4.6 Article

Rapamycin inhibits epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition of peritoneal mesothelium cells through regulation of Rho GTPases

期刊

FEBS JOURNAL
卷 283, 期 12, 页码 2309-2325

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/febs.13740

关键词

epithelial mesenchymal transition; high glucose; mesothelial cells; rapamycin; Rho GTPases

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81170707]
  2. Key Research Program of Zhejiang Provincial Department of Education [N20110429]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) of peritoneal mesothelial cells (PMCs) is a key process of peritoneal fibrosis. Rapamycin has been previously shown to inhibit EMT of PMCs and prevent peritoneal fibrosis. In this study, we investigated the undefined molecular mechanisms by which rapamycin inhibits EMT of PMCs. To define the protective effect of rapamycin, we initially used a rat PD model which was daily infused with 20 mL of 4.25% high glucose (HG) dialysis solution for 6 weeks to induce fibrosis. The HG rats showed decreased ultrafiltration volume and obvious fibroproliferative response, with markedly increased peritoneal thickness and higher expression of a-smooth muscle actin (alpha-SMA) and transforming growth factor-beta 1. Rapamycin significantly ameliorated those pathological changes. Next, we treated rat PMCs with HG to induce EMT and/or rapamycin for indicated time. Rapamycin significantly inhibited HG-induced EMT, which manifests as increased expression of alpha-SMA, fibronectin, and collagen I, decreased expression of E-cadherin, and increased mobility. HG increased the phosphorylation of PI3K, Akt, and mTOR. Importantly, rapamycin inhibits the RhoA, Rac1, and Cdc42 activated by HG. Moreover, rapamycin repaired the pattern of F-actin distribution induced by HG, reducing the formation of stress fiber, focal adhesion, lamellipodia, and filopodia. Thus, rapamycin shows an obvious protective effect on HG-induced EMT, by inhibiting the activation of Rho GTPases (RhoA, Rac1, and Cdc42).

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