4.8 Article

Dichotomous effects of VEGF-A on adipose tissue dysfunction

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1200447109

关键词

neovascularization; VEGF receptor 2; hypoxia; obesity

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01-DK55758, RC1DK086629, P01DK088761]
  2. Medical Research Council [G1002033] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. Novo Nordisk Fonden [NNF12OC1016065] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. MRC [G1002033] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Obese fat pads are frequently undervascularized and hypoxic, leading to increased fibrosis, inflammation, and ultimately insulin resistance. We hypothesized that VEGF-A-induced stimulation of angiogenesis enables sustained and sufficient oxygen and nutrient exchange during fat mass expansion, thereby improving adipose tissue function. Using a doxycycline (Dox)-inducible adipocyte-specific VEGF-A overexpression model, we demonstrate that the local up-regulation of VEGF-A in adipocytes improves vascularization and causes a browning of white adipose tissue (AT), with massive up-regulation of UCP1 and PGC1 alpha. This is associated with an increase in energy expenditure and resistance to high fat diet-mediated metabolic insults. Similarly, inhibition of VEGF-A-induced activation of VEGFR2 during the early phase of high fat diet-induced weight gain, causes aggravated systemic insulin resistance. However, the same VEGF-A-VEGFR2 blockade in ob/ob mice leads to a reduced body-weight gain, an improvement in insulin sensitivity, a decrease in inflammatory factors, and increased incidence of adipocyte death. The consequences of modulation of angiogenic activity are therefore context dependent. Proangiogenic activity during adipose tissue expansion is beneficial, associated with potent protective effects on metabolism, whereas antiangiogenic action in the context of preexisting adipose tissue dysfunction leads to improvements in metabolism, an effect likely mediated by the ablation of dysfunctional proinflammatory adipocytes.

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