4.7 Article

Inhibition of Soluble Epoxide Hydrolase 2 Ameliorates Diabetic Keratopathy and Impaired Wound Healing in Mouse Corneas

期刊

DIABETES
卷 67, 期 6, 页码 1162-1172

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/db17-1336

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH/National Eye Institute (NEI) [R01EY10869, EY17960]
  2. NEI Core [p30 EY04078]
  3. Research to Prevent Blindness
  4. NIH National Center for Research Resources [S10RR027926]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

EPHX2 (encoding soluble epoxide hydrolase [sEH]) converts biologically active epoxyeicosatrienoic acids (EETs), anti-inflammatory and profibrinolytic effectors, into the less biologically active metabolites, dihydroxyeicostrienoic acids. We sought to characterize the expression and the function of EPHX2 in diabetic corneas and during wound healing. The expression of EPHX2 at both mRNA and protein levels, as well as sEH enzymatic activity, was markedly upregulated in the tissues/cells, including corneal epithelial cells as well as the retina of human type 2 and mouse type 1 (streptozotocin [STZ] induced) and/or type 2 diabetes. Ephx2 depletion had no detectable effects on STZ-induced hyperglycemia but prevented the development of tear deficiency. Ephx2(-/-) mice showed an acceleration of hyperglycemia-delayed epithelium wound healing. Moreover, inhibition of sEH increased the rate of epithelium wound closure and restored hyperglycemia-suppressed STAT3 activation and heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1) expression in the diabetic corneas. Treatment of diabetic corneas with cobalt protoporphyrin, a well-known HO-1 inducer, restored wound-induced HO-1 upregulation and accelerated delayed wound healing. Finally, Ephx2 depletion enhanced sensory innervation and regeneration in diabetic corneas at 1 month after epithelial debridement. Our data suggest that increased sEH activity may be a contributing factor for diabetic corneal complications; targeting sEH pharmacologically or supplementing EETs may represent a new, adjunctive therapy for treating diabetic keratopathy.

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