4.6 Article

Ceruloplasmin upregulation in retina of murine and human glaucomatous eyes

期刊

出版社

ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.06-0497

关键词

-

资金

  1. NEI NIH HHS [EY15224, EY15109, EY13467, EY01867, K08-EY00390] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE. Ceruloplasmin (Cp) expression is increased locally as a response to many neurodegenerative conditions. The purposes of this study were to confirm findings of Cp upregulation in glaucoma, detect the time course of this upregulation in a glaucoma model, and better localize its expression in the retina. METHODS. mRNA and protein were extracted from the retina and brain of DBA/2 and C57BL/6 mice and were subjected to analysis by RT-PCR and immunoblotting. In addition, eyes from the same mouse strains were subjected to immunohistochemistry using antibodies specific for Cp. Eyes from human subjects with or without glaucoma were also subjected to immunohistochemical analysis for Cp. RESULTS. Cp mRNA and Cp protein were upregulated in the retinas of glaucomatous DBA/2 mice. Upregulation of Cp occurred at approximately the time of extensive retinal ganglion cell (RGC) death and increased with increasing age to 15 months in the retinas but not in the brains of these animals. No age-related Cp upregulation was detected in the reference normal mouse strain (C57BL/6), which can develop significant nonglaucomatous RGC loss toward the end of the same time frame. Cp upregulation was also detected in most eyes from the patients with glaucoma. Cp upregulation was localized to the Muller cells within the retinas and in the area of the inner limiting membrane. CONCLUSIONS. Cp is upregulated in the retina of a commonly used glaucoma model (the DBA/2 mouse) and in most human glaucomatous eyes. The timing of this upregulation suggests that it may represent a reactive change of the retina in response to a noxious stimulus or to RGC death. Such Cp upregulation may represent a protective mechanism within the retina.

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