4.7 Article

Interleukin-6-deficient mice develop hepatic inflammation and systemic insulin resistance

期刊

DIABETOLOGIA
卷 53, 期 11, 页码 2431-2441

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00125-010-1865-y

关键词

Cytokines; Fatty liver; Obesity; Signal transduction; Type 2 diabetes

资金

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) [526606]
  2. BakerIDI Lipodomics, Genomics and Mouse Metabolic Phenotyping Core Facilities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The role of IL-6 in the development of obesity and hepatic insulin resistance is unclear and still the subject of controversy. We aimed to determine whether global deletion of Il6 in mice (Il6 (-/-)) results in standard chow-induced and high-fat diet (HFD)-induced obesity, hepatosteatosis, inflammation and insulin resistance. Male, 8-week-old Il6 (-/-) and littermate control mice were fed a standard chow or HFD for 12 weeks and phenotyped accordingly. Il6 (-/-) mice displayed obesity, hepatosteatosis, liver inflammation and insulin resistance when compared with control mice on a standard chow diet. When fed a HFD, the Il6 (-/-) and control mice had marked, equivalent gains in body weight, fat mass and ectopic lipid deposition in the liver relative to chow-fed animals. Despite this normalisation, the greater liver inflammation, damage and insulin resistance observed in chow-fed Il6 (-/-) mice relative to control persisted when both were fed the HFD. Microarray analysis from livers of mice fed a HFD revealed that genes associated with oxidative phosphorylation, the electron transport chain and tricarboxylic acid cycle were uniformly decreased in Il6 (-/-) relative to control mice. This coincided with reduced maximal activity of the mitochondrial enzyme beta-hydroxyacyl-CoA-dehydrogenase and decreased levels of mitochondrial respiratory chain proteins. Our data suggest that IL-6 deficiency exacerbates HFD-induced hepatic insulin resistance and inflammation, a process that appears to be related to defects in mitochondrial metabolism.

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