4.7 Article

Increased renal vascular endothelial growth factor and angiopoietins by angiotensin II infusion is mediated by both AT(1) and AT(2) receptors

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY
卷 14, 期 12, 页码 3061-3071

出版社

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.1097/01.ASN.0000099374.58607.C9

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A link between angiotensin II and cell proliferation has previously been reported. However, there remains controversy as to the role of the individual angiotensin II receptor subtypes in mediating these effects and their link to angiogenic cytokines and their receptors. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were infused with either angiotensin II or vehicle for 14 d at a dose of 58.3 ng/min. Angiotensin II-infused rats received no treatment, an AT, receptor antagonist valsartan (30 mg/kg per d), or an AT(2) receptor antagonist PD123319 (830 ng/min). Gene expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and receptor VEGF-R2, as well as Tie-2 and its ligands angiopoietin-1 (Ang-1) and angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) were assessed by reverse transcription-PCR. Protein expression was assessed by Western blotting and immunohistochemistry. Gene and protein expression of VEGF, Ang-1, and Ang-2 were increased by angiotensin II infusion. Valsartan and PD123319 attenuated angiotensin II-associated increases in VEGF gene and protein expression. Ang-1 and Ang-2 gene but not protein expression were reduced by both treatments. These changes occurred in the context of attenuation of angiotensin II-induced glomerular cell proliferation by both valsartan and PD123319. In situ hybridization and immunohistochemical studies localized VEGF, Ang-1, and Ang-2 expression to the epithelial cells of the glomerulus, and VEGF-R2 and Tie-2 receptors to the endothelial cells of the kidney. These findings extend the increasing evidence that the AT(2) receptor, in addition to the AT(1) receptor subtype, plays an important role in mediating the proliferative actions of angiotensin II in the kidney.

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