4.4 Article

Interleukin-15 increases myosin accretion in human skeletal myogenic cultures

期刊

CELL BIOLOGY INTERNATIONAL
卷 27, 期 10, 页码 845-851

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1016/S1065-6995(03)00172-0

关键词

Interleukin-15; insulin-like growth factor-I; skeletal muscle; cytokines; anabolism; hypertrophy; atrophy; myoblasts; myotubes; muscle fibers

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Interleukin-15 (IL-15) has been shown to have anabolic effects on skeletal muscle in rodent studies conducted in vitro and in vivo. The mechanism of IL-15 action on muscle appears to be distinct from that of the well-characterized muscle anabolic factor insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I). IL-15 action has not been investigated in a human culture system nor in detail in primary skeletal myogenic cells. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of IL-15 and IGF-I in primary human skeletal myogenic cells. Accretion of a major myofibrillar protein, myosin heavy chain (MHC), was used as a measure of muscle anabolism. We found that both growth factors induced increases in MHC accretion in primary human skeletal myogenic cultures; however, IL-15 and IGF-I actions were temporally distinct. IL-15 was more effective at stimulating MHC accretion when added to cultures after differentiation of myoblasts had occurred. In contrast, IGF-I was more effective at stimulating MHC accretion when added to cultures prior to differentiation of myoblasts. These results using a human system support recent findings from rodent models which indicate that the primary mode of IGF-I action on skeletal muscle anabolism is through stimulation of myogenic precursor cells, whereas the primary target of IL-15 action is the differentiated muscle fiber. Further, since clinical and experimental studies have shown IGF-I is not effective in preventing skeletal muscle wasting, the distinct mode of action of IL-15 suggests it may be of potential usefulness in the treatment of muscle wasting disorders. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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