4.7 Article

AKAP Signaling in Reinstated Cocaine Seeking Revealed by iTRAQ Proteomic Analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 31, 期 15, 页码 5648-5658

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3452-10.2011

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [DA026254, DA015369, DA015851]
  2. EPSCoR
  3. Office Of The Director [919440] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To identify candidate proteins in the nucleus accumbens (NAc) as potential pharmacotherapeutic targets for treating cocaine addition, an 8-plex iTRAQ (isobaric tag for relative and absolute quantitation) proteomic screen was performed using NAc tissue obtained from rats trained to self-administer cocaine followed by extinction training. Compared with yoked-saline controls, 42 proteins in a postsynaptic density (PSD)-enriched subfraction of the NAc from cocaine-trained animals were identified as significantly changed. Among proteins of interest whose levels were identified as increased was AKAP79/150, the rat ortholog of human AKAP5, a PSD scaffolding protein that localizes signaling molecules to the synapse. Functional downregulation of AKAP79/150 by microinjecting a cell-permeable synthetic AKAP (A-kinase anchor protein) peptide into the NAc to disrupt AKAP-dependent signaling revealed that inhibition of AKAP signaling impaired the reinstatement of cocaine seeking. Reinstatement of cocaine seeking is thought to require upregulated surface expression of AMPA glutamate receptors, and the inhibitory AKAP peptide reduced the PSD content of protein kinase A (PKA) as well as surface expression of GluR1 in NAc. However, reduced surface expression was not associated with changes in PKA phosphorylation of GluR1. This series of experiments demonstrates that proteomic analysis provides a useful tool for identifying proteins that can regulate cocaine relapse and that AKAP proteins may contribute to relapse vulnerability by promoting increased surface expression of AMPA receptors in the NAc.

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