4.6 Article

Sex differences in neuroprotection provided by inhibition of TRPM2 channels following experimental stroke

Journal

JOURNAL OF CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW AND METABOLISM
Volume 31, Issue 11, Pages 2160-2168

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/jcbfm.2011.77

Keywords

ischemia; neuroprotection; stroke; TRPM2

Funding

  1. NIH [NS058792]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The calcium-permeable transient receptor potential M2 (TRPM2) ion channel is activated following oxidative stress and has been implicated in ischemic damage; however, little experimental evidence exists linking TRPM2 channel activation to damage following cerebral ischemia. We directly assessed the involvement of TRPM2 channels in ischemic brain injury using pharmacological inhibitors and short-hairpin RNA (shRNA)-mediated knockdown of TRPM2 expression. Each of the four TRPM2 inhibitors tested provided significant protection to male neurons following in vitro ischemia (oxygen-glucose deprivation, OGD), while having no effect in female neurons. Similarly, TRPM2 knockdown by TRPM2 shRNA resulted in significantly reduced neuronal cell death following OGD only in male neurons. The TRPM2 inhibitor clotrimazole reduced infarct volume in male mice, while having no effect on female infarct volume. Finally, intrastriatal injection of lentivirus expressing shRNA against TRPM2 resulted in significantly smaller striatal infarcts only in male mice following middle cerebral artery occlusion, having no significant effect in female mice. Data presented in the current study demonstrate that TRPM2 inhibition and knockdown preferentially protects male neurons and brain against ischemia in vitro and in vivo, indicating that TRPM2 inhibitors may provide a new therapeutic approach to the treatment of stroke in men. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism (2011) 31, 2160-2168; doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2011.77; published online 18 May 2011

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available