4.8 Article

Betacellulin Protects From Pancreatitis by Activating Stress-Activated Protein Kinase

期刊

GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 138, 期 4, 页码 1585-U462

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2009.12.045

关键词

Betacellulin; ERBB4; SAPK; Pancreatitis

资金

  1. Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung [PMM-S31T06]
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [GRK1029]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a serious, unpredictable clinical problem, the pathophysiology of which is poorly understood. Here, we evaluate whether betacellulin (BTC), a ligand of the epidermal growth factor receptor also able to activate the proapoptotic ERBB4 receptor, can protect against experimental AP. METHODS: AP was induced in transgenic mice overexpressing BTC (BTC-tg), control mice, or control mice after administration of recombinant BTC. The severity of pancreatitis was assessed by measurements of serum amylase and lipase and histologic grading. The involvement of the stress-activated protein kinase (SAPK) was evaluated by treating BTC-tg mice with an SAPK inhibitor before induction of AP. RESULTS: BTC-tg mice showed increased apoptosis and proliferation in the exocrine pancreas, indicating an increased cell turnover. There was a marked, epidermal growth factor receptor-independent decrease in pancreas weight. After induction of AP by cerulein injection, BTC-tg mice showed a significantly lower increase in serum amylase and lipase levels as well as less pronounced tissue necrosis, edema, and inflammation, as compared to nontransgenic littermates. This protective effect, also confirmed in the L-arginine AP model, was associated with increased phosphorylation of SAPK and abrogated after treatment of BTC-tg mice with a SAPK inhibitor. Finally, the protective effect of BTC against AP was confirmed by treating nontransgenic mice with recombinant BTC. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate a potential application of the BTC/ERBB4 pathway for modulating the course of AP.

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

4.8
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