4.7 Review

Potassium Channels as Therapeutic Targets in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension

期刊

BIOMOLECULES
卷 12, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biom12101341

关键词

pulmonary hypertension; ion channel; channelopathy; KCNK3; ABCC8; pharmacology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a devastating disease with complex pathogenesis. Recent studies have identified potassium channelopathies as novel causes of PAH. KCNK3, KATP, and Kv potassium channels have been proposed as promising therapeutic targets in PAH, and experimental pharmacologic discoveries have significantly advanced the field.
Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a devastating disease with high morbidity and mortality. Deleterious remodeling in the pulmonary arterial system leads to irreversible arterial constriction and elevated pulmonary arterial pressures, right heart failure, and eventually death. The difficulty in treating PAH stems in part from the complex nature of disease pathogenesis, with several signaling compounds known to be involved (e.g., endothelin-1, prostacyclins) which are indeed targets of PAH therapy. Over the last decade, potassium channelopathies were established as novel causes of PAH. More specifically, loss-of-function mutations in the KCNK3 gene that encodes the two-pore-domain potassium channel KCNK3 (or TASK-1) and loss-of-function mutations in the ABCC8 gene that encodes a key subunit, SUR1, of the ATP-sensitive potassium channel (KATP) were established as the first two potassium channelopathies in human cohorts with pulmonary arterial hypertension. Moreover, voltage-gated potassium channels (Kv) represent a third family of potassium channels with genetic changes observed in association with PAH. While other ion channel genes have since been reported in association with PAH, this review focuses on KCNK3, KATP, and Kv potassium channels as promising therapeutic targets in PAH, with recent experimental pharmacologic discoveries significantly advancing the field.

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