4.6 Article

Ras Inhibition Induces Insulin Sensitivity and Glucose Uptake

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 6, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0021712

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Israel Science Foundation [912/06]
  2. Prajs-Drimmer Institute for The Development of Anti-Degenerative Drugs

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Reduced glucose uptake due to insulin resistance is a pivotal mechanism in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes. It is also associated with increased inflammation. Ras inhibition downregulates inflammation in various experimental models. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of Ras inhibition on insulin sensitivity and glucose uptake, as well as its influence on type 2 diabetes development. Methods and Findings: The effect of Ras inhibition on glucose uptake was examined both in vitro and in vivo. Ras was inhibited in cells transfected with a dominant-negative form of Ras or by 5-fluoro-farnesylthiosalicylic acid (F-FTS), a small-molecule Ras inhibitor. The involvement of I kappa B and NF-kappa B in Ras-inhibited glucose uptake was investigated by immunoblotting. High fat (HF)-induced diabetic mice were treated with F-FTS to test the effect of Ras inhibition on induction of hyperglycemia. Each of the Ras-inhibitory modes resulted in increased glucose uptake, whether in insulin-resistant C2C12 myotubes in vitro or in HF-induced diabetic mice in vivo. Ras inhibition also caused increased IkB expression accompanied by decreased expression of NF-kappa B. In fat-induced diabetic mice treated daily with F-FTS, both the incidence of hyperglycemia and the levels of serum insulin were significantly decreased. Conclusions: Inhibition of Ras apparently induces a state of heightened insulin sensitization both in vitro and in vivo. Ras inhibition should therefore be considered as an approach worth testing for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available