4.6 Article

Acute effects of oestrogen on the guinea pig and human IKr channels and drug-induced prolongation of cardiac repolarization

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LONDON
卷 586, 期 12, 页码 2961-2973

出版社

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2007.150367

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Female gender is a risk factor for drug-induced arrhythmias associated with QT prolongation, which results mostly from blockade of the human ether-a-go-go-related gene (hERG) channel. Some clinical evidence suggests that oestrogen is a determinant of the gender-differences in drug-induced QT prolongation and baseline QT(C) intervals. Although the chronic effects of oestrogen have been studied, it remains unclear whether the gender differences are due entirely to transcriptional regulations through oestrogen receptors. We therefore investigated acute effects of the most bioactive oestrogen, 17 beta-oestradiol (E2) at its physiological concentrations on cardiac repolarization and drug-sensitivity of the hERG (I-Kr) channel in Langendorff-perfused guinea pig hearts, patch-clamped guinea pig cardiomyocytes and culture cells over-expressing hERG. We found that physiological concentrations of E2 partially suppressed J(Kr) in a receptor-independent manner. E2-induced modification of voltage-dependence causes partial suppression of hERG currents. Mutagenesis studies showed that a common drug-binding residue at the inner pore cavity was critical for the effects of E2 on the hERG channel. Furthermore, E2 enhanced both hERG suppression and QT(C) prolongation by its blocker, E4031. The lack of effects of testosterone at its physiological concentrations on both of hERG currents and E4031-sensitivity of the hERG channel implicates the critical role of aromatic centroid present in E2 but not in testosterone. Our data indicate that E2 acutely affects the hERG channel gating and the E4031-induced QT(C) prolongation, and may provide a novel mechanism for the higher susceptibility to drug-induced arrhythmia in women.

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