4.6 Article

Sustained Exendin-4 Secretion through Gene Therapy Targeting Salivary Glands in Two Different Rodent Models of Obesity/Type 2 Diabetes

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 7, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0040074

关键词

-

资金

  1. Italian Ministry of Health, Regione Toscana Department of Health (Italy)
  2. intramural National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIH/NIDCR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Exendin-4 (Ex-4) is a Glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist approved for the treatment of Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM), which requires daily subcutaneous administration. In T2DM patients, GLP-1 administration is reported to reduce glycaemia and HbA1c in association with a modest, but significant weight loss. The aim of present study was to characterize the site-specific profile and metabolic effects of Ex-4 levels expressed from salivary glands (SG) in vivo, following adenoassociated virus-mediated (AAV) gene therapy in two different animal models of obesity prone to impaired glucose tolerance and T2DM, specifically, Zucker fa/fa rats and high fed diet (HFD) mice. Following percutaneous injection of AAV5 into the salivary glands, biologically active Ex-4 was detected in the blood of both animal models and expression persisted in salivary gland ductal cell until the end of the study. In treated mice, Ex-4 levels averaged 138.9 +/- 42.3 pmol/L on week 6 and in treated rats, mean circulating Ex-4 levels were 238.2 +/- 72 pmol/L on week 4 and continued to increase through week 8. Expression of Ex-4 resulted in a significant decreased weight gain in both mice and rats, significant improvement in glycemic control and/or insulin sensitivity as well as visceral adipose tissue adipokine profile. In conclusion, these results suggest that sustained site-specific expression of Ex-4 following AAV5-mediated gene therapy is feasible and may be useful in the treatment of obesity as well as trigger improved metabolic profile.

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