4.7 Article

Role of LpL (Lipoprotein Lipase) in Macrophage Polarization In Vitro and In Vivo

Journal

ARTERIOSCLEROSIS THROMBOSIS AND VASCULAR BIOLOGY
Volume 39, Issue 10, Pages 1967-1985

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.119.312389

Keywords

fatty acid; inflammation; lipids; macrophage; monocytes

Funding

  1. New York University Clinical, and Translational Science Awards from National Institutes of Health [1TL1 TR001447]
  2. American Heart Association [18PRE33990436]
  3. [R01 HL135987]
  4. [P01 HL092969]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Fatty acid uptake and oxidation characterize the metabolism of alternatively activated macrophage polarization in vitro, but the in vivo biology is less clear. We assessed the roles of LpL (lipoprotein lipase)-mediated lipid uptake in macrophage polarization in vitro and in several important tissues in vivo. Approach and Results: We created mice with both global and myeloid-cell specific LpL deficiency. LpL deficiency in the presence of VLDL (very low-density lipoproteins) altered gene expression of bone marrow-derived macrophages and led to reduced lipid uptake but an increase in some anti- and some proinflammatory markers. However, LpL deficiency did not alter lipid accumulation or gene expression in circulating monocytes nor did it change the ratio of Ly6C(high)/Ly6C(low). In adipose tissue, less macrophage lipid accumulation was found with global but not myeloid-specific LpL deficiency. Neither deletion affected the expression of inflammatory genes. Global LpL deficiency also reduced the numbers of elicited peritoneal macrophages. Finally, we assessed gene expression in macrophages from atherosclerotic lesions during regression; LpL deficiency did not affect the polarity of plaque macrophages. Conclusions: The phenotypic changes observed in macrophages upon deletion of Lpl in vitro is not mimicked in tissue macrophages.

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