Engaging Neuroscience to Advance Translational Research in Brain Barrier Biology

doi:10.1038/nrn2995

Nat Rev Neurosci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 April 24.

Published in final edited form as:

Nat Rev Neurosci. 2011 March; 12(3): 169–182.

doi: 10.1038/nrn2995

PMCID: PMC3335275

NIHMSID: NIHMS370950

Engaging Neuroscience to Advance Translational Research in Brain Barrier Biology

Edward A. Neuwelt,^1,² Björn Bauer,³ Christoph Fahlke,⁴ Gert Fricker,⁵ Constantino Iadecola,⁶ Damir Janigro,⁷ Luc Leybaert,⁸ Zoltan Molnar,⁹ Martha O’Donnell,¹⁰ John Povlishock,¹¹ Norman Saunders,¹² Frank Sharp,¹⁰ Danica Stanimirovic,¹³ Ryan Watts,¹⁴ and Lester Drewes³

¹Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon

²Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Portland, Oregon

³University of Minnesota, Duluth, Minnesota

⁴Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hanover, Germany

⁵University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

⁶Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York

⁷Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio

⁸Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

⁹University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom

¹⁰University of California at Davis, Davis, California

¹¹Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia

¹²University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia

¹³National Research Council, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

¹⁴Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, California

Corresponding Author: Edward A. Neuwelt, MD, Oregon Health & Science University, Blood-Brain Barrier Program, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Mailcode L603, Portland, OR 97239, neuwelte/at/ohsu.edu

The publisher's final edited version of this article is available at Nat Rev Neurosci

See other articles in PMC that cite the published article.

Preface

The delivery of many potentially therapeutic and diagnostic compounds to specific areas of the brain is restricted by brain barriers, the most well known of which are the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and the blood-cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) barrier. Recent studies have shown numerous additional roles of these barriers, including an involvement in neurodevelopment, control of cerebral blood flow, and, when barrier integrity is impaired, a contribution to the pathology of many common CNS disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and stroke. Thus, many key areas of neuroscientific investigation are shared with the ‘brain barriers sciences’. However, despite this overlap there has been little crosstalk. This lack of crosstalk is of more than academic interest as our emerging understanding of the neurovascular unit (NVU), composed of local neuronal circuits, glia, pericytes and the endothelium, illustrates how the brain dynamically modulates its blood flow, metabolism, and electrophysiological regulation. A key insight is that the barriers are an essential part of the NVU and as such are influenced by all cellular elements of this unit.

Introduction

There is a commonly held notion that the blood-brain barrier (BBB) is a simple anatomical structure that restricts the traffic of molecules in and out of the CNS, but otherwise is not very relevant to neuroscience. This view is flawed; however, as brain barrier sciences and neuroscience are inextricably linked in many areas of neurophysiology and neuropathology.

The BBB is one of a number of blood-CNS interfaces, which also include the blood-CSF barrier, the blood-retinal barrier, the blood-nerve barrier and the blood-labyrinth barrier, all of which are important for the physiological functions of the CNS (Figure 1). Among these interfaces, the BBB occupies by far the largest surface area. A wide range of neurological conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease^1–3, Parkinson’s disease⁴, multiple sclerosis^{5, 6}, trauma^{7, 8}, brain tumours^{9, 10}, stroke^11–14 and epilepsy¹⁵ are associated with perturbations in the normal BBB that contribute to their pathology (Table 1, references for Table 1 are in supplementary material S3). Furthermore, the cells that constitute the BBB play a part in the control of cerebral blood flow^{16, 17} and neuronal development¹⁸. Thus, it is important to recognize that the BBB has many other roles and is not simply a control point for molecular trafficking in and out of the brain.

Figure 1

The extended Neurovascular Unit (NVU)

Table 1

Diseases that affect the BBB or diseases impacted by the BBB.

The common wisdom has been that the BBB consists of endothelial cells and is either open or closed depending on the status of tight junction proteins that create a restrictive, fixed barrier. We now know that the BBB is, in fact, quite dynamic, with a wide permeability range that is controlled by intra- and intercellular signaling events among endothelial cells, astrocytes and neurons in the BBB and other cells that are in contact with the BBB, as well as by paracellular changes at the BBB. A further key conceptual advance has been the discovery that the BBB is an integral part of the NVU (see below)¹⁹ (Figure 1A).

The complex regulation of barrier properties is far from understood. Gaining better insight into the physiological and pathophysiological processes that alter intra- and intercellular junction protein distribution and function is important for understanding how the barrier can be fixed when it does not function properly and how it can be manipulated for therapeutic purposes. Suffice it to say, herein lies the opportunity for interdisciplinary approaches to expand our knowledge and improve strategies for treatments of neurological disorders.

Many factors have contributed to the lack of interaction between neuroscientists and brain barriers scientists, including the complexities of each field and the numerous gaps in our understanding of the BBB. This, in turn, has resulted in relatively little emphasis on brain barrier sciences as an interdisciplinary topic or educational objective, both of which would facilitate such communication. However, recent advances have increasingly emphasized the common ground between the two fields of study and the urgency for crosstalk. The present review provides a vision for future study that integrates both disciplines, highlighting areas of relevance and convergence.

A meeting of minds

In an effort to bring the two fields of neuroscience and brain barrier science closer, an international panel of experts was assembled in March 2009 to discuss current areas of overlapping interests where the expertise and observations of one group might advance the research progress of the other. Leaders in the fields of neuroscience and brain barriers science identified five topic areas as central to advancing the treatment of CNS disorders; these included molecular physiology of the brain and brain barriers; intercellular communication within the NVU; transport biology in the brain and brain barriers; neurodevelopment and the brain barriers; and imaging the structure, function and dynamics of the brain and brain barriers.

Within each topic, four main questions were addressed: What are the key scientific opportunities in the neuroscience field that may be applied to the brain barriers field and vice versa?; What is the status of the science in the topic area, including key scientific advances made in the respective fields over the past four years and are they relevant to the other field?; What are the barriers to progress in the topic area?; and What are the highest-priority recommendations for developing and advancing knowledge in the topic area, including the key resources and approaches needed?

For each of the five key topic areas, an international panel of experts, co-chaired by internationally renowned neuroscientists and brain barriers scientists drafted reports answering the four primary questions as well as addressing the key question “What is the single most important issue that would advance research in each topic area?” The draft reports were discussed among approximately 150 neuroscientists and brain barrier scientists at the 2009 Annual Blood-Brain Barrier Consortium Meeting, at Salishan Resort, Gleneden Beach, Oregon, USA (see supplementary information S1 and S2 (box)). The co-chairs and working groups incorporated into their final reports the discussion and input from the combined group of scientists (see supplementary information S4 for the final reports from each of the five topic areas (box)).

Physiology of the NVU

The NVU consists of an endothelial cell monolayer (connected by tight junctions and resting on the basal lamina), integral neighboring cells (including pericytes and smooth muscle cells) and astrocytic endfeet covering >98% of the vascular wall and occasional neuronal terminals. The astrocytes also extend processes that surround synapses and can thereby link neuronal activity and the oxygen and nutrient supply. Finally, components of the NVU include the circulating blood cells such as polymorphonuclear (PMN) cells, lymphocytes and monocytes that adhere and roll along the vascular lumen and perform surveillance of neural signaling and cellular activity²⁰ (Figure 1A).

The endothelial cells of the NVU are highly polarized, with different integral membrane proteins at the luminal and abluminal surfaces. These include various receptors, enzymes and transporters that support the functions of this cellular barrier within the NVU. For example, the endothelial barrier performs vectorial transport of solutes, including ions, nutrients and drugs, at the blood--brain interface. It also engages in highly specialized interactions with blood cells through specific luminal receptors and with elements of the basal lamina and underlying cells (e.g., astrocytic endfeet and neuron terminals) at the abluminal surface through specific abluminal plasma membrane proteins. Furthermore, astrocytes and pericytes possess their own complement of transporters, channels, receptors and signalling mechanisms with which they coordinate the role of the NVU in supporting nervous system function.

The tripartite synapse and the NVU

A major notion that has emerged from neuroscience over the past few years is the concept of the ‘tripartite synapse’, which has compelled neuroscientists to consider the influence of glia in synaptic function^{21, 22}. In the cerebral microcirculation, tripartite synapses composed of pre and postsynaptic endings, together with their related glia, are structurally and functionally related to the brain’s capillary bed and together (Figure 1A) form the NVU. The role of the NVU interface in the context of the tripartite synapse is just beginning to be understood. The cellular components include the endothelium (forming the barrier proper at the capillary level), astrocytic endfeet, pericytes and circulating immune cells, adjoined at some distance by nerve endings and vascular smooth muscle cells found at the arterial level^{19, 23} (Figure 1A and B). Note, immune cells indeed sneak into the NVU and are defined further in this manuscript as part of the extended NVU.

The NVU, together with the basal lamina and extracellular matrix components, engages in complex signaling processes (fast and slow; active and trophic). Documented examples include the propagation of Ca²⁺ waves through the NVU²⁴, neuro-metabolic coupling²⁵, neuro-hemodynamic coupling, neuro-angiogenic coupling and neuro-trophic coupling^{26, 27} and cell adhesion-based signaling networks²⁸. These NVU signaling processes are also linked to membrane transport^29–33, regulation of cellular permeability (specific, selective or via paracellular pathways)^{32, 34, 35} and intracellular metabolic cascades^{25, 36, 37}.

Dynamic regulation of brain barrier permeability by the NVU

Cells of the NVU form a complex and fine-tuned transport machine that balances the influx of nutrients and the efflux of wastes, toxins, and drugs to maintain CNS homeostasis³⁸. Numerous factors regulate the barrier permeability of the NVU, including modulation of membrane transporters and transcytotic vesicles and modulation of transcellular permeability³⁴ (Figure 1B).

The importance of investigating NVU transport proteins is underscored by the recent finding that 10–15% of all proteins in the NVU are transporters³⁹. In 2003 it was estimated that only about 50% of brain barrier transporter proteins had been identified^{39, 40}. Since then, several new transporters have been detected and localized in the brain endothelium and the choroid plexus (which forms the blood—CSF barrier). The identity and cellular location of multiple — generally efflux — transporters that are present in the NVU and that function possibly in drug transport are shown in Figure 2 (cell-type specific differences in expression are not shown here). New neuroscience discoveries include structural and mechanistic insights into coupled transporters (e.g. GABA and norepinephrine transporters (GAT/NET)), excitatory amino acid transporters (EAATs)⁴¹ and ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters⁴². Improved understanding of the physiological and biophysical mechanisms underlying transport function^43–46 should be applicable to both general brain function and dysfunction in disease.

Figure 2

Primary transporters in the neurovascular unit

Ion transporter proteins in cells of the NVU play an important role in maintaining fluid balance in the brain and our understanding of their role in water and electrolyte movement among cells of the NVU has recently been expanded. These studies largely focused on whole brain and/or hypoxia in neurons and astrocytes, and led to the discoveries of a family of HCO₃⁻ transporters, the electrogenic and electroneutral Na⁺/HCO₃⁻ transporters (NBCe and NBCn, respectively) and Na⁺-driven Cl⁻/HCO₃⁻ exchangers (NDCBE)^47–49. Expression levels of these transporters varies with brain region and cell type, with prominent expression of both NBC and NDCBE transporters reported for neurons and choroid plexus and little or no expression in astrocytes. Little is known about expression and function of the NBC and NDCBE transporters in cells of the cerebrovasculature.

Recent studies have provided important new insights regarding the role of aquaporins AQP4 in astrocytic endfeet⁵⁰ distribution of water within the brain^51–55 and have shown that abnormal fluid dynamics or AQP malfunctions may have pathological consequences⁵⁶. Several aquaporins are found in brain including AQP1, 3, 4, 5, 8, and 9, with AQP1, 4 and 9 most heavily studied. While AQP9 is found in the astrocyte cell body, AQP4 is abundant in perivascular astrocyte endfeet and also where the astrocyte is in close apposition to neurons. Choroid plexus exhibits AQP1 and 4. Endothelial cells of the NVU appear to have minor amounts of AQP4 at best. Pathways by which water moves through the endothelial cells of the NVU are largely understudied. A relatively recent finding is that that CO₂ and NH₃ conductances are regulated by AQP1 and AQP4⁵⁷. This has created a paradigm shift in the way we think about how metabolically relevant gases move through the NVU, i.e. that diffusion of the gases across plasma membrane is not by simple diffusion but rather, by facilitated diffusion via the aquaporins.

It has long been accepted that the NVU functions as a selective barrier to various substances passing between blood and brain, but these new discoveries have lead to a more developed understanding of the NVU which recognizes the NVU as a functionally complex blood–brain interface with multiple, interacting roles.

The NVU as a barrier to xenobiotics

One of the most important roles of the NVU is to limit xenobiotics, including CNS drugs, from entering the brain. This barrier function is mainly achieved by two components in the brain capillary endothelium: ATP-driven membrane transporters known as ‘efflux transporters’ and tight junctions that ‘seal’ spaces between endothelial cells.

Signaling pathways that regulate efflux transporters

Transporter-mediated export of xenobiotics can affect the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a large number of therapeutics and poses a challenge for the ability to deliver drugs into the CNS. Direct transporter inhibition has been pursued as one strategy, but it leaves little control over the extent and duration of the inhibition. Accordingly, transporter inhibitors are currently not in clinical use. Recent efforts have therefore focused on targeting the intracellular signaling pathways and molecular switches that control efflux transporter regulation, for several reasons. First, modulating these pathways and switches would allow fine-tuning of transporter activity so that transporters can be turned off for controlled periods, thus providing a time window to deliver drugs⁵⁸. Second, such strategies could be used to up-regulate expression and activity of efflux transporters in the NVU in order to minimize brain side effects associated with the treatment of a disease in the periphery (e.g., “chemobrain” in cancer patients)⁵⁹. Third, efflux transporters are affected by — and likely contribute to — disease pathology of CNS disorders that are accompanied by inflammation, oxidative stress and neurotransmitter release, including cancer, epilepsy, and Alzheimer’s disease^60–62. Thus, understanding the signaling pathways that regulate efflux transporter expression and activity is likely to be useful for improving CNS drug delivery, protecting the brain during systemic treatment, and preventing pathogenesis or slowing the progression of several CNS diseases.

For example, three major pathways have been identified that regulate P-glycoprotein (P-gp), a major efflux transporter at the blood-brain barrier that limits brain penetration of therapeutic drugs⁶³. One pathway is triggered by the inflammatory mediator tumor necrosis factor- α (TNF-α), which signals through TNF-R1 resulting in release of endothelin-1 (ET-1), which in turn signals through the ET_B receptor resulting in signaling through nitric oxide (NO) synthase and protein kinase C (PKC) βI to alter P-gp expression and function^{58, 64–66}. Indeed, activating PKC βI reduced P-gp activity and enhanced delivery of small molecule therapeutics into the brain⁵⁸. A second pathway involves the neurotransmitter glutamate, which signals through the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor, cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) and the prostaglandin E2 receptor EP1 to up-regulate P-gp expression and activity^67–70. Inhibiting this pathway prevents seizure-induced P-gp up-regulation and improves brain penetration of anti-epileptic drugs and reduces epileptic seizures⁷¹. The third pathway involves activation of xenobiotic-nuclear receptors such as the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR), the glucocorticoid receptor (GR), the pregnane xenobiotic receptor (PXR) and the constitutive androstane receptor (CAR)^72–78 to regulate transporter expression. For example, in a recent study, activation of PXR has been used to restore brain endothelial P-gp in an Alzheimer’s disease mouse model, which resulted in enhanced amyloid- β clearance from the brain⁶⁰. In addition, several of the signaling pathways have common elements (e.g. TNF-α, NF-κB, COX-2) that may be potential therapeutic targets.

Thus, findings from studies using physiological and pathophysiological modulators, pharmacologic inhibitors and activators of efflux transporters may be useful for improving the delivery of drugs into the brain, protecting the brain from harmful xenobiotics and alleviating CNS disorders^{79, 80}. In addition to studying brain barrier transporters, understanding the molecular regulation of tight junctions may provide therapeutic opportunities in diseases where endothelial barrier integrity is disrupted⁸¹.

Role of tight junctions in NVU function

In the brain capillary endothelium, tight junctions that seal the spaces between neighboring endothelial cells represent a passive barrier that restricts paracellular diffusion of water soluble solutes, including drugs, from blood to brain. The role of tight junctions and their key constituent proteins, claudins and occludins, in the regulation of barrier function is beginning to be elucidated. However, it is not yet known how these and other proteins interact to create the highly effective and precisely regulated tight junction. For example, although genetic ablation of claudin 5 has shown that this tight junction protein is necessary to limit movement of small molecules into the brain⁸², other studies have shown that claudin 5 is expressed in all endothelial cells, not just those in the NVU. Conversely, occludin is brain endothelial cell-specific but is not required for barrier function⁸³. Thus the molecular basis for the tightness of the cerebrovascular endothelium compared to endothelia in most other tissues remains unknown.

NVU and the control of cerebral blood flow

Communication between neurons and glial cells — especially astrocytes⁸⁴ — in response to electrical and synaptic activity can influence cerebral blood flow. This occurs under conditions of physiological levels of neuronal activity⁸⁵, strong or pathological stimuli⁸⁶ and spontaneous activation⁸⁷. Astrocytic calcium signals propagate to astrocytic endfoot extensions that are in contact with blood vessels and also extend to neighboring endfeet⁸⁸, thereby triggering the release of vasoactive messengers^89–91, thus altering local cerebral blood flow. Neuroimaging techniques such as functional MRI use these changes in cerebral blood flow as an indicator of CNS activity.

A key finding is that astrocytic endfeet release vasodilatory as well as vasoconstrictive messengers and this depends on the availability of oxygen: if oxygen availability is low, vasodilators prevail while if oxygen availability is high vasoconstrictors predominate⁹². Vasoactive messengers released by astrocytes include arachidonic acid, prostaglandin members of the epoxy-eicosa-trienoic acid family, and NO as vasodilators, and ET and OH-eicosa-tetraenoic acid products as vasoconstrictors¹⁷. As astrocytes make extensive contacts with smooth muscle cells at the arteriolar level⁹³, vasotropic actions of astrocytic calcium signals may also affect smooth muscle cells directly or indirectly via brain endothelial cells (which in turn secrete vasoactive substances such as NO)⁸⁹.

The observation that calcium signals in astrocytic endfeet located at the blood-brain interface suggests that these signals may influence endothelial cells at less than 0.1 µm distance and thus could cause dynamic alterations in BBB function²⁵. Clearly the astrocyte is a major communication link between the multiple parts of the NVU.

Neurodevelopment of the brain barriers

Research on vascular and neuronal development has been converging over the past decade, for example in the study of angiogenesis in fetal brain. There are at least two major reasons for this: first, there is evidence for shared molecules and coordinated cellular mechanisms during the development of these systems^{94, 95}; and second, there is evidence that neurogenesis and angiogenesis are co-regulated in embryonic and adult brains^{94, 96, 97}.

The CNS vasculature develops by angioblastic invasion of the head region that occurs in early phases of embryogenesis and this vasculogenic process establishes the extracerebral vascular plexus that eventually covers the entire surface of the neural tube^98–100. After the primary vascular plexus is formed, further vascularization of the CNS is exclusively achieved by angiogenesis from the perineural vascular complex. Driven by metabolic demands of the expanding neuroectoderm, capillary sprouts invade from the extracerebral vascular plexus toward the periventricular zone¹⁰¹. Once formed, the nascent brain vasculature is further stabilized by the recruitment of mural cells and the formation of the extracellular matrix, and is fine-tuned by microenvironmental cues from the neighboring cells^{102, 103}. Through this process of maturation all the components of brain vascular network acquire the phenotype that allows them to form a fully differentiated NVU.

It has been known for decades that there is a functional NVU well before the middle of the 150-day gestation of sheep^104–106 and the existence of tight junctions during brain development has also been noted in various other species, including humans, as summarized elsewhere¹⁰⁷. Over the past five years, unequivocal evidence has been published of both structural and functional barriers in the developing brain. In fact, studies using small molecular weight markers have shown that functionally effective tight junctions are present as soon as blood vessels begin to penetrate the early CNS parenchyma and as soon as epithelial cells of the choroid plexuses begin to differentiate^{108, 109}.

These tight junctions provide the basis for selectivity of barrier interfaces. Efflux transporters (e.g. P-glycoprotein, breast cancer resistance protein, multidrug resistance proteins), which can reduce the accumulation of drugs and toxins in the brain, are expressed in cerebral endothelial and choroid plexus epithelial cells early in development^110–112. A recent study reported that pericytes are required for blood-brain barrier integrity during embryogenesis¹¹³. Specifically, the data indicated that pericyte-endothelial cell interactions regulate some properties of the BBB during development, and disruption of these interactions may lead to BBB dysfunction and thus, to neuroinflammation as part of the response to CNS injury and disease¹¹³.

The functional role of the brain barriers during development is to provide the brain with a specialized internal environment. As shown in Figure 3, one major barrier difference is that the neuroependyma lining the cerebral ventricles constitutes a barrier during early development but not at later times, when it has become the adult ependyma. The molecular properties¹¹⁴ and specific functions of the brain barriers alter as the brain matures to reflect its changing role, influenced by the surrounding neural environment and its intrinsic developmentally regulated properties. In addition, the vasculature interacts with the neural environment – this includes shared molecular processes that influence the growth and maturation of the brain at specific stages of its development⁹⁴. Several key studies have identified important CNS parenchymal cell-derived molecular signals, including angiotensinogen and Wnt, that seem to regulate the formation and function of the cerebrovasculature and thereby the NVU^{18, 27, 94, 104, 115}. In addition to being essential for angiogenesis, Wnt/βcatenin signaling appears to be essential for expression of cerebral endothelial cell specific transporters such as slc2a1 (glut-1), slc7a1 (CAT1), and slc7a5 (TA1), but not tight junction molecules including occludin and ZO-1 or pan-endothelial molecules including PECAM and VE-cadherin²⁷. The finding that Wnt regulates CNS-specific angiogenesis and induces specific NVU properties such as gene expression and restricted permeability^{27, 94} suggests that CNS angiogenesis and brain barrier formation are linked by Wnt regulation and mutual interactions. The similarity of some immune and neural molecular mechanisms during development might also have implications for vascular development of CNS barriers, but this has so far remained unexplored. Combining vascular and neuronal developmental approaches to tackle questions related to brain barrier development promises to unravel the poorly understood mechanisms of barrier development, as has recently been reviewed⁹⁴.

Figure 3

Barrier interfaces

The blood-CSF barrier seems to be especially important during development as the choroid plexuses are functional, possess protein specific transport mechanisms and restrict paracellular passage at a time in development when the brain parenchyma has low levels of vascularization^{108, 116, 117}.

The NVU in disease

The NVU is usually considered in the context of its role in preventing CNS access of drugs and proteins with neurotherapeutic potential. The NVU is also affected in many CNS conditions and plays a role in their pathology. Brain abscess, trauma, MS, diabetic ketoacidosis and stroke can all alter brain endothelial cell and NVU function, with consequent edema that may be life threatening. NVU abnormalities themselves can result in distinct disease entities, as highlighted in Table 1. These disorders range from acute mountain sickness causing vasogenic edema^118–120, and hepatic encephalopathy causing astrocyte swelling in the NVU^{121, 122} to malaria impacting the cerebral endothelium^123–125.

The complexity of the cellular interactions in the NVU offer numerous potential targets for treatment. For example, one of the newest treatments for MS is a monoclonal antibody that binds the alpha 4 integrin receptor found on leukocytes and that prevents adhesion of the leukocytes to brain endothelial cells¹²⁶. This reduces the effects of the leukocytes that lead to the demyelination and brain injury seen in acute MS plaques. In addition, molecules found on the luminal side of brain endothelial cells are now recognized as receptors or ligands for proteins associated with various infectious microorganisms that have a predisposition to invade the brain, i.e. malaria (see Table 1). Furthermore, the large number of transporters and receptors on the luminal and abluminal membranes of brain endothelial cells and astrocyte endfeet provide numerous potential therapeutic targets for treatment of CNS diseases¹²⁷. One example is co-opting insulin receptors for transport of drugs across the NVU¹²⁸, a possibility that is now being examined^{129, 130}.

Cerebral vascular abnormalities have been reported in brains from both AD and PD patients¹³¹ and human genetics studies have linked vascular phenotypes to amyloid precursor protein (APP)¹³². Specifically, mutations in APP of the Dutch-type lead to cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) in both humans and transgenic mouse models¹³³. CAA induces intracranial hemorrhages, with cognitive decline and seizures, which may also contribute to the pathology and symptoms of AD. ApoE4-positive patients, who carry the most common late-onset genetic risk factor for AD, also have a higher rate of CAA¹³⁴. Recent advances have also described an influx and efflux mechanism for amyloid-beta, via receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE), lipoprotein receptor-related protein (LRP-1), and more recently P-gp, respectively^{20, 60}. These membrane proteins might be targets for modulating movement of amyloid-beta out of the brain of AD patients to slow or reverse plaque formation. Although barrier-specific genes have not been implicated in directly inducing CNS disease, there are genes associated with barrier function that have been linked to disease^135–143.

Recent data from the epilepsy field indicate a prominent role of interactions of leucocytes, in particular PMN cells, with brain endothelium in the initiation of seizure activity¹⁴⁴. This is a key observation that not only points to the importance of the BBB in initiating pathology but also stresses the need to consider the blood cells (leucocytes in this case) as members of the family of NVU cells. We therefore propose to use the term ‘extended NVU’ (Figure 1A) to underscore the importance of blood cells and inflammatory signals as key players in disturbed NVU and barrier function. We further anticipate that astrocytes may play an active role to maintain disturbed NVU function, by feeding back pathological signals from the disturbed NVU to the BBB (Figure 1C). Indeed, astrocytes as well as microglial cells are physiological sensors of brain function and pathology¹⁴⁵. The work by Appel¹⁴⁶ in which neuroprotective signals may cause microglia to become protective in axonal injury models and in PD and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (in contrast to the majority of literature in which microglia are damaging) further emphasize the need for greater communication between neuroscientists and brain barrier scientists.

Imaging Brain Barrier function

At the microscopic level, new imaging techniques, including confocal- and time-lapse microscopy, which allow simultaneous tagging and visualization of multiple molecular targets, molecular imaging of brain cells in vitro and brain tissues in vivo have made tremendous advances in recent years¹⁴⁷. Although imaging techniques at the atomic level and “label-less” techniques such as Raman spectroscopy¹⁴⁸ have much improved resolution, they can only be used to detect one or a few molecular species simultaneously. With imaging mass spectroscopy (IMS) tissue sections can be directly analyzed for the spatial distribution of multiple molecular markers¹⁴⁹, a powerful method for ex vivo imaging (bio)markers that define particular regions, or following ‘biomarker’ responses to disease, pharmacological treatment, electrical stimulation, etc.¹⁴⁹.

Further, the field of bioimaging relying on confocal, multiphoton and spinning disk confocal microscopy have been enhanced through the use of fluorescent murine transgenic reporter systems, mostly using green fluorescent protein (GFP) as a reporter. These have gained in popularity and have made great contributions to in vivo tracking exogenously-added cells (i.e. tumor cells, immune cells, and progenitor cells) and as proxy reporters for endogenous genes (i.e. transgenic mice)^150–152. These approaches have enhanced greatly our understanding of the trafficking of inflammatory cells across the BBB in models of ischemic brain injury and autoimmune demyelination, among others¹⁵³. In addition, the recent introduction of optogenetic approaches¹⁵⁴ will allow investigators to examine discrete neuronal signaling events in the context of the NVU, providing a degree of in vivo analytical power previously achievable only using in vivo systems. Since brain vasculature is functionally implicated in many brain diseases (Table 1), molecular changes in the NVU could be exploited as image-able biomarkers for early diagnosis or monitoring of the disease using targeted molecular imaging agents¹⁵⁵; the added advantage of such biomarkers is their accessibility from the systemic circulation.

At a macroscopic level, analysis of drug delivery to the CNS will be advanced by imaging technologies. For example, studies in animals using positron emission tomography (PET) indicate that it is possible to assess endothelial P-glycoprotein function and its role in the uptake and binding of drugs in the intact CNS by using suitable P-gp modulators that are labeled with a positron emitting isotopes¹⁵⁶ (Figure 4). In functional MRI, signal intensity changes are detected as changes in local blood flow and oxygenation, presumably linked to changes in neural activity. The opportunity exists to apply this technology (as well as other methods for imaging cerebral perfusion i.e. dynamic MR) with nanoparticle-based brain mapping methods to advance our understanding of neuro-glio-vascular coupling and BBB pathophysiology¹⁵⁷. As no single method can cover the several orders of magnitude in temporal and spatial resolutions and at the same time capture cellular and vascular events, one of the key opportunities to be harnessed in the future is a combination and integration of data and knowledge obtained through multi-modal imaging, such as MRI and PET.

Figure 4

Micro PET images of the head biodistribution of calcium channel blocker

Barriers to Progress

The most important barrier to progress in our understanding of the role of brain barriers in brain functioning is the lack of communication between neuroscience and brain barrier science. This lack of communication contributes to the omission of the brain barriers sciences in interdisciplinary education programs, thus perpetuating the gap between the fields. If the relationships among neurons, astrocytes and cells of the NVU are to be fully appreciated, it is essential for researchers in both fields to expand their knowledge of the cellular and molecular mechanisms at play in all cells of the NVU, not just those of the endothelial cell (currently studied by brain barrier scientists) or neurons and astrocytes (currently studied by neuroscientists). This should include, for example, attention to all classes of membrane proteins involved in transport across the barriers and among cells of the NVU, such as ion transporters and channels, nutrient transporters, drug transporters, and to proteins that are involved in transport mechanisms (including receptor-mediated endocytosis) and to the receptors and transduction pathways signaling to these proteins.

Because the endothelial cells are thin and tightly embedded within the brain parenchyma, they are not easily isolated for routine biochemical, molecular or cellular analysis. This has posed significant technical difficulties that have delayed progress in the study of blood-brain interfaces. This interface is a highly interactive structure, in which endothelial cells engage with multiple neighboring cells including pericytes, astrocytes, neurons and blood cells such as leukocytes. Brain endothelial cells are very flat cells, with a thickness of less than 0.5 µm outside the nuclear region, comparable in size to dendritic spines. The major technical difficulty here is the fact that the numerous cellular partners at the barrier interface interact with each other in a very thin compartment that has a thickness in the order of the size of dendritic spines. As such, it is very inaccessible. In addition, barrier function can only be studied in vivo because blood cells and blood flow are now considered as essential elements for its normal function. The presence of an intact circulation is a technical difficulty for microscopic imaging studies because of the presence of mechanical vascular pulsations. We propose to apply highly specialized microscope imaging techniques based on two-photon excitation that have been employed to study dendritic functions and dynamics for investigating the functional interaction s at the BBB interface.

Finally, there are misconceptions that need to be overcome, particularly with regard to the status of the NVU during development. A perception persists for some researchers in the field of brain barrier physiology, and therefore in the wider area of neurobiology, that the barrier systems are immature in the developing brain in both their structure and function. This misunderstanding of barrier function during neural development represents an impediment to a full understanding of the biological processes involved in barrier development and the contribution of barrier functions to neural development. The emphasis that is currently placed on understanding the role of the NVU in neuronal development, and recent evidence that vascular and neuronal development have common mechanisms, make a fruitful merger of fields possible. Similarly, there are misconceptions that the blood-brain interface is either open or closed in brain tumors¹⁵⁸, i.e. opened as in systemic tissues or closed as in normal brain. In truth, cerebral microvessels coursing through most malignant brain tumors have intermediate paracellular permeability so that some drugs and proteins can move from blood into tumor¹⁵⁸. However, recent evidence has shown that enhanced delivery of antitumor agents by further opening the blood-brain interface may improve survival in malignant brain tumor patients¹⁵⁹. One key obstacle is the lack of efficacious yet non-invasive methods. Modeling animal models of the BBB in human diseases such as stroke is difficult since our clinical knowledge in patients over time is so limited. Improved models may open up new avenues to define opportunities and time windows for therapeutic interventions.

Conclusions and future directions

In order to further the science in both fields, it is important that understanding what constitutes the functional blood-CNS interface under various physiological and pathophysiological conditions is paramount for developing appropriate therapies to address different disease states. New and improved animal models, including transgenic rodents, will be beneficial in achieving this aim. The use of zebrafish as an easily accessible comparative model for mechanistic in vivo studies should be further explored¹⁶⁰. Investigations on the contribution of blood cells and inflammatory signals as part of the NVU are needed. Although blood cells and inflammatory signals are generally not considered part of the NVU proper, they must be considered part of the extended NVU and are important mediators of CNS pathophysiology and need further investigation. Furthermore, animal models will be useful with application of advanced microscopy tools for real time and spatial resolution of cellular interactions, signaling events and metabolism.

Transporters, receptors and their signaling pathways in the NVU are important targets for improving CNS drug delivery and brain protection, and in preventing CNS disease. Advancing knowledge of transporter function, expression, localization and regulation in the brain vasculature and CNS tissues will surely aid progress.

Further consideration of the role of the NVU in research into nervous system development will likely continue to lend insight into both developmental neuroscience and the barriers sciences. There is also a need for improved animal models that are appropriate for studies investigating the links between barrier versus neural development. Furthermore, neuroscientists should consider the possible contributions of the NVU to the interpretation of their neuroscience data, including analysis of genetically engineered mouse models, drug efficacy studies, etc. Acceptance of the recent evidence in support of barrier function in the developing brain, along with the advent of an increased research focus on the development of brain barriers will help to overcome impediments to progress in these fields.

The simultaneous and remarkable advancements in neuroscience and brain-barriers research over the past decade have followed relatively independent tracks. Because of the mutual interests in understanding the mechanisms underlying neural function and disease and in delivering therapeutics through the blood-brain interface, it is now becoming clear that these dual tracks must become one. A careful analysis of common interests as reviewed here indicates that many underlying biological principles and technical approaches in neuroscience apply to the brain barriers and vice versa. Further progress in both fields will be advanced by continued and greater cross-talk and collaboration among the respective scientists and clinicians in the brain barriers and neuroscience fields.

Supplementary Material

Supplementary 1

Click here to view.^{(33K, doc)}

Supplementary 2

Click here to view.^{(91K, doc)}

Supplementary 3

Click here to view.^{(45K, doc)}

Supplementary 4

Click here to view.^{(25M, doc)}

References

1. Selkoe DJ. Alzheimer disease: mechanistic understanding predicts novel therapies. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140:627–638. [PubMed]

2. Zlokovic BV. Neurovascular mechanisms of Alzheimer's neurodegeneration. Trends Neurosci. 2005;28:202–208. [PubMed]

3. Iadecola C. The overlap between neurodegenerative and vascular factors in the pathogenesis of dementia. Acta Neuropathol. 2010;120:287–296. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

4. Kortekaas R, et al. Blood-brain barrier dysfunction in parkinsonian midbrain in vivo. Ann Neurol. 2005;57:176–179. [PubMed]

5. Gold R, Linington C, Lassmann H. Understanding pathogenesis and therapy of multiple sclerosis via animal models: 70 years of merits and culprits in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis research. Brain. 2006;129:1953–1971. [PubMed]

6. Hemmer B, Cepok S, Zhou D, Sommer N. Multiple sclerosis -- a coordinated immune attack across the blood brain barrier. Curr Neurovasc Res. 2004;1:141–150. [PubMed]

7. Shlosberg D, Benifla M, Kaufer D, Friedman A. Blood-brain barrier breakdown as a therapeutic target in traumatic brain injury. Nat Rev Neurol. 2010;6:393–403. [PubMed]

8. Barzo P, Marmarou A, Fatouros P, Hayasaki K, Corwin F. Contribution of vasogenic and cellular edema to traumatic brain swelling measured by diffusion-weighted imaging. J Neurosurg. 1997;87:900–907. [PubMed]

9. Jain RK, et al. Angiogenesis in brain tumours. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2007;8:610–622. [PubMed]

10. Papadopoulos MC, et al. Occludin expression in microvessels of neoplastic and non-neoplastic human brain. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol. 2001;27:384–395. [PubMed]

11. Moskowitz MA, Lo EH, Iadecola C. The science of stroke: mechanisms in search of treatments. Neuron. 2010;67:181–198. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

12. Belayev L, Busto R, Zhao W, Ginsberg MD. Quantitative evaluation of blood-brain barrier permeability following middle cerebral artery occlusion in rats. Brain Res. 1996;739:88–96. [PubMed]

13. Benchenane K, Lopez-Atalaya JP, Fernandez-Monreal M, Touzani O, Vivien D. Equivocal roles of tissue-type plasminogen activator in stroke-induced injury. Trends Neurosci. 2004;27:155–160. [PubMed]

14. Kuroiwa T, Ting P, Martinez H, Klatzo I. The biphasic opening of the blood-brain barrier to proteins following temporary middle cerebral artery occlusion. Acta Neuropathol. 1985;68:122–129. [PubMed]

15. Navarro Mora G, et al. Does pilocarpine-induced epilepsy in adult rats require status epilepticus? PLoS ONE. 2009;4:e5759. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

16. Takano T, et al. Astrocyte-mediated control of cerebral blood flow. Nat Neurosci. 2006;9:260–267. [PubMed]

17. Iadecola C, Nedergaard M. Glial regulation of the cerebral microvasculature. Nat Neurosci. 2007;10:1369–1376. [PubMed]

18. Stenman JM, et al. Canonical Wnt signaling regulates organ-specific assembly and differentiation of CNS vasculature. Science. 2008;322:1247–1250. [PubMed]

19. Abbott NJ, Ronnback L, Hansson E. Astrocyte-endothelial interactions at the blood-brain barrier. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006;7:41–53. [PubMed]

20. Neuwelt E, et al. Strategies to advance translational research into brain barriers. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7:84–96. [PubMed]

21. Perea G, Navarrete M, Araque A. Tripartite synapses: astrocytes process and control synaptic information. Trends Neurosci. 2009;32:421–431. [PubMed]

22. Araque A, Parpura V, Sanzgiri RP, Haydon PG. Tripartite synapses: glia, the unacknowledged partner. Trends Neurosci. 1999;22:208–215. [PubMed]

23. Grotta JC, Jacobs TP, Koroshetz WJ, Moskowitz MA. Stroke program review group: an interim report. Stroke. 2008;39:1364–1370. [PubMed]

24. Barres BA. The mystery and magic of glia: a perspective on their roles in health and disease. Neuron. 2008;60:430–440. [PubMed]

25. Leybaert L. Neurobarrier coupling in the brain: a partner of neurovascular and neurometabolic coupling? J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2005;25:2–16. [PubMed]

26. Lok J, et al. Cell-cell signaling in the neurovascular unit. Neurochem Res. 2007;32:2032–2045. [PubMed]

27. Daneman R, et al. Wnt/beta-catenin signaling is required for CNS, but not non-CNS, angiogenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106:641–646. [PubMed]

28. McCarty JH. Cell adhesion and signaling networks in brain neurovascular units. Curr Opin Hematol. 2009;16:209–214. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

29. MacAulay N, Zeuthen T. Water transport between CNS compartments: contributions of aquaporins and cotransporters. Neuroscience. 2010;168:941–956. [PubMed]

30. Miller DS. Regulation of P-glycoprotein and other ABC drug transporters at the blood-brain barrier. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2010;31:246–254. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

31. Kimelberg HK, Nedergaard M. Functions of astrocytes and their potential as therapeutic targets. Neurotherapeutics. 2010;7:338–353. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

32. Zlokovic BV. The blood-brain barrier in health and chronic neurodegenerative disorders. Neuron. 2008;57:178–201. [PubMed]

33. Pedersen SF, O'Donnell ME, Anderson SE, Cala PM. Physiology and pathophysiology of Na+/H+ exchange and Na+ -K+ -2Cl- cotransport in the heart, brain, and blood. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2006;291:R1–R25. [PubMed]

34. Persidsky Y, Ramirez SH, Haorah J, Kanmogne GD. Blood-brain barrier: structural components and function under physiologic and pathologic conditions. J Neuroimmune Pharmacol. 2006;1:223–236. [PubMed]

35. Jin R, Yang G, Li G. Molecular insights and therapeutic targets for blood-brain barrier disruption in ischemic stroke: critical role of matrix metalloproteinases and tissue-type plasminogen activator. Neurobiol Dis. 2010;38:376–385. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

36. Bell RD, et al. Pericytes control key neurovascular functions and neuronal phenotype in the adult brain and during brain aging. Neuron. 2010;68:409–427. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

37. Madri JA. Modeling the neurovascular niche: implications for recovery from CNS injury. J Physiol Pharmacol. 2009;60(Suppl 4):95–104. [PubMed]

38. Ohtsuki S, Terasaki T. Contribution of carrier-mediated transport systems to the blood-brain barrier as a supporting and protecting interface for the brain; importance for CNS drug discovery and development. Pharm Res. 2007;24:1745–1758. [PubMed]

39. Enerson BE, Drewes LR. The rat blood-brain barrier transcriptome. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism. 2006;26:959–973. [PubMed]

40. Pardridge WM. Molecular biology of the blood-brain barrier. Methods Mol Med. 2003;89:385–399. [PubMed]

41. Torres GE, Amara SG. Glutamate and monoamine transporters: new visions of form and function. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2007;17:304–312. [PubMed]

42. Locher KP. Review. Structure and mechanism of ATP-binding cassette transporters. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2009;364:239–245. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

43. Melzer N, Torres-Salazar D, Fahlke C. A dynamic switch between inhibitory and excitatory currents in a neuronal glutamate transporter. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;102:19214–19218. [PubMed]

44. Bunch L, Erichsen MN, Jensen AA. Excitatory amino acid transporters as potential drug targets. Expert Opin Ther Targets. 2009;13:719–731. [PubMed]

45. Bridges RJ, Esslinger CS. The excitatory amino acid transporters: pharmacological insights on substrate and inhibitor specificity of the EAAT subtypes. Pharmacol Ther. 2005;107:271–285. [PubMed]

46. Gonzalez MI, Robinson MB. Neurotransmitter transporters: why dance with so many partners? Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2004;4:30–35. [PubMed]

47. Chen LM, Haddad GG, Boron WF. Effects of chronic continuous hypoxia on the expression of SLC4A8 (NDCBE) in neonatal versus adult mouse brain. Brain Res. 2008;1238:85–92. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

48. Bevensee MO, Boron WF. Effects of acute hypoxia on intracellular-pH regulation in astrocytes cultured from rat hippocampus. Brain Res. 2008;1193:143–152. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

49. Chen LM, et al. Expression and localization of Na-driven Cl-HCO(3)(-) exchanger (SLC4A8) in rodent CNS. Neuroscience. 2008;153:162–174. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

50. Amiry-Moghaddam M, et al. An alpha-syntrophin-dependent pool of AQP4 in astroglial end-feet confers bidirectional water flow between blood and brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100:2106–2111. [PubMed]

51. Benfenati V, Ferroni S. Water transport between CNS compartments: functional and molecular interactions between aquaporins and ion channels. Neuroscience. 2010;168:926–940. [PubMed]

52. Speake T, Freeman LJ, Brown PD. Expression of aquaporin 1 and aquaporin 4 water channels in rat choroid plexus. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2003;1609:80–86. [PubMed]

53. Gunnarson E, Zelenina M, Aperia A. Regulation of brain aquaporins. Neuroscience. 2004;129:947–955. [PubMed]

54. King LS, Kozono D, Agre P. From structure to disease: the evolving tale of aquaporin biology. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2004;5:687–698. [PubMed]

55. Badaut J, Lasbennes F, Magistretti PJ, Regli L. Aquaporins in brain: distribution, physiology, and pathophysiology. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2002;22:367–378. [PubMed]

56. Francesca B, Rezzani R. Aquaporin and blood brain barrier. Curr Neuropharmacol. 2010;8:92–96. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

57. Musa-Aziz R, Chen LM, Pelletier MF, Boron WF. Relative CO2/NH3 selectivities of AQP1, AQP4, AQP5, AmtB, and RhAG. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106:5406–5411. [PubMed]

58. Rigor RR, Hawkins BT, Miller DS. Activation of PKC isoform beta(I) at the blood-brain barrier rapidly decreases P-glycoprotein activity and enhances drug delivery to the brain. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2010;30:1373–1383. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

59. Raffa RB, Tallarida RJ. Effects on the visual system might contribute to some of the cognitive deficits of cancer chemotherapy-induced 'chemo-fog'. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2010;35:249–255. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

60. Hartz AM, Miller DS, Bauer B. Restoring blood-brain barrier P-glycoprotein reduces brain amyloid-beta in a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease. Mol Pharmacol. 2010;77:715–723. [PubMed]

61. Loscher W, Potschka H. Drug resistance in brain diseases and the role of drug efflux transporters. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2005;6:591–602. [PubMed]

62. Fletcher JI, Haber M, Henderson MJ, Norris MD. ABC transporters in cancer: more than just drug efflux pumps. Nat Rev Cancer. 2010;10:147–156. [PubMed]

63. Schinkel AH. P-Glycoprotein, a gatekeeper in the blood-brain barrier. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 1999;36:179–194. [PubMed]

64. Bauer B, Hartz AM, Miller DS. Tumor necrosis factor alpha and endothelin-1 increase P-glycoprotein expression and transport activity at the blood-brain barrier. Mol Pharmacol. 2007;71:667–675. [PubMed]

65. Hartz AM, Bauer B, Fricker G, Miller DS. Rapid regulation of P-glycoprotein at the blood-brain barrier by endothelin-1. Mol Pharmacol. 2004;66:387–394. [PubMed]

66. Hartz AM, Bauer B, Fricker G, Miller DS. Rapid modulation of P-glycoprotein-mediated transport at the blood-brain barrier by tumor necrosis factor-alpha and lipopolysaccharide. Mol Pharmacol. 2006;69:462–470. [PubMed]

67. Bankstahl JP, Hoffmann K, Bethmann K, Loscher W. Glutamate is critically involved in seizure-induced overexpression of P-glycoprotein in the brain. Neuropharmacology. 2008;54:1006–1016. [PubMed]

67. Bauer B, et al. Seizure-induced up-regulation of P-glycoprotein at the blood-brain barrier through glutamate and cyclooxygenase-2 signaling. Mol Pharmacol. 2008;73:1444–1453. [PubMed]

69. Pekcec A, et al. Targeting prostaglandin E2 EP1 receptors prevents seizure-associated P-glycoprotein up-regulation. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2009;330:939–497. [PubMed]

70. Zibell G, et al. Prevention of seizure-induced up-regulation of endothelial P-glycoprotein by COX-2 inhibition. Neuropharmacology. 2009;56:849–855. [PubMed]

71. Schlichtiger J, et al. Celecoxib treatment restores pharmacosensitivity in a rat model of pharmacoresistant epilepsy. Br J Pharmacol. 2010;160:1062–1071. [PubMed]

72. Bauer B, et al. In vivo activation of human pregnane X receptor tightens the blood-brain barrier to methadone through P-glycoprotein up-regulation. Mol Pharmacol. 2006;70:1212–1219. [PubMed]

73. Wang X, Sykes DB, Miller DS. Constitutive androstane receptor-mediated up-regulation of ATP-driven xenobiotic efflux transporters at the blood-brain barrier. Mol Pharmacol. 2010;78:376–383. [PubMed]

74. Wang X, Hawkins BT, Miller DS. Aryl hydrocarbon receptor-mediated up-regulation of ATP-driven xenobiotic efflux transporters at the blood-brain barrier. FASEB J. 2010 [PubMed]

75. Bauer B, Hartz AM, Fricker G, Miller DS. Pregnane X receptor up-regulation of P-glycoprotein expression and transport function at the blood-brain barrier. Mol Pharmacol. 2004;66:413–419. [PubMed]

76. Dauchy S, et al. ABC transporters, cytochromes P450 and their main transcription factors: expression at the human blood-brain barrier. J Neurochem. 2008;107:1518–1528. [PubMed]

77. Narang VS, et al. Dexamethasone increases expression and activity of multidrug resistance transporters at the rat blood-brain barrier. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2008;295:C440–C450. [PubMed]

78. Ott M, Fricker G, Bauer B. Pregnane X receptor (PXR) regulates P-glycoprotein at the blood-brain barrier: functional similarities between pig and human PXR. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2009;329:141–149. [PubMed]

79. Miller DS, Bauer B, Hartz AM. Modulation of P-glycoprotein at the blood-brain barrier: opportunities to improve central nervous system pharmacotherapy. Pharmacol Rev. 2008;60:196–209. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

80. Hartz AM, Bauer B. Regulation of ABC transporters at the blood-brain barrier: new targets for CNS therapy. Mol Interv. 2010;10:293–304. [PubMed]

81. Hawkins BT, Davis TP. The blood-brain barrier/neurovascular unit in health and disease. Pharmacol Rev. 2005;57:173–185. [PubMed]

82. Nitta T, et al. Size-selective loosening of the blood-brain barrier in claudin-5-deficient mice. Journal of Cell Biology. 2003;161:653–660. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

83. Saitou M, et al. Complex phenotype of mice lacking occludin, a component of tight junction strands. Molecular Biology of the Cell. 2000;11:4131–4142. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

84. Volterra A, Meldolesi J. Astrocytes, from brain glue to communication elements: the revolution continues. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2005;6:626–640. [PubMed]

85. Wang X, et al. Astrocytic Ca2+ signaling evoked by sensory stimulation in vivo. Nat Neurosci. 2006;9:816–823. [PubMed]

86. Ding S, et al. Enhanced astrocytic Ca2+ signals contribute to neuronal excitotoxicity after status epilepticus. J Neurosci. 2007;27:10674–10684. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

87. Takata N, Hirase H. Cortical layer 1 and layer 2/3 astrocytes exhibit distinct calcium dynamics in vivo. PLoS ONE. 2008;3:e2525. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

88. Mulligan SJ, MacVicar BA. Calcium transients in astrocyte endfeet cause cerebrovascular constrictions. Nature. 2004;431:195–199. [PubMed]

89. Zonta M, et al. Neuron-to-astrocyte signaling is central to the dynamic control of brain microcirculation. Nat Neurosci. 2003;6:43–50. [PubMed]

90. Koehler RC, Roman RJ, Harder DR. Astrocytes and the regulation of cerebral blood flow. Trends Neurosci. 2009 [PubMed]

91. Haydon PG, Carmignoto G. Astrocyte control of synaptic transmission and neurovascular coupling. Physiol Rev. 2006;86:1009–1031. [PubMed]

92. Gordon GR, Choi HB, Rungta RL, Ellis-Davies GC, MacVicar BA. Brain metabolism dictates the polarity of astrocyte control over arterioles. Nature. 2008;456:745–749. [PubMed]

93. Simard M, Arcuino G, Takano T, Liu QS, Nedergaard M. Signaling at the gliovascular interface. J Neurosci. 2003;23:9254–9262. [PubMed]

94. Tam SJ, Watts RJ. Connecting vascular and nervous system development: angiogenesis and the blood-brain barrier. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2010;33:379–408. [PubMed]

95. Carmeliet P, Tessier-Lavigne M. Common mechanisms of nerve and blood vessel wiring. Nature. 2005;436:193–200. [PubMed]

96. Stubbs D, et al. Neurovascular congruence during cerebral cortical development. Cereb Cortex. 2009;(19 Suppl 1):i32–i41. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

97. Javaherian A, Kriegstein A. A stem cell niche for intermediate progenitor cells of the embryonic cortex. Cereb Cortex. 2009;(19 Suppl 1):i70–i77. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

98. Risau W, Wolburg H. Development of the blood-brain barrier. Trends Neurosci. 1990;13:174–178. [PubMed]

99. Harrigan MR. Angiogenic factors in the central nervous system. Neurosurgery. 2003;53:639–660. discussion 660-1. [PubMed]

100. Risau W. Mechanisms of angiogenesis. Nature. 1997;386:671–674. [PubMed]

101. Stone J, et al. Development of retinal vasculature is mediated by hypoxia-induced vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) expression by neuroglia. J Neurosci. 1995;15:4738–4747. [PubMed]

102. Jain RK. Molecular regulation of vessel maturation. Nat Med. 2003;9:685–693. [PubMed]

103. Greenberg DA, Jin K. From angiogenesis to neuropathology. Nature. 2005;438:954–959. [PubMed]

104. Dziegielewska KM, et al. Plasma proteins in fetal sheep brain: blood-brain barrier and intracerebral distribution. J Physiol. 1981;318:239–250. [PubMed]

105. Dziegielewska KM, et al. Studies of the development of brain barrier systems to lipid insoluble molecules in fetal sheep. J Physiol. 1979;292:207–231. [PubMed]

106. Evans CA, Reynolds JM, Reynolds ML, Saunders NR, Segal MB. The development of a blood-brain barrier mechanism in foetal sheep. J Physiol. 1974;238:371–386. [PubMed]

107. Mollgard K, Saunders NR. The development of the human blood-brain and blood-CSF barriers. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol. 1986;12:337–358. [PubMed]

108. Johansson PA, Dziegielewska KM, Liddelow SA, Saunders NR. The blood-CSF barrier explained: when development is not immaturity. Bioessays. 2008;30:237–248. [PubMed]

109. Ek CJ, Dziegielewska KM, Stolp H, Saunders NR. Functional effectiveness of the blood-brain barrier to small water-soluble molecules in developing and adult opossum (Monodelphis domestica) J Comp Neurol. 2006;496:13–26. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

110. Gazzin S, et al. Differential expression of the multidrug resistance-related proteins ABCb1 and ABCc1 between blood-brain interfaces. J Comp Neurol. 2008;510:497–507. [PubMed]

111. Kalabis GM, Petropoulos S, Gibb W, Matthews SG. Breast cancer resistance protein (Bcrp1/Abcg2) in mouse placenta and yolk sac: ontogeny and its regulation by progesterone. Placenta. 2007;28:1073–1081. [PubMed]

112. Ek CJ, et al. Efflux mechanisms at the developing brain barriers: ABC-transporters in the fetal and postnatal rat. Toxicol Lett. 2010;197:51–59. [PubMed]

113. Daneman R, Zhou L, Kebede AA, Barres BA. Pericytes are required for blood-brain barrier integrity during embryogenesis. Nature. 2010;468:562–566. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

114. Daneman R, et al. The mouse blood-brain barrier transcriptome: a new resource for understanding the development and function of brain endothelial cells. PLoS ONE. 2010;5:e13741. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

115. Wosik K, et al. Angiotensin II controls occludin function and is required for blood brain barrier maintenance: relevance to multiple sclerosis. J Neurosci. 2007;27:9032–9042. [PubMed]

116. Liddelow SA, et al. Cellular transfer of macromolecules across the developing choroid plexus of Monodelphis domestica. Eur J Neurosci. 2009;29:253–266. [PubMed]

117. Liddelow SA, et al. Modification of protein transfer across blood/cerebrospinal fluid barrier in response to altered plasma protein composition during development. Eur J Neurosci. 2010 [PubMed]

118. Krasney JA. A neurogenic basis for acute altitude illness. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1994;26:195–208. [PubMed]

119. Severinghaus JW. Hypothetical roles of angiogenesis, osmotic swelling, and ischemia in high-altitude cerebral edema. J Appl Physiol. 1995;79:375–379. [PubMed]

120. Wilson MH, Newman S, Imray CH. The cerebral effects of ascent to high altitudes. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8:175–191. [PubMed]

121. Laursen H. Cerebral vessels and glial cells in liver disease. A morphometric and electron microscopic investigation. Acta Neurol Scand. 1982;65:381–412. [PubMed]

122. Martinez A. Electron microscopy in human hepatic encephalopathy. Acta Neuropathol. 1968;11:82–86. [PubMed]

123. Tripathi AK, Sha W, Shulaev V, Stins MF, Sullivan DJ., Jr Plasmodium falciparum-infected erythrocytes induce NF-kappaB regulated inflammatory pathways in human cerebral endothelium. Blood. 2009;114:4243–4252. [PubMed]

124. Tripathi AK, Sullivan DJ, Stins MF. Plasmodium falciparum-infected erythrocytes increase intercellular adhesion molecule 1 expression on brain endothelium through NF-kappaB. Infect Immun. 2006;74:3262–3270. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

125. Tripathi AK, Sullivan DJ, Stins MF. Plasmodium falciparum-infected erythrocytes decrease the integrity of human blood-brain barrier endothelial cell monolayers. J Infect Dis. 2007;195:942–950. [PubMed]

126. Engelhardt B, Kappos L. Natalizumab: targeting alpha4-integrins in multiple sclerosis. Neurodegener Dis. 2008;5:16–22. [PubMed]

127. Spencer BJ, Verma IM. Targeted delivery of proteins across the blood-brain barrier. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104:7594–7599. [PubMed]

128. Hoffman AS. The origins and evolution of "controlled" drug delivery systems. J Control Release. 2008;132:153–163. [PubMed]

129. Pardridge WM. Biopharmaceutical drug targeting to the brain. J Drug Target. 2010;18:157–167. [PubMed]

130. Vastag B. Biotechnology: Crossing the barrier. Nature. 2010;466:916–918. [PubMed]

131. Farkas E, De Jong GI, de Vos RA, Jansen Steur EN, Luiten PG. Pathological features of cerebral cortical capillaries are doubled in Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's disease. Acta Neuropathol. 2000;100:395–402. [PubMed]

132. Levy E, et al. Mutation of the Alzheimer's disease amyloid gene in hereditary cerebral hemorrhage, Dutch type. Science. 1990;248:1124–1126. [PubMed]

133. Herzig MC, et al. Abeta is targeted to the vasculature in a mouse model of hereditary cerebral hemorrhage with amyloidosis. Nat Neurosci. 2004;7:954–960. [PubMed]

134. Premkumar DR, Cohen DL, Hedera P, Friedland RP, Kalaria RN. Apolipoprotein E-epsilon4 alleles in cerebral amyloid angiopathy and cerebrovascular pathology associated with Alzheimer's disease. Am J Pathol. 1996;148:2083–2095. [PubMed]

135. Westerlund M, et al. Association of a polymorphism in the ABCB1 gene with Parkinson's disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2009;15:422–424. [PubMed]

136. Weber YG, et al. GLUT1 mutations are a cause of paroxysmal exertion-induced dyskinesias and induce hemolytic anemia by a cation leak. J Clin Invest. 2008;118:2157–2168. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

137. Suls A, et al. Paroxysmal exercise-induced dyskinesia and epilepsy is due to mutations in SLC2A1, encoding the glucose transporter GLUT1. Brain. 2008;131:1831–1844. [PubMed]

138. Newmeyer A, Cecil KM, Schapiro M, Clark JF, Degrauw TJ. Incidence of brain creatine transporter deficiency in males with developmental delay referred for brain magnetic resonance imaging. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2005;26:276–282. [PubMed]

139. Klepper J. Glucose transporter deficiency syndrome (GLUT1DS) and the ketogenic diet. Epilepsia. 2008;(49 Suppl 8):46–49. [PubMed]

140. Kim WS, Weickert CS, Garner B. Role of ATP-binding cassette transporters in brain lipid transport and neurological disease. J Neurochem. 2008;104:1145–1166. [PubMed]

141. Drozdzik M, et al. Polymorphism in the P-glycoprotein drug transporter MDR1 gene: a possible link between environmental and genetic factors in Parkinson's disease. Pharmacogenetics. 2003;13:259–263. [PubMed]

142. Dean M. The genetics of ATP-binding cassette transporters. Methods Enzymol. 2005;400:409–429. [PubMed]

143. Blanz J, et al. Leukoencephalopathy upon disruption of the chloride channel ClC-2. J Neurosci. 2007;27:6581–6589. [PubMed]

144. Fabene PF, et al. A role for leukocyte-endothelial adhesion mechanisms in epilepsy. Nat Med. 2008;14:1377–1383. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

145. Kreutzberg GW. Microglia: a sensor for pathological events in the CNS. Trends Neurosci. 1996;19:312–318. [PubMed]

146. Appel SH, Beers DR, Henkel JS. T cell-microglial dialogue in Parkinson's disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: are we listening? Trends Immunol. 2010;31:7–17. [PubMed]

147. Raj A, van den Bogaard P, Rifkin SA, van Oudenaarden A, Tyagi S. Imaging individual mRNA molecules using multiple singly labeled probes. Nat Methods. 2008;5:877–879. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

148. Freudiger CW, et al. Label-free biomedical imaging with high sensitivity by stimulated Raman scattering microscopy. Science. 2008;322:1857–1861. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

149. Seeley EH, Caprioli RM. Molecular imaging of proteins in tissues by mass spectrometry. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105:18126–18131. [PubMed]

150. Todman MG, Han SK, Herbison AE. Profiling neurotransmitter receptor expression in mouse gonadotropin-releasing hormone neurons using green fluorescent protein-promoter transgenics and microarrays. Neuroscience. 2005;132:703–712. [PubMed]

151. Turney SG, Lichtman JW. Chapter 11: Imaging fluorescent mice in vivo using confocal microscopy. Methods Cell Biol. 2008;89:309–327. [PubMed]

152. Zhuo L, et al. Live astrocytes visualized by green fluorescent protein in transgenic mice. Dev Biol. 1997;187:36–42. [PubMed]

153. Priller J, et al. Targeting gene-modified hematopoietic cells to the central nervous system: use of green fluorescent protein uncovers microglial engraftment. Nat Med. 2001;7:1356–1361. [PubMed]

154. Miesenbock G. The optogenetic catechism. Science. 2009;326:395–399. [PubMed]

155. Iqbal U, et al. Molecular imaging of glioblastoma multiforme using anti-insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-7 single-domain antibodies. Br J Cancer. 2010;103:1606–1616. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

156. Elsinga PH, Hendrikse NH, Bart J, van Waarde A, Vaalburg W. Positron emission tomography studies on binding of central nervous system drugs and P-glycoprotein function in the rodent brain. Mol Imaging Biol. 2005;7:37–44. [PubMed]

157. Weinstein JS, et al. Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles: diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging and potential therapeutic applications in neurooncology and central nervous system inflammatory pathologies, a review. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2010;30:15–35. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

158. Muldoon LL, et al. Chemotherapy delivery issues in central nervous system malignancy: a reality check. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:2295–2305. [PubMed]

159. Angelov L, et al. Blood-brain barrier disruption and intra-arterial methotrexate-based therapy for newly diagnosed primary CNS lymphoma: a multi-institutional experience. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3503–3509. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

160. Eliceiri BP, Gonzalez AM, Baird A. Zebrafish model of the blood-brain barrier: morphological and permeability studies. Methods Mol Biol. 2011;686:371–378. [PubMed]

161. Hartz AM, Bauer B. ABC Transporters in the CNS - An Inventory. Curr Pharm Biotechnol. 2011;12:423–440. [PubMed]

162. Saunders NR, Ek CJ, Habgood MD, Dziegielewska KM. Barriers in the brain: a renaissance? Trends Neurosci. 2008;31:279–286. [PubMed]

163. Bates KA, et al. Clearance mechanisms of Alzheimer's amyloid-beta peptide: implications for therapeutic design and diagnostic tests. Mol Psychiatry. 2008;16:16. [PubMed]

164. Vogelgesang S, et al. Deposition of Alzheimer's beta-amyloid is inversely correlated with P-glycoprotein expression in the brains of elderly non-demented humans. Pharmacogenetics. 2002;12:535–541. [PubMed]

165. Cirrito JR, et al. P-glycoprotein deficiency at the blood-brain barrier increases amyloid-beta deposition in an Alzheimer disease mouse model. J Clin Invest. 2005;115:3285–3290. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

166. Hartz AM, Miller DS, Bauer B. Restoring blood-brain barrier P-glycoprotein reduces brain amyloid-beta in a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease. Mol Pharmacol. 2010;77:715–723. [PubMed]

167. Xiong H, et al. ABCG2 is upregulated in Alzheimer's brain with cerebral amyloid angiopathy and may act as a gatekeeper at the blood-brain barrier for Abeta(1–40) peptides. J Neurosci. 2009;29:5463–5475. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

168. Drozdzik M, et al. Polymorphism in the P-glycoprotein drug transporter MDR1 gene: a possible link between environmental and genetic factors in Parkinson's disease. Pharmacogenetics. 2003;13:259–263. [PubMed]

169. Westerlund M, et al. Association of a polymorphism in the ABCB1 gene with Parkinson's disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2009;15:422–424. [PubMed]

170. Lu A, et al. Reperfusion activates metalloproteinases that contribute to neurovascular injury. Exp Neurol. 2008;210:549–559. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

171. Rosenberg GA. Matrix metalloproteinases and their multiple roles in neurodegenerative diseases. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8:205–216. [PubMed]

172. Wang X, Rosell A, Lo EH. Targeting extracellular matrix proteolysis for hemorrhagic complications of tPA stroke therapy. CNS Neurol Disord Drug Targets. 2008;7:235–242. [PubMed]

173. Xue M, Yong VW. Matrix metalloproteinases in intracerebral hemorrhage. Neurol Res. 2008;30:775–782. [PubMed]

174. Argaw AT, Gurfein BT, Zhang Y, Zameer A, John GR. VEGF-mediated disruption of endothelial CLN-5 promotes blood-brain barrier breakdown. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106(6):1977–1982. [PubMed]

175. Guzeloglu-Kayisli O, et al. KRIT1/cerebral cavernous malformation 1 protein localizes to vascular endothelium, astrocytes, and pyramidal cells of the adult human cerebral cortex. Neurosurgery. 2004;54:943–949. discussion 949. [PubMed]

176. Pagenstecher A, Stahl S, Sure U, Felbor U. A two-hit mechanism causes cerebral cavernous malformations: complete inactivation of CCM1, CCM2 or CCM3 in affected endothelial cells. Hum Mol Genet. 2009;18:911–918. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

177. Candelario-Jalil E, Yang Y, Rosenberg GA. Diverse roles of matrix metalloproteinases and tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases in neuroinflammation and cerebral ischemia. Neuroscience. 2009;158:983–994. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

178. Gidday JM, et al. Leukocyte-derived matrix metalloproteinase-9 mediates blood-brain barrier breakdown and is proinflammatory after transient focal cerebral ischemia. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2005;289:H558–H568. [PubMed]

179. Strbian D, et al. The blood-brain barrier is continuously open for several weeks following transient focal cerebral ischemia. Neuroscience. 2008;153:175–181. [PubMed]

180. Simard JM, et al. Newly expressed SUR1-regulated NCCa-ATP channel mediates cerebral edema after ischemic stroke. Nat Med. 2006;12:433–440. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

181. Wilson MH, Newman S, Imray CH. The cerebral effects of ascent to high altitudes. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8:175–191. [PubMed]

182. Klepper J. Glucose transporter deficiency syndrome (GLUT1DS) and the ketogenic diet. Epilepsia. 2008;(49 Suppl 8):46–49. [PubMed]

183. Suls A, et al. Paroxysmal exercise-induced dyskinesia and epilepsy is due to mutations in SLC2A1, encoding the glucose transporter GLUT1. Brain. 2008;131:1831–1844. [PubMed]

184. Weber YG, et al. GLUT1 mutations are a cause of paroxysmal exertion-induced dyskinesias and induce hemolytic anemia by a cation leak. J Clin Invest. 2008;118:2157–2168. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

185. Hughes JR. One of the hottest topics in epileptology: ABC proteins. Their inhibition may be the future for patients with intractable seizures. Neurol Res. 2008;30:920–925. [PubMed]

186. Miller DS, Bauer B, Hartz AM. Modulation of P-glycoprotein at the blood-brain barrier: opportunities to improve central nervous system pharmacotherapy. Pharmacol Rev. 2008;60:196–209. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

187. Mignot C, et al. Alexander disease: putative mechanisms of an astrocytic encephalopathy. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2004;61:369–385. [PubMed]

188. Blanz J, et al. Leukoencephalopathy upon disruption of the chloride channel ClC-2. J Neurosci. 2007;27:6581–6589. [PubMed]

189. Chaudhuri A, Yang B, Gendelman HE, Persidsky Y, Kanmogne GD. STAT1 signaling modulates HIV-1-induced inflammatory responses and leukocyte transmigration across the blood-brain barrier. Blood. 2008;111:2062–2072. [PubMed]

190. Huang W, Eum SY, Andras IE, Hennig B, Toborek M. PPARalpha and PPARgamma attenuate HIV-induced dysregulation of tight junction proteins by modulations of matrix metalloproteinase and proteasome activities. Faseb J. 2009;23:1596–1606. [PubMed]

191. Yamamoto M, et al. Phosphorylation of claudin-5 and occludin by rho kinase in brain endothelial cells. Am J Pathol. 2008;172:521–533. [PubMed]

192. de Lagerie SB, et al. MDR1A (ABCB1)-deficient CF-1 mutant mice are susceptible to cerebral malaria induced by Plasmodium berghei ANKA. J Parasitol. 2008;94:1139–1142. [PubMed]

193. Unkmeir A, et al. Fibronectin mediates Opc-dependent internalization of Neisseria meningitidis in human brain microvascular endothelial cells. Mol Microbiol. 2002;46:933–946. [PubMed]

194. Wang L, Lin M. A novel cell wall-anchored peptidoglycan hydrolase (autolysin), IspC, essential for Listeria monocytogenes virulence: genetic and proteomic analysis. Microbiology. 2008;154:1900–1913. [PubMed]

195. Banks WA. Physiology and pathology of the blood-brain barrier: implications for microbial pathogenesis, drug delivery and neurodegenerative disorders. Journal of Neurovirology. 1999;5:538–555. [PubMed]

196. Tripathi AK, Sullivan DJ, Stins MF. Plasmodium falciparum-infected erythrocytes decrease the integrity of human blood-brain barrier endothelial cell monolayers. J Infect Dis. 2007;195:942–950. [PubMed]

197. Haorah J, et al. Oxidative stress activates protein tyrosine kinase and matrix metalloproteinases leading to blood-brain barrier dysfunction. J Neurochem. 2007;101:566–576. [PubMed]

198. Man S, Ubogu EE, Ransohoff RM. Inflammatory cell migration into the central nervous system: a few new twists on an old tale. Brain Pathol. 2007;17:243–250. [PubMed]

199. Zlokovic BV. The blood-brain barrier in health and chronic neurodegenerative disorders. Neuron. 2008;57:178–201. [PubMed]

200. Suidan GL, McDole JR, Chen Y, Pirko I, Johnson AJ. Induction of blood brain barrier tight junction protein alterations by CD8 T cells. PLoS ONE. 2008;3:e3037. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

201. Verkman AS. Mammalian aquaporins: diverse physiological roles and potential clinical significance. Expert Rev Mol Med. 2008;10:e13. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

202. Yang B, Zador Z, Verkman AS. Glial cell aquaporin-4 overexpression in transgenic mice accelerates cytotoxic brain swelling. J Biol Chem. 2008;283:15280–15286. [PubMed]

203. Blecharz KG, Drenckhahn D, Forster CY. Glucocorticoids increase VE-cadherin expression and cause cytoskeletal rearrangements in murine brain endothelial cEND cells. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2008;28:1139–1149. [PubMed]

204. Felinski EA, Cox AE, Phillips BE, Antonetti DA. Glucocorticoids induce transactivation of tight junction genes occludin and claudin-5 in retinal endothelial cells via a novel cis-element. Exp Eye Res. 2008;86:867–878. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

205. Harke N, Leers J, Kietz S, Drenckhahn D, Forster C. Glucocorticoids regulate the human occludin gene through a single imperfect palindromic glucocorticoid response element. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2008;295:39–47. [PubMed]

206. Reijerkerk A, et al. Tissue-type plasminogen activator is a regulator of monocyte diapedesis through the brain endothelial barrier. J Immunol. 2008;181:3567–3574. [PubMed]

207. Kebir H, et al. Human TH17 lymphocytes promote blood-brain barrier disruption and central nervous system inflammation. Nat Med. 2007;13:1173–1175. [PubMed]

208. Morgan L, et al. Inflammation and dephosphorylation of the tight junction protein occludin in an experimental model of multiple sclerosis. Neuroscience. 2007;147:664–673. [PubMed]

209. Goodin DS, Cohen BA, O'Connor P, Kappos L, Stevens JC. Assessment: the use of natalizumab (Tysabri) for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (an evidence-based review): report of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2008;71:766–773. [PubMed]

210. Lutterotti A, Martin R. Getting specific: monoclonal antibodies in multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7:538–547. [PubMed]

211. Martin C, et al. FGF2 plays a key role in embryonic cerebrospinal fluid trophic properties over chick embryo neuroepithelial stem cells. Dev Biol. 2006;297:402–416. [PubMed]

212. Brooks TA, et al. Biphasic cytoarchitecture and functional changes in the BBB induced by chronic inflammatory pain. Brain Res. 2006;1120:172–182. [PubMed]

213. Foroutan S, Brillault J, Forbush B, O'Donnell ME. Moderate-to-severe ischemic conditions increase activity and phosphorylation of the cerebral microvascular endothelial cell Na+-K+-Cl- cotransporter. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2005;289:C1492–C1501. [PubMed]

214. Lam TI, Anderson SE, Glaser N, O'Donnell ME. Bumetanide reduces cerebral edema formation in rats with diabetic ketoacidosis. Diabetes. 2005;54:510–516. [PubMed]

215. Lam TI, O'Donnell ME. BBB Na/H exchange: plasma membrane distribution of NHE1 and NHE2 isoforms and stimulation by arginine vasopressin. FASEB J. 2008;22:734.3. [PubMed]

216. O'Donnell ME, Duong V, Suvatne J, Foroutan S, Johnson DM. Arginine vasopressin stimulation of cerebral microvascular endothelial cell Na-K-Cl cotransporter activity is V1 receptor and [Ca] dependent. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2005;289:C283–C292. [PubMed]

217. O'Donnell ME, Lam TI, Tran L, Anderson SE. The role of the blood-brain barrier Na-K-2Cl cotransporter in stroke. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2004;559:67–75. [PubMed]

218. Yuen N, Anderson SE, Glaser N, Tancredi DJ, O'Donnell ME. Cerebral blood flow and cerebral edema in rats with diabetic ketoacidosis. Diabetes. 2008;57:2588–2594. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

219. Dean M. The genetics of ATP-binding cassette transporters. Methods Enzymol. 2005;400:409–429. [PubMed]

220. Kim WS, Weickert CS, Garner B. Role of ATP-binding cassette transporters in brain lipid transport and neurological disease. J Neurochem. 2008;104:1145–1166. [PubMed]

221. Banks WA. The blood-brain barrier as a cause of obesity. Curr Pharm Des. 2008;14:1606–1614. [PubMed]

222. Jequier E. Leptin signaling, adiposity, and energy balance. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2002;967:379–388. [PubMed]

223. Pan W, et al. Astrocyte leptin receptor (ObR) and leptin transport in adult-onset obese mice. Endocrinology. 2008;149:2798–2806. [PubMed]

224. Luder AS, Tanner SM, de la Chapelle A, Walter JH. Amnionless (AMN) mutations in Imerslund-Grasbeck syndrome may be associated with disturbed vitamin B(12) transport into the CNS. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2008;7:7. [PubMed]

225. Gordon N. Canavan disease: a review of recent developments. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2001;5:65–69. [PubMed]

226. Urayama A, Grubb JH, Sly WS, Banks WA. Developmentally regulated mannose 6- phosphate receptor-mediated transport of a lysosomal enzyme across the blood-brain barrier. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2004;101:12658–12663. [PubMed]

227. Uhr M, et al. Polymorphisms in the drug transporter gene ABCB1 predict antidepressant treatment response in depression. Neuron. 2008;57:203–209. [PubMed]

228. Tanigami H, et al. Effect of glutamine synthetase inhibition on astrocyte swelling and altered astroglial protein expression during hyperammonemia in rats. Neuroscience. 2005;131:437–449. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

229. Sugimoto H, Koehler RC, Wilson DA, Brusilow SW, Traystman RJ. Methionine sulfoximine, a glutamine synthetase inhibitor, attenuates increased extracellular potassium activity during acute hyperammonemia. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1997;17:44–49. [PubMed]

230. Strauss GI, Knudsen GM, Kondrup J, Moller K, Larsen FS. Cerebral metabolism of ammonia and amino acids in patients with fulminant hepatic failure. Gastroenterology. 2001;121:1109–1119. [PubMed]