4.6 Article

Small-molecule inhibitors of FABP4/5 ameliorate dyslipidemia but not insulin resistance in mice with diet-induced obesity

期刊

JOURNAL OF LIPID RESEARCH
卷 52, 期 4, 页码 646-656

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1194/jlr.M012757

关键词

fatty acid binding protein-4; pharmacokinetics; triglyceride; free fatty acid

资金

  1. Merck Research Laboratories

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fatty acid binding protein-4 (FABP4) and FABP5 are two closely related FA binding proteins expressed primarily in adipose tissue and/or macrophages. The small-molecule FABP4 inhibitor BMS309403 was previously reported to improve insulin sensitivity in leptin-deficient Lep(ob)/Lep(ob) (ob/ob) mice. However, this compound was not extensively characterized in the more physiologically relevant animal model of mice with diet-induced obesity (DIO). Here, we report the discovery and characterization of a novel series of FABP4/5 dual inhibitors represented by Compounds 1-3. Compared with BMS309403, the compounds had significant in vitro potency toward both FABP4 and FABP5. In cell-based assays, Compounds 2 and 3 were more potent than BMS309403 to inhibit lipolysis in 3T3-L1 adipocytes and in primary human adipocytes. They also inhibited MCP-1 release from THP-1 macrophages as well as from primary human macrophages. When chronically administered to DIO mice, BMS309403 and Compound 3 reduced plasma triglyceride and free FA levels. Compound 3 reduced plasma free FAs at a lower dose level than BMS309403. However, no significant change was observed in insulin, glucose, or glucose tolerance.jlr Our results indicate that the FABP4/5 inhibitors ameliorate dyslipidemia but not insulin resistance in DIO mice.-Lan, H., C. C. Cheng, T. J. Kowalski, L. Pang, L. Shan, C-C. Chuang, J. Jackson, A. Rojas-Triana, L. Bober, L. Liu, J. Voight, P. Orth, X. Yang, G. W. Shipps, and J. A. Hedrick. Small-molecule inhibitors of FABP4/5 ameliorate dyslipidemia but not insulin resistance in mice with diet-induced obesity. J. Lipid Res. 2011. 52: 646-656.

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

4.6
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