4.7 Article

Thrombospondin-1 antagonizes nitric oxide-stimulated vascular smooth muscle cell responses

期刊

CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH
卷 71, 期 4, 页码 785-793

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cardiores.2006.05.024

关键词

smooth muscle; signal transduction; nitric oxide; extracellular matrix

资金

  1. Intramural NIH HHS Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Endothelial-derived nitric oxide (NO), by increasing cGMP, is a major physiological regulator of vascular tone and of vascular smooth muscle cell (VSMC) adhesion, chemotaxis, and proliferation. Thrombospondin-1 is a potent antagonist of NO/cGMP signaling in endothelial cells. Because endothelial and VSMC typically exhibit opposing responses to thrombospondin-1, we examined thrombospondin-1 effects on NO signaling in VSMC. Methods: Effects of exogenous thrombospondin-1 on human VSMC adhesion, chemotaxis, proliferation, and cGMP signaling were examined. Endogenous thrornbospondin-1 function was characterized by comparing NO signaling in VSMC from wild type and thrombospondin-1 null mice. Results: Picomolar concentrations of exogenous thrombospondin-1 prevented adhesive, chemotactic, and proliferative responses of human aortic VSMC stimulated by low dose NO. A recombinant CD36-binding domain of thrombospondin-1 or antibody ligation of CD36 similarly inhibited NO-stimulated VSMC responses. Thrombospondin-1 and CD36 ligation inhibited NO responses in VSMC by preventing cGMP accumulation. Thrombospondin-1 null VSMC responses to NO and cGMP signaling were enhanced relative to wild type murine VSMC. Conclusions: In the presence of NO, thrombospondin-1 is converted from a weak stimulator to a potent inhibitor of VSMC responses. Both exogenous and endogenous thrombospondin-1 inhibit NO signaling in VSMC. This activity is mediated by the type I repeats and utilizes the same CD36-dependent cGMP signaling pathway in endothelial and VSMC. (c) 2006 European Society of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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