4.8 Article

An Adipose Tissue Atlas: An Image-Guided Identification of Human-like BAT and Beige Depots in Rodents

期刊

CELL METABOLISM
卷 27, 期 1, 页码 252-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2017.12.004

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH grants [R01-DK099110, R01-DK55758, P01-DK088761, P01-AG051459, R01-DK092163]
  2. Department of Radiology
  3. Visiting Scholar Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences
  4. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDB19000000]
  5. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31630037]
  6. NIH [1S10RR029674-01]
  7. Inveon PET-CT system
  8. NATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH RESOURCES [S10RR029674] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  9. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [K99DK114498, K01DK107788, P01DK088761, R01DK092163, RC1DK086629, R01DK055758, R01DK104789, R01DK099110] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

[F-18]Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/CT ((18) F-FDG-PET/CT) imaging has been invaluable for visualizing metabolically active adipose tissues in humans with potential anti-diabetic and anti-obesity effects. To explore whether mice display human-like fat depots in anatomically comparable regions, we mapped fat depots using glucose or fatty acid imaging tracers, such as F-18-FDG through PET/CT or [I-123/125]b- methyl-p-iodophenyl-pentadecanoic acid with SPECT/CT imaging, to analogous depots in mice. Using this type of image analysis with both probes, we define a large number of additional areas of high metabolic activity corresponding to novel fat pads. Histological and gene expression analyses validate these regions as bona fide fat pads. Our findings indicate that fat depots of rodents show a high degree of topological similarity to those of humans. Studies involving both glucose and lipid tracers indicate differential preferences for these substrates in different depots and also suggest that fatty acid-based visualized approaches may reveal additional brown adipose tissue and beige depots in humans.

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

4.8
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