← Explore

Focused Ultrasound-Mediated Blood–Brain Barrier Opening Best Promotes Neuroimmunomodulation through Brain Macrophage Redistribution

Alina R. Kline-Schoder, Rebecca L. Noel, Hemali Phatnani, Vilas Menon, Elisa E. Konofagou

Neuroglia 2023 · 10.3390/neuroglia4020010

rodenthealthyalzheimers diseaseother mrihistology molecularother

Abstract

Neuroimmunomodulation is a promising form of drug-free treatment for neurological diseases ranging from Alzheimer’s disease to depression. The evidence supporting the efficacy of focused ultrasound (FUS) neuroimmunomodulation is encouraging; however, the method has yet to be standardized, and its mechanism remains poorly understood. Methods of FUS neuroimmunomodulation can be categorized into three paradigms based on the parameters used. In the first paradigm, focused ultrasound blood–brain barrier opening (FUS-BBBO) combines FUS with microbubbles (MB) to transiently and safely induce BBB opening. In the second paradigm, focused ultrasound neuromodulation (FUS-N) harnesses the acoustic effects of FUS alone (without MB). In the third paradigm, focused ultrasound with microbubbles without BBBO (FUS + MB) combines MB with FUS below the BBBO pressure threshold—harnessing the mechanical effects of FUS without opening the barrier. Due to the recent evidence of brain macrophage modulation in response to FUS-BBBO, we provide the first direct comparison of brain macrophage modulation between all three paradigms both in the presence and absence of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathology. Flow cytometry and single-cell sequencing are employed to identify FUS-BBBO as the FUS paradigm, which maximizes brain macrophage modulation, including an increase in the population of neuroprotective, disease-associated microglia and direct correlation between treatment cavitation dose and brain macrophage phagocytosis. Next, we combine spatial and single-cell transcriptomics with immunohistochemical validation to provide the first characterization of brain macrophage distribution in response to FUS-BBBO. Given their relevance within neurodegeneration and perturbation response, we emphasize the analysis of three brain macrophage populations—disease- and interferon-associated microglia and central-nervous-system-associated macrophages. We find and validate the redistribution of each population with an overall trend toward increased interaction with the brain–cerebrospinal fluid barrier (BCSFB) after FUS-BBBO, an effect that is found to be more pronounced in the presence of disease pathology. This study addresses the prior lack of FUS neuroimmunomodulation paradigm optimization and mechanism characterization, identifying that FUS-BBBO best modulates brain macrophage response via complex redistribution.

Abstract via crossref.

Speciesmouse (C57BL6/129 wild type; 3xTg-AD)
Subjects3, 6swept animals
Sessions per subject1
Randomisednot reported
Blindingnot reported
Sham / controlno treatment control
Auditory controlnot reported
Readout timingoffline
Anaesthesiaanaesthetised
Readoutsother mri, histology molecular, other — flow cytometry and imaging flow cytometry of brain macrophages (Cd9, phagocytosis, amyloid-beta); single-cell RNA sequencing; spatial transcriptomics; contrast-enhanced T1 MRI; passive cavitation detection (stable cavitation dose)
Direction of effectnot assessedBrain macrophage modulation (Cd9+ DAM, phagocytosis) was largest with FUS-BBBO; FUS-N brain macrophages had no significant changes from naive. Neuronal excitation or inhibition was not assessed.
Adverse eventsnot reported

Exposures

Exposure 1: FUS + MB (250 kPa), FUS-BBBO (450 kPa) and FUS-N (2 MPa), bilateral hippocampus

Target: hippocampus — “bilateral hippocampus”
Device: IGT / Imasonic · Imasonic, France · single-element spherical-segment transducer, 1.5 MHz ✓

Pulse timing
Waveformnot reported
Fundamental frequency (kHz)1,500✓✓✓
Pulse duration (ms)not reported
Pulse repetition frequency (Hz)not reported
Duty cycle (%)not reported
Sonication duration (s)not reported
Pressure and intensity, by domain
Free-field pressure (kPa)not reported
Free-field Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
Free-field Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ estimatenot reported
In-situ pressure (kPa)not reported
In-situ Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
Pressure, domain unspecified (kPa)250, 450, 2,000swept✓✓✓⚑
Protocol, in the paper’s words

Each hippocampus was sonicated first for 10 s for cavitation baseline and then again for the experimental sonication; microbubbles (FUS + MB and FUS-BBBO) were injected intravenously between the two. Pulse length, PRF, duty cycle and experimental sonication duration are not stated.

Flags from extraction

  • n_subjects — Only per-condition group sizes (n = 3 or 6 per condition, n = 1 section for spatial) are given, no total
  • exposures[0].unspecified_domain.pressure_kpa — Text says '250, 450 and 2 MPa' (2 MPa recorded as 2000 kPa); domain not stated; one entry per paradigm: FUS + MB, FUS-BBBO, FUS-N
  • exposures[0].timing — No pulse length, PRF, duty cycle or sonication duration given in the text
  • exposures[0].device.model — Transducer described by specification only; maker Imasonic named

Notes: Primarily a macrophage/neuroimmunomodulation study; FUS-N group (2 MPa, no microbubbles) is the TUS-like arm. Paradigms treated as one exposure with a pressure list.