4.7 Article

Opposite effects of lithium and valproic acid on trophic factor deprivation-induced glycogen synthase kinase-3 activation, c-Jun expression and neuronal cell death

期刊

NEUROPHARMACOLOGY
卷 48, 期 4, 页码 576-583

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2004.11.010

关键词

GSK-3; cerebellar granule cells; serum/potassium withdrawal; indirubin; Tau phosphorylation

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [P01 MH64570] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies demonstrate that lithium and valproic acid (VPA), two commonly used mood-stabilizing drugs, have neuroprotective effects against a variety of insults. Inhibition of the proapoptotic, enzyme, glycogen synthase kinase-3 (GSK-3), has been suggested to be the mechanism of action of neuroprotection for both drugs. In this study, we tested if lithium and VPA could protect cultured cerebellar granule neurons (CGNs) from GSK-3-mediated apoptosis induced by trophic factor withdrawal (serum/potassium deprivation). Both lithium and indirubin, a specific GSK-3 inhibitor, protected CGNs in a dose-dependent manner. In contrast, VPA did not provide any neuroprotection and even potentiated cell death. Immunoblot analysis revealed that lithium inhibited the trophic factor deprivation-induced activation of GSK-3 as well as the in vivo phosphorylation of the microtubule-associated protein Tau on Scr199, a specific target site for GSK-3. Under these same experimental conditions, however, VPA neither inhibited GSK-3 activation nor hindered GSK-3 mediated Tau phosphorylation. Furthermore, in accordance with their effects on neuronal survival, lithium prevented the induction of c-Jun expression in trophic factor-deprived CGNs, whereas VPA potentiated it. Collectively, these results show that VPA is not a universal inhibitor of neuronal GSK-3, and that instead of being neuroprotective, VPA can even exacerbate neuronal death under some conditions. (c) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. 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