4.7 Article

Apelin affects the mouse aging urinary peptidome with minimal effects on kidney

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-47109-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. INSERM (Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale)
  2. Conseil Regional Occitanie
  3. Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale [DEQ20170336759]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Kidney function is altered by age together with a declined filtration capacity of 5-10% per decade after 35 years. Renal aging shares many characteristics with chronic kidney disease. Plasma levels of the bioactive peptide apelin also decline with age and apelin has been shown to be protective in chronic kidney disease. Therefore we evaluated whether apelin could also improve aging-induced renal lesions and function in mice. Since urine is for the major part composed of proteins and peptides originating from the kidney, we first studied apelin-induced changes, in the aging urinary peptidome. Despite the recently published age-associated plasma decrease of apelin, expression of the peptide and its receptor was increased in the kidneys of 24 months old mice. Twenty-eight days treatment with apelin significantly modified the urinary peptidome of 3 and 24 months old mice towards a signature suggesting more advanced age at 3 months, and a younger age at 24 months. The latter was accompanied by a decreased staining of collagen (Sirius red staining) in 24 months old apelin-treated mice, without changing aging-induced glomerular hypertrophy. In addition, apelin was without effect on aging-induced renal autophagy, apoptosis, inflammation and reduced renal function. In conclusion, treatment of aged mice with apelin had a limited effect on kidney lesions although modifying the urinary peptidome towards a younger signature. This supports evidence of apelin inducing more general beneficial effects on other aging organs, muscles in particular, as recently shown for sarcopenia, markers of which end up via the glomerular filtration in urine.

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

4.7
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