4.5 Article

Inhibition of Apoptotic Cell Death by Ghrelin Improves Functional Recovery after Spinal Cord Injury

期刊

ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 151, 期 8, 页码 3815-3826

出版社

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/en.2009-1416

关键词

-

资金

  1. Korea Science and Engineering Foundation, Science Research Council [KRF-2007-331-E00199, R01-2007-000-20617-0, 20090063283]
  2. Brain Research Center [2009K001286, 2009K001291]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [R01-2007-000-20617-0] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spinal cord injury (SCI) induces massive cell death, leading to permanent neurological disability. No satisfactory treatment is currently available. Ghrelin, a gastric hormone, is known to stimulate GH release from the hypothalamus and pituitary gland. Here, we report that ghrelin administration improves functional recovery after SCI in part by inhibiting apoptosis of neurons and oligodendrocytes. Ghrelin was not detected in normal, uninjured spinal cords, but spinal cord neurons and oligodendrocytes expressed the ghrelin receptor. Ghrelin significantly inhibited apoptotic cell death of neurons and oligodendrocytes, release of mitochondrial cytochrome c, and activation of caspase-3 after moderate contusion SCI. Ghrelin also significantly increased the level of phosphorylated ERK but decreased the level of phosphorylated p38MAPK. In addition, ghrelin increased the level of ERK-dependent brain-derived neurotrophic factor expression and decreased the level of pronerve growth factor expression. Furthermore, the neuroprotective effects of ghrelin were mediated through the ghrelin receptor. Finally, ghrelin significantly improved functional recovery and reduced the size of the lesion volume and the loss of axons and myelin after injury. These results suggest that ghrelin may represent a potential therapeutic agent after acute SCI in humans. (Endocrinology 151: 3815-3826, 2010)

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

4.5
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