4.1 Article

Nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR) are increased in the pre-eclamptic placenta

期刊

HYPERTENSION IN PREGNANCY
卷 34, 期 2, 页码 227-240

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.3109/10641955.2015.1009545

关键词

ACh; Blood pressure; Hypoxia; mRNA; Nicotine; Protein

资金

  1. PEARLS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The role of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR) in pre-eclampsia is unknown. Given that ACh levels are affected in pre-eclampsia, it has been suggested that compensatory changes in nAChR expression may ensue. This study aimed to determine the effects of pre-eclampsia on the mRNA and protein expression of 12 mammalian nAChR subunits. Methods: Placentas were collected from healthy term pregnancies (n = 8) and pregnancies complicated by pre-eclampsia (n = 7), both being non-cigarette smoke exposed to rule out any role of nicotine. Using real-time quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR), 12 subunits (alpha 2, alpha 3, alpha 4, alpha 5, alpha 6, alpha 7, alpha 9, beta 1, beta 2, beta 4, delta, and gamma) were able to be studied at the mRNA level, while at the protein level using Western blotting, nine subunits (alpha 2, alpha 3, alpha 4, alpha 5, alpha 7, alpha 9, beta 1, beta 2, and gamma) were studied. Results: At the mRNA level, pre-eclamptic placentas showed an increase in alpha 2 (p = 0.003), alpha 9 (p50.001), beta 1 (p = 0.03) and beta 2 (p = 0.02) subunit expression, while at the protein level, alpha 7 (p = 0.004), alpha 9 (p = 0.02), and delta (p = 0.003) subunits were increased compared to controls. Conclusion: Certain nAChR subunits are increased in the pre-eclamptic placenta. Given the absence of cigarette smoking, the changes in expression are hypothesised to be due to the hypoxic environment resulting from the pathophysiology of pre-eclampsia, which subsequently affects endogenous ACh levels, yielding compensatory increases in alpha 2, alpha 7, alpha 9, beta 1, beta 2, and delta nAChR subunits.

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

4.1
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