4.7 Review

Rotten to the Cortex: Ceramide-Mediated Lipotoxicity in Diabetic Kidney Disease

期刊

FRONTIERS IN ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2020.622692

关键词

ceramide; sphingolipids; diabetic kidney disease; diabetic nephropathy; lipid metabolism; lipotoxicity

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [DK115824, DK116888, DK116450]
  2. Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation [JDRF 3-SRA-2019-768-A-B]
  3. American Diabetes Association
  4. American Heart Association
  5. Margolis Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is a prevalent and progressive comorbidity of diabetes mellitus that increases the risk of renal failure. Research suggests that bioactive ceramides may serve as a potential therapeutic target for DKD, as modulation of renal ceramide levels could improve kidney function and ameliorate DKD pathology. Studies have shown that circulating sphingolipid profiles can distinguish DKD patients from diabetic controls, highlighting the potential of ceramide as a central and therapeutically tractable lipid mediator of DKD.
Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is a prevalent and progressive comorbidity of diabetes mellitus that increases one's risk of developing renal failure. Progress toward development of better DKD therapeutics is limited by an incomplete understanding of forces driving and connecting the various features of DKD, which include renal steatosis, fibrosis, and microvascular dysfunction. Herein we review the literature supporting roles for bioactive ceramides as inducers of local and systemic DKD pathology. In rodent models of DKD, renal ceramides are elevated, and genetic and pharmacological ceramide-lowering interventions improve kidney function and ameliorate DKD histopathology. In humans, circulating sphingolipid profiles distinguish human DKD patients from diabetic controls. These studies highlight the potential for ceramide to serve as a central and therapeutically tractable lipid mediator of DKD.

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