4.7 Article

Norepinephrine Protects against Methamphetamine Toxicity through β2-Adrenergic Receptors Promoting LC3 Compartmentalization

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22137232

关键词

PC12; autophagy; norepinephrine; methamphetamine; LC3; autophagy vacuoles; cell compartmentalization

资金

  1. Ministero della Salute [2021]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Norepinephrine (NE) offers protective effects against Meth-induced cell damage when directly applied to PC12 cells, primarily through activation of plasma membrane beta 2-adrenergic receptors (ARs) and restoration of autophagy disrupted by Meth administration.
Norepinephrine (NE) neurons and extracellular NE exert some protective effects against a variety of insults, including methamphetamine (Meth)-induced cell damage. The intimate mechanism of protection remains difficult to be analyzed in vivo. In fact, this may occur directly on target neurons or as the indirect consequence of NE-induced alterations in the activity of trans-synaptic loops. Therefore, to elude neuronal networks, which may contribute to these effects in vivo, the present study investigates whether NE still protects when directly applied to Meth-treated PC12 cells. Meth was selected based on its detrimental effects along various specific brain areas. The study shows that NE directly protects in vitro against Meth-induced cell damage. The present study indicates that such an effect fully depends on the activation of plasma membrane beta 2-adrenergic receptors (ARs). Evidence indicates that beta 2-ARs activation restores autophagy, which is impaired by Meth administration. This occurs via restoration of the autophagy flux and, as assessed by ultrastructural morphometry, by preventing the dissipation of microtubule-associated protein 1 light chain 3 (LC3) from autophagy vacuoles to the cytosol, which is produced instead during Meth toxicity. These findings may have an impact in a variety of degenerative conditions characterized by NE deficiency along with autophagy impairment.

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