4.7 Article

Gene Expression Analyses of Mouse Aortic Endothelium in Response to Atherogenic Stimuli

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.113.301989

关键词

atherosclerosis; endothelium; genetics

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [PO1-HL030568]
  2. NIH [HL-064731]
  3. American Heart Association
  4. Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award [GM007185]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective Endothelial cells are central to the initiation of atherosclerosis, yet there has been limited success in studying their gene expression in the mouse aorta. To address this, we developed a method for determining the global transcriptional changes that occur in the mouse endothelium in response to atherogenic conditions and applied it to investigate inflammatory stimuli. Approach and Results We characterized a method for the isolation of endothelial cell RNA with high purity directly from mouse aortas and adapted this method to allow for the treatment of aortas ex vivo before RNA collection. Expression array analysis was performed on endothelial cell RNA isolated from control and hyperlipidemic prelesion mouse aortas, and 797 differentially expressed genes were identified. We also examined the effect of additional atherogenic conditions on endothelial gene expression, including ex vivo treatment with inflammatory stimuli, acute hyperlipidemia, and age. Of the 14 most highly differentially expressed genes in endothelium from prelesion aortas, 8 were also perturbed significantly by 1 atherogenic conditions: 2610019E17Rik, Abca1, H2-Ab1, H2-D1, Pf4, Ppbp, Pvrl2, and Tnnt2. Conclusions We demonstrated that RNA can be isolated from mouse aortic endothelial cells after in vivo and ex vivo treatments of the murine vessel wall. We applied these methods to identify a group of genes, many of which have not been described previously as having a direct role in atherosclerosis, that were highly regulated by atherogenic stimuli and may play a role in early atherogenesis.

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