4.8 Article

Disruption of the Transcription Factor Recombination Signal-binding Protein-J kappa (RBP-J) Leads to Veno-Occlusive Disease and Interfered Liver Regeneration in Mice

期刊

HEPATOLOGY
卷 49, 期 1, 页码 268-277

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/hep.22579

关键词

-

资金

  1. NSFC [30425015, 30700415, 30830360, 30772103]
  2. Ministry of Education of China [IRT0459]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Liver sinusoid (LS) endothelial cells (LSECs) support hepatocytes in resting livers and proliferate during liver regeneration to revascularize regenerated liver parenchyma. We report that recombination signal-binding protein-J kappa (RBP-J), the critical transcription factor mediating Notch signaling, regulates both resting and regenerating LSECs. Conditional deletion of RBP-J resulted in LSEC proliferation and a veno-occlusive disease-like phenotype in the liver, as manifested by liver congestion, deposition of fibrin-like materials in LSs, edema in the space of Disse, and increased apoptosis of hepatocytes. Regeneration of liver was remarkably impaired, with reduced LSEC proliferation and destroyed sinusoidal. structure. LSEC degeneration was obvious in the regenerating liver of RBP-J-deficient mice, with some LSECs losing cytoplasm, and organelles protruding into the remnant plasma-membrane of LSs to hamper the microcirculation and intensify veno-occlusive disease during liver regeneration. Hepatocytes were also degenerative, as shown by dilated endoplasmic reticulum, decreased proliferation, and increased apoptosis during liver regeneration. Molecular analyses revealed that the dynamic expression of several related molecules-such as vascular endothelial growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1 and 2, interleukin-6, and hepatocyte growth factor-was disturbed. Conclusion: Notch/RBP-J signaling may play dual roles in LSECs: in resting liver it represses proliferation, and in regenerating liver it supports proliferation and functional differentiation. (HEPATOLOGY 2009;49:268-277.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据