4.7 Review

Glucose, glycolysis, and neurodegenerative diseases

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELLULAR PHYSIOLOGY
卷 235, 期 11, 页码 7653-7662

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcp.29682

关键词

glucose; glycolysis; neurodegenerative diseases

资金

  1. NUS Graduate School for Integrative Sciences and Engineering

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Prolonged survival of a typical postmitotic neuron hinges on a balance between multiple processes, among these are a sustenance of ATP production and protection against reactive oxygen species. In neuropathological conditions, mitochondrial defects often lead to both a drop in ATP levels, as well as increase reactive oxygen species production from inefficient electron transport processes and NADPH-oxidases activities. The former often resulted in the phenomenon of compensatory aerobic glycolysis. The latter stretches the capacity of the cell's redox buffering capacity, and may lead to damages of key enzymes involved in energy metabolism. Several recent reports have indicated that enhancing glucose availability and uptake, as well as increasing glycolytic flux via pharmacological or genetic manipulation of glycolytic enzymes, could be protective in animal models of several major neurodegenerative diseases, including Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, and Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Activation of canonical Wnt signaling, which improves disease symptoms in mouse models of Alzheimer's disease also appears to work via an elevation of glycolytic enzymes and enhance glucose metabolism. Here, I discuss these findings and the possible underlying mechanisms of how an increase in glucose uptake and glycolysis could be neuroprotective. Increased glycolytic production of ATP would help alleviate energy deficiency, and ATP's hydrotropic effect may enhance solubility and clearance of toxic aggregates prevalent in many neurodegenerative diseases. Furthermore, channeling of glucose into the Pentose Phosphate Pathway would increase the redox buffering capacity of the cell.

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