Activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ inhibits transforming growth factor-β1 induction of connective tissue growth factor and extracellular matrix in hypertrophic scar fibroblasts in vitro
Abstract:Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPAR-gamma) ligands have been recently reported to have beneficial effects on organ fibrosis. However, their effects on extracellular matrix (ECM) turnover in hypertrophic scar fibroblasts (HSFs), and the related molecular mechanisms are unknown. HSFs were cultured and exposed to different concentration PPAR-gamma ligands in the presence of transforming growth factor-beta1 (TGF-beta1). In growth-arrested HSFs, a PPAR-gamma natural ligand (15-deoxy-D12,14-prosta… Show more
“…The main reasons to assess the efficacy of new synthetic PPARγ modulators in the treatment of intestinal fibrosis are due to the evidences that: (i) together with the adipose tissue, the intestine represents the main site where PPARγ achieves the higher tissue expression levels and (ii) PPARγ activation downregulates TGFβ/Smad pathway [7,13,24,25,35,36] .…”
Background
Intestinal fibrosis is mainly associated with Crohn's disease (CD) and is defined as a progressive and excessive deposition of extracellular matrix (ECM) components. No specific anti-fibrotic therapies are available. In this study we evaluate the anti-fibrotic effect of GED, a novel PPARγ modulator[1-4].
Methods
Colonic fibrosis was induced in 110 C57BL/6 mice by three cycles of 2.5% (w/v) DSS administration for 6 weeks. The preventive effects of oral daily GED (30mg/kg/d) administration were evaluated using a macroscopic and histologic score as well as through biologic endpoints. Expression of main markers of myofibroblasts activation was determined in TGF-β-stimulated intestinal fibroblasts and epithelial cells (IECs).
Results
GED improved macroscopic and microscopic intestinal lesions in dextran sulfate sodium (DSS) treated animals and reduced the profibrotic gene expression of Acta2, COL1a1 and Fn1 by 1.48 folds (p< 0.05), 1.93 folds (p< 0.005) and 1.03 fold (p< 0.05), respectively. It reduced protein levels of main markers of fibrosis (α-SMA and Collagen I-II), as well as the main TGFβ/Smad pathway components. GED also decreased the IL-13 and CTGF expression by 1.89 folds (p<0.05) and 2.2 folds (p<0.005), respectively. GED inhibited TGF-β-induced activation of both fibroblast and IEC cell lines, by regulating mRNA expression of αSMA and fibronectin and restoring the TGF-β-induced loss of IEC markers. GED treatment also reduced the TGFB and ACTA1 expression in primary human intestinal fibroblasts from ulcerative colitis (UC) patients.
Conclusions
GED ameliorates intestinal fibrosis in DSS-induced chronic colitis in mice and regulates major pro-fibrotic cellular and molecular mechanisms.
“…The main reasons to assess the efficacy of new synthetic PPARγ modulators in the treatment of intestinal fibrosis are due to the evidences that: (i) together with the adipose tissue, the intestine represents the main site where PPARγ achieves the higher tissue expression levels and (ii) PPARγ activation downregulates TGFβ/Smad pathway [7,13,24,25,35,36] .…”
Background
Intestinal fibrosis is mainly associated with Crohn's disease (CD) and is defined as a progressive and excessive deposition of extracellular matrix (ECM) components. No specific anti-fibrotic therapies are available. In this study we evaluate the anti-fibrotic effect of GED, a novel PPARγ modulator[1-4].
Methods
Colonic fibrosis was induced in 110 C57BL/6 mice by three cycles of 2.5% (w/v) DSS administration for 6 weeks. The preventive effects of oral daily GED (30mg/kg/d) administration were evaluated using a macroscopic and histologic score as well as through biologic endpoints. Expression of main markers of myofibroblasts activation was determined in TGF-β-stimulated intestinal fibroblasts and epithelial cells (IECs).
Results
GED improved macroscopic and microscopic intestinal lesions in dextran sulfate sodium (DSS) treated animals and reduced the profibrotic gene expression of Acta2, COL1a1 and Fn1 by 1.48 folds (p< 0.05), 1.93 folds (p< 0.005) and 1.03 fold (p< 0.05), respectively. It reduced protein levels of main markers of fibrosis (α-SMA and Collagen I-II), as well as the main TGFβ/Smad pathway components. GED also decreased the IL-13 and CTGF expression by 1.89 folds (p<0.05) and 2.2 folds (p<0.005), respectively. GED inhibited TGF-β-induced activation of both fibroblast and IEC cell lines, by regulating mRNA expression of αSMA and fibronectin and restoring the TGF-β-induced loss of IEC markers. GED treatment also reduced the TGFB and ACTA1 expression in primary human intestinal fibroblasts from ulcerative colitis (UC) patients.
Conclusions
GED ameliorates intestinal fibrosis in DSS-induced chronic colitis in mice and regulates major pro-fibrotic cellular and molecular mechanisms.
“…Indeed, several studies have examined the relationship between inhibition of CTGF and reduction of hypertrophic scars. PPARg activators 15d-PGJ2 and GW7845 were found to attenuate TGF-b1-induced expression of CTGF and collagens at both mRNA and protein levels in hypertrophic scar fibroblasts [34]. These data supported the application of PPARg agonists for treatment of hypertrophic scars through modulating CTGF.…”
“…Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-g (PPARg) ligands15d-PGJ2 and GW7845 inhibited the expression and phosphorylation of TGF-b1/Smads leading to anti-proliferative effect and reduced ECM production in hypertrophic scar fibroblasts [34]. Recently, many natural compounds have increasingly been demonstrated to have anti-hypertrophic scar properties by interrupting TGF-b1 signaling, including botulinum toxin type A [35], tetrandrine [36], baicalein [16], loureirin B [37,38], and the uighur medicine ASMq [39].…”
“…It has been reported that peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ (PPARγ) ligands, 15d-PGJ2 and GW7845, could inhibit the expression and phosphorylation of TGF-β1/Smads [18]. Either disruption or neutralization of TGF-β/Smads signaling by botulinum toxin type A, tetrandrine, baicalein, loureirin B, or the Uighur medicine ASMq can decrease the myofibroblast properties [19].…”
Abnormal wound healing is likely to induce scar formation, leading to dysfunction, deformity, and psychological trauma in burn patients. Despite the advancement of medical care treatment, scar contracture in burn patients remains a challenge. Myofibroblasts play a key role in scar contracture. It has been demonstrated that myofibroblasts, as well as inflammatory cells, fibroblasts, endothelial cells, and epithelial cells, secrete transforming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1) and other cytokines, which can promote persistent myofibroblast activation via a positive regulation loop. In addition to the cellular contribution, the microenvironments, including the mechanical tension and integrin family, are also involved in scar contracture. Most recently, eukaryotic initiation factor 6 (eIF6), an upstream regulator of TGF-β1, has been demonstrated to be involved in myofibroblast differentiation and contraction in both in vitro fibroblast-populated collagen lattice (FPCL) and in vivo external mechanical stretch models. Moreover, the data showed that P311 could induce the transdifferentiation of epidermal stem cells to myofibroblasts by upregulating TGF-β1 expression, which mediated myofibroblast contraction. In this review, we briefly described the most current progress on the biological function of myofibroblasts in scar contracture and subsequently summarized the molecular events that initiated contracture. This would help us better understand the molecular basis of scar contracture as well as to find a comprehensive strategy for preventing/managing scar contracture.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.