4.8 Article

Glucose-6 phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency decreases the vascular response to angiotensin II

期刊

CIRCULATION
卷 112, 期 2, 页码 257-263

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.104.499095

关键词

angiotensin; aorta; free radicals; hypertension; hypertrophy

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL55993, R01 HL55620] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIA NIH HHS [R03 AG19078-01] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background - Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) regulates production of the reduced form of NADPH through the pentose phosphate pathway. G6PD may therefore affect superoxide anion production via vascular NADPH oxidase, which is key in mediating the vascular response to angiotensin II (Ang II). We determined the hypertensive and vascular hypertrophic response to Ang II in G6PD-deficient mice. Methods and Results - Ang II (0.7 mg/kg per day) was infused via subcutaneous osmotic pumps for 6 days in male hemizygote G6PD mutant (G6PD(mat)) and wild-type (WT) C3H mice. ( 1) Compared with WT, G6PD(mut) mouse aorta had 10% to 20% of G6PD activity and 50% less NADPH. ( 2) Basal systolic blood pressure was not significantly different in G6PDmut mice (WT 88 +/- 4 mm Hg versus G6PD(mut) 95 +/- 4 mm Hg), but Ang II increased blood pressure to a lower level in G6PDmut mice (WT 139 +/- 4 mm Hg versus G6PDmut 123 +/- 5 mm Hg; P < 0.05). (3) Ang II increased aortic medial thickness less in G6PDmut mice (WT 71 +/- 2 mu m versus G6PD(mut) 62 +/- 1 mu m; P < 0.01). (4) 3-o-Nitrotyrosine staining and dihydroethidium oxidation in the aorta was increased by Ang II less in G6PDmut mice. ( 5) Smooth muscle cells isolated from G6PDmut mice showed less Ang II - induced phosphorylation of Akt and p42/44 ERK. Conclusions - G6PD deficiency may reduce vascular superoxide anion production by limiting production of the substrate for NADPH oxidase, thereby inhibiting oxidant-mediated Ang II - induced signaling pathways that contribute to hypertension and smooth muscle hypertrophy.

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

4.8
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