The study evaluates pridopidine's effects on neural progenitor cells in ALS, indicating its potential therapeutic role.
The sigma-1 receptor (S1R) is an endoplasmic reticulum (ER)-resident protein enriched at the mitochondria-associated ER membranes (MAMs) that supports ER homeostasis, preserves mitochondrial function, and enhances cell survival under stress. Disruptions of MAM integrity and prolonged ER stress are well-recognized pathological features of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), contributing to motor neuron dysfunction and degeneration. In this study, we evaluated the protective effects of pridopidine, a highly selective and potent S1R agonist currently in clinical development for Huntington’s disease (HD) and ALS, using neural progenitor cells (NPCs) derived from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) from a patient with sporadic ALS. Exposure of ALS NPCs to the ER stressor tunicamycin increased the ER stress markers binding immunoglobulin protein (BiP) and C/EBP homologous protein (CHOP), disrupted mitochondrial membrane potential, upregulated expression of the mitochondrial apoptotic marker, BAX, increased caspase-3 activation, and reduced cell viability. Pridopidine significantly attenuated tunicamycin-induced BiP and CHOP expression in a biphasic, dose-dependent manner (with maximal efficacy at 1 µM), consistent with the typical pharmacology of S1R agonists. Pridopidine restored mitochondrial membrane potential, reduced mitochondrial apoptotic signaling, shown by decreased BAX expression and caspase-3 activation, and improved survival of ALS-NPCs under ER stress. Co-treatment with the selective S1R antagonist, NE-100, attenuated these effects, supporting an S1R-mediated mechanism of action for pridopidine. Together, these results demonstrate that S1R activation by pridopidine mitigates ER-stress-induced mitochondrial dysfunction and cell loss in ALS-NPCs, resulting in enhanced survival of NPCs supporting the therapeutic potential of pridopidine in ALS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Meltzer et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: