4.6 Article

Metformin restores impaired HDL-mediated cholesterol efflux due to glycation

期刊

ATHEROSCLEROSIS
卷 206, 期 2, 页码 434-438

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2009.03.003

关键词

Cholesterol efflux; HDL; Glycation; Metformin; 3-Deoxyglucosone; ABCG1; THP-1

向作者/读者索取更多资源

High-density lipoprotein (HDL) mediates cholesterol efflux, which is the initial and rate-limiting step of reverse cholesterol transport. The present study was undertaken to evaluate the effect, on macrophage cholesterol efflux, of functional modification of HDL by its glycation. We also investigated the effects of the glycation-inhibitors metformin (MF) and aminoguanidine (AG) on glycated HDL-mediated cholesterol efflux. Human plasma HDL (5 mg protein/mL) was glycated by incubation with 3-deoxyglucosone (3-DG). Glycation was monitored by measuring carboxymethyl-lysine (CML). HDL-mediated cholesterol efflux was determined using human THP-1-derived macrophages pre-labeled with [H-3]-cholesterol. To measure expression of potential factors related to the efflux in the macrophages, ATP-binding cassette transporter (ABC) G1 was analyzed by real-time quantitative RT-PCR and Western blot. Glycation of HDL significantly reduced the HDL-mediated cholesterol efflux from THP-1-derived macrophages (87.7 +/- 4.2% of control, n = 9, p < 0.0001). In the presence of metformin or aminoguanidine (100 mM), glycated HDL-mediated cholesterol efflux was restored to 97.5 +/- 4.3% and 96.9 +/- 3.1%, respectively. Exogenous HDL reduced ABCG1 mRNA and protein expression in THP-1-derived macrophages, but glycation deprived HDL of this effect. We conclude that glycated HDL particles are ineffective as acceptors of ABCG1-mediated cholesterol efflux; and this may explain, at least in part, accelerated atherosclerosis in diabetic patients. Metformin serves as a possible candidate to restore impaired cholesterol efflux and reverse cholesterol transport. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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