4.5 Article

Comparison of putative BH3 mimetics AT-101, HA14-1, sabutoclax and TW-37 with ABT-737 in platelets

期刊

PLATELETS
卷 32, 期 1, 页码 105-112

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/09537104.2020.1724276

关键词

Apoptosis; BH3 mimetic; chemotherapy; pharmacology; platelets

资金

  1. Isaac Newton Trust/Wellcome Trust ISSF/University of Cambridge Joint Research Grant [105602]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Various BH3 mimetics have different effects on platelet apoptosis, with some drugs triggering platelet death through mechanisms that are distinct from classical apoptosis pathways.
Platelet lifespan is regulated by intrinsic apoptosis. Platelet apoptosis can be triggered by BH3 mimetics that inhibit the pro-survival Bcl-2 family protein, Bcl-xL. Here, we investigated several small molecules that are reported to act as BH3 mimetics and compared their effects to the well-established BH3 mimetic, ABT-737. Platelet phosphatidylserine (PS) exposure was determined by flow cytometry. Changes in cytosolic Ca2+ signaling were detected using Cal-520. Plasma membrane integrity was determined by calcein leakage. The roles of caspases and calpain in these processes were determined using Q-VD-OPh and calpeptin, respectively. As previously reported, ABT-737 triggered PS exposure in a caspase-dependent manner and calcein loss in a caspase and calpain-dependent manner. In contrast, AT-101 and sabutoclax triggered PS exposure independently of caspases. HA14-1 also triggered PS exposure in a caspase-independent but calpain-dependent manner. There were also significant differences in the pattern and protease-dependency of cytosolic Ca2+ signaling in response to these drugs compared to ABT-737. Since there are clear differences between the action of ABT-737 and the other putative BH3 mimetics investigated here, AT-101, HA14-1 and sabutoclax cannot be considered as acting as BH3 mimetics in platelets. Furthermore, the platelet death caused by these drugs is likely to be distinct from apoptosis.

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