4.6 Review

Vascular endothelial growth factor: a neurovascular target in neurological diseases

期刊

NATURE REVIEWS NEUROLOGY
卷 12, 期 8, 页码 439-454

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nrneurol.2016.88

关键词

-

资金

  1. Max Planck Society
  2. state of North Rhine-Westphalia
  3. Frick Foundation for ALS Research
  4. Minna James Heineman Foundation
  5. French Muscular Dystrophy Association (AFM)
  6. Schram Foundation
  7. Belgian Science Policy [IAP-P6/20, IAP-P7/20, IAP-P7/03]
  8. Flemish Government
  9. FWO [G.0595.12N, 1.5.149.13N, 1.5.211.14N]
  10. Foundation Leducq Transatlantic Network (ARTEMIS)
  11. 'A cure for ALS' fund from the ALS League Belgium
  12. Motor Neuron Disease Association
  13. ALS Association [C44128]
  14. Euro-MOTOR (EU HEALTH project)
  15. Leuven University Fund - Opening the Future
  16. [ERC-StG-311367]
  17. [FP7-PEOPLE-2011-CIG-304054]
  18. [DFG-FOR 2325]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Brain function critically relies on blood vessels to supply oxygen and nutrients, to establish a barrier for neurotoxic substances, and to clear waste products. The archetypal vascular endothelial growth factor, VEGF, arose in evolution as a signal affecting neural cells, but was later co-opted by blood vessels to regulate vascular function. Consequently, VEGF represents an attractive target to modulate brain function at the neurovascular interface. On the one hand, VEGF is neuroprotective, through direct effects on neural cells and their progenitors and indirect effects on brain perfusion. In accordance, preclinical studies show beneficial effects of VEGF administration in neurodegenerative diseases, peripheral neuropathies and epilepsy. On the other hand, pathologically elevated VEGF levels enhance vessel permeability and leakage, and disrupt blood brain barrier integrity, as in demyelinating diseases, for which blockade of VEGF may be beneficial. Here, we summarize current knowledge on the role and therapeutic potential of VEGF in neurological diseases.

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