4.7 Article

ATP Maintenance via Two Types of ATP Regulators Mitigates Pathological Phenotypes in Mouse Models of Parkinson's Disease

期刊

EBIOMEDICINE
卷 22, 期 -, 页码 225-241

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2017.07.024

关键词

ATP Parkinson's disease; ER stress; Dopaminergic neurons; Mitochondria; alpha-Synuclein

资金

  1. Mitsubishi Foundation [28107]
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan [16H05151]
  3. Solution-Oriented Research for Science and Technology from the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) [SORST-H16-3]
  4. Platform Project for Supporting Drug Discovery and Life Science Research (Platform for Dynamic Approaches to Living Systems) from the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) [16am0101009j0005]
  5. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [15K07036, 16H05151] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Parkinson's disease is assumed to be caused bymitochondrial dysfunction in the affected dopaminergic neurons in the brain. We have recently created small chemicals, KUSs (Kyoto University Substances), which can reduce cellular ATP consumption. By contrast, agonistic ligands of ERRs (estrogen receptor-related receptors) are expected to raise cellular ATP levels via enhancing ATP production. Here, we show that esculetin functions as an ERR agonist, and its addition to culturemedia enhances glycolysis and mitochondrial respiration, leading to elevated cellular ATP levels. Subsequently, we show the neuroprotective efficacies of KUSs, esculetin, and GSK4716 (an ERR. agonist) against cell death in Parkinson's disease models. In the surviving neurons, ATP levels and expression levels of a-synuclein and CHOP (an ER stress-mediated cell death executor) were all rectified. We propose that maintenance of ATP levels, by inhibiting ATP consumption or enhancing ATP production, or both, would be a promising therapeutic strategy for Parkinson's disease. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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