4.4 Article

Both all-trans retinoic acid and cytochrome P450 (CYP26) inhibitors affect the expression of vitamin A metabolizing enzymes and retinoid biomarkers in organotypic epidermis

期刊

ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 301, 期 7, 页码 475-485

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00403-009-0937-7

关键词

CYP26; RAMBA; Metabolism

资金

  1. Swedish Research Council [74X-07133]
  2. Erik
  3. Karin och Gosta Selanders Foundation
  4. Edvard Welander and Finsen Foundations
  5. Swedish Psoriasis Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The biosynthesis of retinoic acid (RA) from retinol is controlled by several enzymes, e.g. dehydrogenases (RalDH2, RoDH-4) and retinol-esterifying enzyme (LRAT), whereas its degradation mainly involves CYP26 enzymes. In keratinocytes, RA activates the nuclear retinoid-receptors inducing the transcription of many genes. Here, we examined the effects of RA and the CYP26 inhibitors, liarozole and talarozole, on retinoid metabolism and RA-regulated genes in organotypic epidermis. RA induced the expression of CYP26 enzymes already after 8 h, whereas LRAT exhibited a later response and peaked at 48 h, indicating a feedback induction of retinol esterification. In line with a reduced biosynthesis of RA from retinol after exogenous RA, the expression of RDH16 reduced 80% in response to exogenous RA. The mRNA expression of RA-regulated genes (KRT2, KRT4, CRABPII and HBEGF) was altered within 24 h after RA exposure. In contrast, the CYP26 inhibitors caused only minor effects, except for a clear-cut induction of CYP26A1 only when combined with minute amounts of exogenous RA. Cellular accumulation of exogenous [H-3]RA was higher after talarozole than after liarozole, probably indicating a greater CYP26-inhibitory potency of the former drug. The present study shows that CYP26A1 expression is extremely sensitive to both exogenous RA and increased endogenous RA levels, i.e. due to CYP26 inhibition, and thus an excellent biomarker for retinoid signalling in organotypic epidermis.

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

4.4
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