4.7 Article

Opposite effect of cAMP signaling in endothelial barriers of different origin

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-CELL PHYSIOLOGY
卷 287, 期 5, 页码 C1246-C1255

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpcell.00132.2004

关键词

endothelial cell adhesion; endothelial permeability; isometric force; myosin light chain kinase; myosin light chain phosphatase

向作者/读者索取更多资源

cAMP-mediated signaling mechanisms may destabilize or stabilize the endothelial barrier, depending on the origin of endothelial cells. Here, microvascular coronary [ coronary endothelial cells (CEC)] and macrovascular aortic endothelial cell (AEC) monolayers with opposite responses to cAMP were analyzed. Macromolecule permeability, isometric force, activation state of contractile machinery [ indicated by phosphorylation of regulatory myosin light chains (MLC), activity of MLC kinase, and MLC phosphatase], and dynamic changes of adhesion complex proteins ( translocation of VE-cadherin and paxillin) were determined. cAMP signaling was stimulated by the adenosine receptor agonist 5'-N( ethylcarboxamido)-adenosine (NECA), the beta-adrenoceptor agonist isoproterenol (Iso), or by the adenylyl cyclase activator forskolin (FSK). Permeability was increased in CEC and decreased in AEC on stimulation with NECA, Iso, or FSK. The effects could be inhibited by the PKA inhibitor Rp-8-CPT-cAMPS and imitated by the PKA activator Sp-cAMPS. Under cAMP/PKA-dependent stimulation, isometric force and MLC phosphorylation were reduced in monolayers of either cell type, due to an activation of MLC phosphatase. In CEC but not in AEC, FSK induced delocalization of VE-cadherin and paxillin from cellular adhesion complexes as indicated by cell fractionation and immunofluorescence microscopy. In conclusion, decline in contractile activation and isometric force contribute to cAMP/PKA-mediated stabilization of barrier function in AEC. In CEC, this stabilizing effect is overruled by cAMP-induced disintegration of cell adhesion structures.

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