4.5 Article

Proteolysis consistent with activation of caspase-7 after severe traumatic brain injury in humans

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROTRAUMA
卷 23, 期 11, 页码 1583-1590

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT INC
DOI: 10.1089/neu.2006.23.1583

关键词

apoptosis; cysteine protease; head injury; inflammation; programmed cell death

资金

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [P50 NS 30318, R01 NS 38620] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The expression and proteolysis of caspase family proteins are involved in the initiation and execution of apoptosis, which has been reported to occur in human and experimental traumatic brain injury (TBI). Caspase-3, -6, and -7 belong to the group of executioner caspases, which are cleaved and activated at the late, irreversible stage of apoptosis. Our previous studies demonstrated roles for caspase-1, -3, and -8 in humans after severe TBI. Here we report expression of caspase-7 mRNA and protein in humans after TBI (n = 16) and control brain-bank tissue (n = 6). Semiquantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction showed no differences between caspase-7 mRNA in TBI patients versus controls (73 +/- 24 vs. 85 +/- 56 relative optical density [ROD], respectively). In contrast, Western blot analysis showed increased pro-caspase-7 in TBI patients versus controls (214 +/- 30 vs. 1 +/- 1 ROD, respectively), as well as an increase in the similar-to-20 kD proteolytic fragment in TBI patients versus controls (86 +/- 13 vs. 22 +/- 12 ROD, respectively), consistent with activation of caspase-7 after TBI in humans. Immunohistochemical analysis showed that cells expressing caspase-7 included astrocytes and neurons and possibly other glial cell types and infiltrated inflammatory cells. These data show that caspase-7 and its cleavage product are increased in human brain after TBI in many central nervous system, as well as noncentral nervous system, cell types. Thus, caspase-7 may play a role in the glial and inflammatory responses, and possibly neuronal death, after TBI 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

4.5
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