4.5 Article

Attenuation of endoplasmic reticulum stress using the chemical chaperone 4-phenylbutyric acid prevents cardiac fibrosis induced by isoproterenol

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL AND MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY
卷 92, 期 1, 页码 97-104

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yexmp.2011.10.012

关键词

4-Phenylbutyric acid; Endoplasmic reticulum stress; Heart; Isoproterenol; Fibrosis

资金

  1. MECESUP, Chile
  2. CONICYT, Chile
  3. FONDECYT [1100443]
  4. FONDAP [15010006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Increasing evidence indicates that endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress is involved in various diseases. In the human heart, ischemia/reperfusion has been correlated to ER stress, and several markers of the unfolded protein response (UPR) participate during cardiac remodeling and fibrosis. Here, we used isoproterenol (ISO) injection as a model for in vivo cardiac fibrosis. ISO induced significant cardiomyocyte loss and collagen deposition in the damaged areas of the endocardium. These responses were accompanied by an increase in the protein levels of the lumina! ER chaperones RIP and PDI, as well as an increase in the UPR effector CHOP. The use of the chemical chaperone 4-phenylbutyric acid (4-PBA) prevented the activation of the UPR, the increase in luminal chaperones and also, leads to decreased collagen deposition, cardiomyocyte loss into the damaged zones. Our results suggest that cardiac damage and fibrosis induced in vivo by the beta-adrenergic agonist ISO are tightly related to ER stress signaling pathways, and that increasing the ER luminal folding capacity with exogenously administrated 4-PBA is a powerful strategy for preventing the development of cardiac fibrosis. Additionally, 4-PBA might prevent the loss of cardiomyocytes. Our data suggests that the attenuation of ER stress pathways with pharmacological compounds such as the chemical chaperone 4-PBA can prevent the development of cardiac fibrosis and adverse remodeling. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.5
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