4.6 Article

Dual Outcomes of Rosiglitazone Treatment on Fatty Liver

Journal

AAPS JOURNAL
Volume 18, Issue 4, Pages 1023-1031

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1208/s12248-016-9919-9

Keywords

NAFLD; nuclear receptor; obesity; peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors; rosiglitazone

Funding

  1. NIH [RO1EB007357, RO1HL098295]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In previous studies, it has been reported that rosiglitazone has opposing effects on nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. The purpose of the current study is to test the hypothesis that such opposing effects are related to different levels of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-gamma) in the liver. Using a gene transfer approach and mice fed a high-fat diet (HFD) as an animal model, we demonstrate that mice with low levels of PPAR-gamma expression in the liver are resistant to HFD-induced development of fatty liver when treated with rosiglitazone. Conversely, rosiglitazone treatment actually exacerbates liver steatosis in obese mice that have a higher level of PPAR-gamma. Mechanistic studies show that an elevated hepatic PPAR-gamma level is associated with an increased expression of genes responsible for lipid metabolism in the liver, particularly Cd36, Fabp4, and Mgat1. The concurrent transfer of these three genes into the mouse liver fully recapitulates the phenotypic change induced by the overexpression of PPAR-gamma. These results provide evidence in support of the importance of PPAR-gamma in the liver when rosiglitazone is considered for the treatment of fatty liver disease. Clinically, our results suggest the necessity of verifying PPAR-gamma levels in the liver when rosiglitazone is considered as a treatment option, and indicate that the direct use of rosiglitazone for treatment of nonalcoholic fatty liver may not be desirable when the patient's PPAR-gamma level in the liver is significantly elevated.

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