4.7 Article

In human endothelial cells rapamycin causes mTORC2 inhibition and impairs cell viability and function

期刊

CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH
卷 78, 期 3, 页码 563-571

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/cvr/cvn024

关键词

mTOR; apoptosis; TNFalpha; nitric oxide; restenosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim Drug-eluting stents are widely used to prevent restenosis but are associated with late endothelial damage. To understand the basis for this effect, we have studied the consequences of a prolonged incubation with rapamycin on the viability and functions of endothelial cells. Methods and results Human umbilical vein or aorta endothelial cells were exposed to rapamycin in the absence or in the presence of tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF alpha). After a 24 h-incubation, rapamycin (100 nM) caused a significant cell loss associated with the increase of both apoptosis and necrosis, as quantified by propidium iodide staining, caspase 3 activity, and lactate dehydrogenase release. Rapamycin also impaired cell mobility, as assessed by a wound test, and promoted the formation of actin stress fibres, as determined with confocal microscopy. Moreover, the inhibitor prolonged TNF alpha-dependent E-selectin induction, inhibited endothelial nitric oxide synthase expression at both mRNA (quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction) and protein level (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and western blot), and lowered bioactive nitric oxide output (RFL-6 reporter cell assay). Under the conditions adopted, rapamycin inhibited both mammalian target-of-rapamycin complexes (mTORC1 and mTORC2), as indicated by the reduced amount of raptor and rictor bound to mTOR in immunoprecipitates and by the marked hypophosphorylation of protein S6 kinase 1 (p70S6K) and Akt, determined by western blotting. The selective inhibition of mTORC1 by AICAR did not affect endothelial viability. Conclusion A prolonged treatment with rapamycin impairs endothelial function and hinders cell viability. Endothelial damage seems dependent on mTORC2 inhibition.

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