4.7 Article

Prolonged exposure to free fatty acids has cytostatic and pro-apoptotic effects on human pancreatic islets -: Evidence that β-cell death is caspase mediated, partially dependent on ceramide pathway, and Bcl-2 regulated

期刊

DIABETES
卷 51, 期 5, 页码 1437-1442

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/diabetes.51.5.1437

关键词

-

资金

  1. Telethon [E.0660] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In an effort to better understand the phenomenon of lipotoxicity in human beta-cells, we evaluated the effects of 48-h preculture with 1.0 or 2.0 mmol/l free fatty acid (FFA) (2:1 oleate to palmitate) on the function and survival of isolated human islets and investigated some of the possible mechanisms. Compared with control islets, triglyceride content was significantly increased and insulin content and glucose-stimulated insulin release were significantly reduced in islets precultured with increased FFA concentrations. These changes were accompanied by a significant reduction of glucose utilization and oxidation. By cell death detection techniques, it was observed that exposure to FFAs induced a significant increase of the amount of dead cells. Electron microscopy showed the involvement of beta-cells, with morphological appearance compatible with the presence of apoptotic phenomena. FFA-induced islet cell death was blocked by inhibition of upstream caspases and partially prevented by inhibiton of ceramide synthesis or serine protease activity, whereas inhibition of nitric oxide synthesis had no effect. RTPCR studies revealed no major change of iNOS and Bax mRNA expression and a marked decrease of Bcl-2 mRNA expression in the islets cultured with FFA. Thus, prolonged exposure to FFAs has cytostatic and proapoptotic effects on human pancreatic beta-cells. The cytostatic action is likely to be due to the FFA-induced reduction of intraislet glucose metabolism, and the proapoptotic effects are mostly caspase mediated, partially dependent on ceramide pathway, and possibly Bcl-2 regulated.

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