE5281) and its CA1 and CA3 subfields (GSE29378). Our aim was to perform a comparative molecular signatures analysis, investigating sex-specific differences and similarities in the hippocampus and its subfields in AD. This involved comparing the gene expression profiles among: (a) male controls (M-controls) vs. female controls (F-controls), (b) females with AD (F-AD) vs. F-controls, (c) males with AD (M-AD) vs. M-controls, and (d) M-AD vs. F-AD. Furthermore, we identified AD susceptibility genes interacting with key targets of menopause hormone replacement drugs, specifically the ESR1 and ESR2 genes, along with GPER1.

Results

The hippocampal analysis revealed contrasting patterns between M-AD vs. M-controls and F-AD vs. F-controls, as well as M-controls vs. F-controls. Notably, BACE1, a key enzyme linked to amyloid-beta production in AD pathology, was found to be upregulated in M-controls compared to F-controls in both CA1 and CA3 hippocampal subfields. In M-AD vs. M-controls, the GABAergic synapse was downregulated, and the Estrogen signaling pathway was upregulated in both subfields, unlike in F-AD vs. F-controls. Analysis of the whole hippocampus also revealed upregulation of the GABAergic synapse in F-AD vs. F-controls. While direct comparison of M-AD vs. F-AD, revealed a small upregulation of the ESR1 gene in the CA1 subfield of males. Conversely, F-AD vs. F-controls exhibited downregulation of the Dopaminergic synapse in both subfields, while the Calcium signaling pathway showed mixed regulation, being upregulated in CA1 but downregulated in CA3, unlike in M-AD vs. M-controls. The upregulated Estrogen signaling pathway in M-AD, suggests a compensatory response to neurodegenerative specifically in males with AD. Our results also identified potential susceptibility genes interacting with ESR1 and ESR2, including MAPK1, IGF1, AKT1, TP53 and CD44.

Conclusion

These findings underscore the importance of sex-specific disease mechanisms in AD pathogenesis. Region-specific analysis offers a more detailed examination of localized changes in the hippocampus, enabling to capture sex-specific molecular patterns in AD susceptibility and progression.