4.7 Article

Akt Inhibition as Preconditioning Treatment to Protect Kidney Cells against Anoxia

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23010152

关键词

ischemia; ROS; mitochondria; triciribine; GC7; eIF5A

资金

  1. Agence Nationale de La Recherche, ANR [19-CE18-0029 KIRI]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lesions caused by ischemia/reperfusion stress are a major challenge in human pathophysiology, and the kidney is particularly sensitive to this. Targeting the hypusination pathway of eIF5A has been shown to improve ischemic tolerance and is successfully applied to kidney transplants. Inhibition of Akt can also be considered a preconditioning treatment against ischemia.
Lesions issued from the ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) stress are a major challenge in human pathophysiology. Of human organs, the kidney is highly sensitive to I/R because of its high oxygen demand and poor regenerative capacity. Previous studies have shown that targeting the hypusination pathway of eIF5A through GC7 greatly improves ischemic tolerance and can be applied successfully to kidney transplants. The protection process correlates with a metabolic shift from oxidative phosphorylation to glycolysis. Because the protein kinase B Akt is involved in ischemic protective mechanisms and glucose metabolism, we looked for a link between the effects of GC7 and Akt in proximal kidney cells exposed to anoxia or the mitotoxic myxothiazol. We found that GC7 treatment resulted in impaired Akt phosphorylation at the Ser473 and Thr308 sites, so the effects of direct Akt inhibition as a preconditioning protocol on ischemic tolerance were investigated. We evidenced that Akt inhibitors provide huge protection for kidney cells against ischemia and myxothiazol. The pro-survival effect of Akt inhibitors, which is reversible, implied a decrease in mitochondrial ROS production but was not related to metabolic changes or an antioxidant defense increase. Therefore, the inhibition of Akt can be considered as a preconditioning treatment against ischemia.

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