4.7 Article

The cardioprotective effect of postconditioning is mediated by ARC through inhibiting mitochondrial apoptotic pathway

期刊

APOPTOSIS
卷 14, 期 2, 页码 164-172

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10495-008-0296-4

关键词

Apoptosis; ARC; Cardioprotection; Postconditioning

资金

  1. Chinese National Natural Scientific Fund [Li30570735, Li30772297]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China [Liu2007CB512003]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Postconditioning protects the heart against ischemia/reperfusion injury by inhibiting cardiomyocyte apoptosis. However, the molecular mechanism by which postconditioning suppresses apoptosis remains to be fully understood. Apoptosis repressor with caspase recruitment domain (ARC) has been demonstrated to possess the ability to protect cardiomyocytes from apoptosis induced by ischemia/reperfusion. It is not yet clear as to whether ARC contributes to the inhibitory effect of postconditioning against cardiomyocyte apoptosis. The cultured cardiomyocytes from 1-day old male Sprague-Dawley rats were exposed to 3 h hypoxia followed by 3 h of reoxygenation. Cells were postconditioned by three cycles each of 5 min reoxygenation and 5 min hypoxia before 3 h of reoxygenation. Hypoxia/reoxygenation led to a decrease of endogenous ARC protein levels. In contrast, postconditioning could block the reduction of endogenous ARC protein levels. Interestingly, inhibition of endogenous ARC expression by ARC antisense oligodeoxynucleotides reduced the inhibitory effect of postconditioning against apoptosis. Furthermore, our data showed that postconditioning suppressed the loss of mitochondrial membrane potential, Bax activation and the release of mitochondrial cytochrome c to cytosol. However, these inhibitory effects of postconditioning disappeared upon knockdown of endogenous ARC. Our data for the first time demonstrate that ARC plays an essential role in mediating the cardioprotective effect of postconditioning against apoptosis initiated by the mitochondrial pathway.

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