4.5 Article

Differential accumulation of non-transferrin-bound iron by cardiac myocytes and fibroblasts

Journal

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR CARDIOLOGY
Volume 35, Issue 5, Pages 505-514

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-2828(03)00072-5

Keywords

iron overload; iron transport; cardiac cells; cardiac fibroblasts; non-transferrin-bound iron

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cardiac myocytes accumulate iron preferentially over fibroblast-like non-myocytes, both in clinical iron overload and when the cells are grown together in culture. In order to determine whether this reflects the tissue context or is an inherent property of the cells, we studied iron transporters, transport kinetics, and iron efflux in homogeneous cultures of rat cardiac myocytes and fibroblasts. In both cells, the rate of uptake of Fe-59 from transferrin was insignificant, compared to the rate of uptake from non-transferrin-bound iron (NTBI). Expression of transferrin receptor mRNA and protein, and divalent metal transporter 1 (DMTI) mRNA, could not account for any difference in iron accumulation, and proportional efflux after iron loading was similar in both cells. Nevertheless, iron accumulation from NTBI over 72 h was greater in myocytes as determined by histological staining and quantitative iron measurement. NTBI uptake was greater for Fe2+ than Fe3+ in both cells, was increased by iron loading in both cells to a similar extent, and was characterized by similar Michaelis constants (K-m) in all cases (redox state and presence or absence of iron loading). However, V-max values were about 10-fold higher in myocytes. We conclude that preferential iron accumulation in cardiac myocytes, compared to fibroblasts, is due to a higher capacity of the NTBI-transporter system, and reflects an inherent difference in NTBI acquisition by the individual cell types. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

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