4.8 Article

Hybrid cell-gene therapy for pulmonary hypertension based on phagocytosing action of endothelial progenitor cells

期刊

CIRCULATION
卷 108, 期 7, 页码 889-895

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000079161.56080.22

关键词

pulmonary heart disease; natriuretic peptides; gene therapy; endothelium

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background-Circulating endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) migrate to injured vascular endothelium and differentiate into mature endothelial cells. We investigated whether transplantation of vasodilator gene-transduced EPCs ameliorates monocrotaline (MCT)-induced pulmonary hypertension in rats. Methods and Results-We obtained EPCs from cultured human umbilical cord blood mononuclear cells and constructed plasmid DNA of adrenomedullin (AM), a potent vasodilator peptide. We used cationic gelatin to produce ionically linked DNA-gelatin complexes. Interestingly, EPCs phagocytosed plasmid DNA-gelatin complexes, which allowed nonviral, highly efficient gene transfer into EPCs. Intravenously administered EPCs were incorporated into the pulmonary vasculature of immunodeficient nude rats given MCT. Transplantation of EPCs alone modestly attenuated MCT-induced pulmonary hypertension (16% decrease in pulmonary vascular resistance). Furthermore, transplantation of AM DNA-transduced EPCs markedly ameliorated pulmonary hypertension in MCT rats (39% decrease in pulmonary vascular resistance). MCT rats transplanted with AM-expressing EPCs had a significantly higher survival rate than those given culture medium or EPCs alone. Conclusions-Umbilical cord blood-derived EPCs had a phagocytosing action that allowed nonviral, highly efficient gene transfer into EPCs. Transplantation of AM gene-transduced EPCs caused significantly greater improvement in pulmonary hypertension in MCT rats than transplantation of EPCs alone. Thus, a novel hybrid cell-gene therapy based on the phagocytosing action of EPCs may be a new therapeutic strategy for the treatment of pulmonary hypertension.

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