4.5 Article

The nonerythropoietic asialoerythropoietin protects against neonatal hypoxia-ischemia as potently as erythropoietin

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROCHEMISTRY
Volume 91, Issue 4, Pages 900-910

Publisher

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-4159.2004.02769.x

Keywords

asialoerythropoietin; erythropoietin; hypoxia; ischemia; neonatal; neuroprotection

Funding

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM 44842] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recently, erythropoietin (EPO) and the nonerythropoietic derivative asialoEPO have been linked to tissue protection in the nervous system. In this study, we tested their effects in a model of neonatal hypoxia-ischemia (HI) in 7-day-old rats (unilateral carotid ligation and exposure to 7.7% O-2 for 50 min). EPO (10 U/g body weight = 80 ng/g; n = 24), asialoEPO (80 ng/g; n = 23) or vehicle (phosphate-buffered saline with 0.1% human serum albumin; n = 24) was injected intraperitoneally 4 h before HI. Both drugs were protective, as judged by measuring the infarct volumes, neuropathological score and gross morphological score. The infarct volumes were significantly reduced by both EPO (52%) and asialoEPO (55%) treatment, even though the plasma levels of asialoEPO had dropped below the detection limit (1 pm) at the onset of HI, while those of EPO were in the nanomolar range. Thus, a brief trigger by asialoEPO before the insult appears to be sufficient for protection. Proteomics analysis after asialoEPO treatment alone (no HI) revealed at least one differentially up-regulated protein, synaptosome-associated protein of 25 kDa (SNAP-25). Activation (phosphorylation) of ERK was significantly reduced in asialoEPO-treated animals after HI. EPO and the nonerythropoietic asialoEPO both provided significant and equal neuroprotection when administered 4 h prior to HI in 7-day-old rats. The protection might be related to reduced ERK activation and up-regulation of SNAP-25.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available