4.7 Article

Increased fibulin-5 and elastin in S100A4/Mts1 mice with pulmonary hypertension

期刊

CIRCULATION RESEARCH
卷 97, 期 6, 页码 596-604

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.RES.0000182425.49768.8a

关键词

elastin; fibulin-5; hypoxia; mouse; pulmonary hypertension; smooth muscle cells; S100 proteins; vascular smooth muscle cells; vascular disease

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [1-R01-HL074186-01] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Transgenic mice overexpressing the calcium binding protein, S100A4/Mts1, occasionally develop severe pulmonary vascular obstructive disease. To understand what underlies this propensity, we compared the pulmonary vascular hemodynamic and structural features of S100A4/Mts1 with control C57Bl/6 mice at baseline, following a 2-week exposure to chronic hypoxia, and after 1 and 3 months recovery in room air. S100A4/Mts1 mice had greater right ventricular systolic pressure and right ventricular hypertrophy at baseline, which increased further with chronic hypoxia and was sustained after 3 months recovery in room air. These findings correlated with a heightened response to acute hypoxia and failure to vasodilate with nitric oxide or oxygen. S100A4/Mts1 mice, when compared with C57Bl/6 mice, also had impaired cardiac function judged by reduced ventricular elastance and decreased cardiac output. Despite higher right ventricular systolic pressures with chronic hypoxia, S100A4/Mts1 mice did not develop more severe PVD, but in contrast to C57Bl/6 mice, these features did not regress on return to room air. Microarray analysis of lung tissue identified a number of genes differentially upregulated in S100A4/Mts1 versus control mice. One of these, fibulin-5, is a matrix component necessary for normal elastin fiber assembly. Fibulin-5 was localized to pulmonary arteries and associated with thickened elastic laminae. This feature could underlie attenuation of pulmonary vascular changes in response to elevated pressure, as well as impaired reversibility.

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