4.7 Review

Regulation of hypoxia-inducible factor 1 and the loss of the cellular response to hypoxia in diabetes

期刊

DIABETOLOGIA
卷 54, 期 8, 页码 1946-1956

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00125-011-2191-8

关键词

Carboxy terminus of HSP70-interacting protein; Diabetes; Hyperglycaemia; Hypoxia inducible factor-1; Hypoxia; Methylglyoxal; Neovascularisation; Review; VEGF; von Hippel-Lindau protein

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal [SFRH/BD/15229/2004, PDTC/SAU-OBS/67498/2006]
  2. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/15229/2004] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Diabetes is frequently associated with hypoxia and is known to impair ischaemia-induced neovascularisation and other forms of adaptive cell and tissue responses to low oxygen levels. Hyperglycaemia appears to be the driving force of such deregulation. Recent data indicate that destabilisation of hypoxia-inducible factor 1 (HIF-1) is most likely the event that transduces hyperglycaemia into the loss of the cellular response to hypoxia in most diabetic complications. HIF-1 is a critical transcription factor involved in oxygen homeostasis that regulates a variety of adaptive responses to hypoxia, including angiogenesis, metabolic reprogramming and survival. Thus, destabilisation of HIF-1 is likely to have a negative impact on cell and tissue adaptation to low oxygen. Indeed, destabilisation of HIF-1 by high glucose levels has serious consequences in various organs and tissues, including myocardial collateralisation, wound healing, renal, neural and retinal function, as a result of poor cell and tissue responses to low oxygen. This review aims to integrate and summarise some of the most recent developments, including new proposed molecular models, on this research topic, particularly in terms of their implications for potential therapeutic approaches for the prevention or treatment of some of the diabetic complications characterised by impaired cellular and tissue responses to hypoxia.

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