4.7 Article

Detrimental role of the EP1 prostanoid receptor in blood-brain barrier damage following experimental ischemic stroke

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 5, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep17956

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIH [R01 NS065849, NS046400]
  2. Brain and Spinal Cord Injury Research Trust Fund
  3. McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) is activated in response to ischemia and significantly contributes to the neuroinflammatory process. Accumulation of COX-2-derived prostaglandin E-2 (PGE(2)) parallels the substantial increase in stroke-mediated blood-brain barrier (BBB) breakdown. Disruption of the BBB is a serious consequence of ischemic stroke, and is mainly mediated by matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs). This study aimed to investigate the role of PGE(2) EP1 receptor in neurovascular injury in stroke. We hypothesized that pharmacological blockade or genetic deletion of EP1 protects against BBB damage and hemorrhagic transformation by decreasing the levels and activity of MMP-3 and MMP-9. We found that post-ischemic treatment with the EP1 antagonist, SC-51089, or EP1 genetic deletion results in a significant reduction in BBB disruption and reduced hemorrhagic transformation in an experimental model of transient focal cerebral ischemia. These neurovascular protective effects of EP1 inactivation are associated with a significant reduction in MMP-9/-3, less peripheral neutrophil infiltration, and a preservation of tight junction proteins (ZO-1 and occludin) composing the BBB. Our study identifies the EP1 signaling pathway as an important link between neuroinflammation and MMP-mediated BBB breakdown in ischemic stroke. Targeting the EP1 receptor could represent a novel approach to diminish the devastating consequences of stroke-induced neurovascular damage.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available