4.7 Article

Silk fibroin peptide self-assembled nanofibers delivered naringenin to alleviate cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury by inhibiting mtDNA-cGAS-STING pathway

期刊

FOOD AND CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGY
卷 177, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2023.113844

关键词

Silk fibroin peptide; Naringin; Acute kidney injury; Mitophagy; cGAS-STING pathway

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Silk fibroin peptide nanofibers loaded with naringenin protected kidney cells from cisplatin-induced damage by activating mitophagy and inhibiting mtDNA release and the cGAS-STING pathway. This study confirmed the potential of silk fibroin peptide nanofibers for protection against cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury, warranting further investigation.
Silk fibroin (SF) has excellent biocompatibility and biodegradability as a biomaterial. The purity and molecular weight distribution of silk fibroin peptide (SFP) make it more suitable for medical application. In this study, SFP nanofibers (molecular weight similar to 30kD) were prepared through CaCl2/H2O/C2H5OH solution decomposition and dialysis, and adsorbed naringenin (NGN) to obtain SFP/NGN NFs. In vitro results showed that SFP/NGN NFs increased the antioxidant activity of NGN and protected HK-2 cells from cisplatin-induced damage. In vivo results also showed that SFP/NGN NFs protected mice from cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury (AKI). The mechanism results showed that cisplatin induced mitochondrial damage, as well as increased mitophagy and mtDNA release, which activated the cGAS-STING pathway and induced the expression of inflammatory factors such as IL-6 and TNF-alpha. Interestingly, SFP/NGN NFs further activated mitophagy and inhibited mtDNA release and cGAS-STING pathway. Demonstrated that mitophagy-mtDNA-cGAS-STING signal axis was involved in the kidney protection mechanism of SFP/NGN NFs. In conclusion, our study confirmed that SFP/NGN NFs are candidates for protection of cisplatin-induced AKI, which is worthy of further study.

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