4.7 Article

Pancreatic β-cell failure and diabetes in mice with a deletion mutation of the endoplasmic reticulum molecular chaperone gene P58IPK

Journal

DIABETES
Volume 54, Issue 4, Pages 1074-1081

Publisher

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/diabetes.54.4.1074

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL52848] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [R01AI22646] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIDDK NIH HHS [P30DK17047] Funding Source: Medline
  4. NIEHS NIH HHS [P30ES0703, U01ES11045] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The endoplasmic reticulum (ER) transmits apoptotic signals in the pancreas during ER stress, implicating ER stress-mediated apoptosis in the development of diabetes. P58(IPK) (DNAJC3) is induced during ER stress and functions as a negative feedback component to inhibit eIF-2 alpha signaling and attenuate the later phases of the ER stress response. To gain insight into a more comprehensive role of P58(IPK) function, we generated deletion mutant mice that showed a gradual onset of glucosuria, and hyperglycemia associated with increasing apoptosis of pancreatic islet cells. Lack of P58(IPK) had no apparent effect on the functional integrity of viable beta-cells. A set of genes associated with apoptosis showed altered expression in pancreatic islets from P58(IPK)-null mice, further substantiating the apoptosis phenotype. The data provide in vivo evidence to support the concept that P58(IPK) functions as a signal for the downregulation of ER-associated proteins involved in the initial ER stress response, thus preventing excessive cell loss by degradation pathways. Insulin deficiency associated with the absence of P58IPK mimics beta-cell failure associated with type 1 and late-stage type 2 diabetes. P58(IPK) function and activity may therefore provide a novel area of investigation into ER-mediated mechanistic and therapeutic approaches for diabetes.

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