4.7 Article

Cytochrome P450-dependent renal arachidonic acid metabolism in desoxycorticosterone acetate-salt hypertensive mice

期刊

HYPERTENSION
卷 36, 期 4, 页码 610-616

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.HYP.36.4.610

关键词

mice; kidney; arachidonic acid; cytochrome P450; hydroxyeicosatetraenoic acids

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cytochrome P450 (P450)-dependent arachidonic acid metabolites may act as mediators in the regulation of vascular tone and renal function. We studied arachidonic acid hydroxylase activities in renal microsomes from normotensive NMRI mice, desoxycorticostetone acetate (DOCA)-salt hypertensive mice, and DOCA-salt mice treated with either lovastatin or bezafibrate, both of which improve hemodynamics in this model. Control renal microsomes had arachidonic acid hydroxylase activities of 175+/-12 pmol (.) min(-1) (.) mg(-1). The metabolites formed were 20- and 19-hvdroxyarachidonic acid, representing approximate to 80% and approximate to 20% of the total hydroxylation. Treatment with DOCA-salt resulted in significantly decreased hydroxylase activities (to 84+/-4 pmol (.) min(-1) (.) mg(-1)) of the total microsomal P450 content and a decrease in immunodetectable Cyp4a proteins. Lovastatin had no effect on these variables, whereas bezafibrate increased arachidonic acid hydroxylase activities to 163 +/- 12 pmol (.) min(-1) . mg(-1). In situ hybridization with probes for Cyp4a-10, 12, and 14 revealed that Cyp4a-14 was the P450 isoform most strongly induced by bezafibrate. The expression was concentrated in the cortical medullary junction and was localized predominantly in the proximal tubules. In conclusion, these results suggest that the capacity to produce 20-hydroxyarachidonic acid is impaired in the kidneys of DOCA-salt hypertensive mice. Furthermore, bezafibrate may ameliorate hemodynamics in this model by restoring P350-dependent arachidonic acid hydroxylase activities. Lovastatin, on the other hand, exerts its effects via P450-independent mechanisms.

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