OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of Sonic hedgehog (Shh) gene transfer, AMD3100-induced progenitor-cell mobilization, and Shh-AMD3100 combination therapy for treatment of surgically induced myocardial infarction (MI) in mice. BACKGROUND: Shh gene transfer improves myocardial recovery by up-regulating angiogenic genes and enhancing the incorporation of bone marrow-derived progenitor cells (BMPCs) in infarcted myocardium. Here, we investigated whether the effectiveness of Shh gene therapy could be improved with AMD3100-induced progenitor-cell mobilization. METHODS: Gene expression and cell function were evaluated in cells cultured with medium collected from fibroblasts transfected with plasmids encoding human Shh (phShh). MI was induced in wild-type mice, in matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-9 knockout mice, and in mice transplanted with bone marrow that expressed green-fluorescent protein. Mice were treated with 100 μg of phShh (administered intramyocardially), 5 mg/kg of AMD3100 (administered subcutaneously), or both; cardiac function was evaluated echocardiographically, and fibrosis, capillary density, and BMPC incorporation were evaluated immunohistochemically. RESULTS: phShh increased vascular endothelial growth factor and stromal cell-derived factor 1 expression in fibroblasts; the medium from phShh-transfected fibroblasts increased endothelial-cell migration and the migration, proliferation, and tube formation of BMPCs. Combination therapy enhanced cardiac functional recovery (i.e., left ventricular ejection fraction) in wild-type mice, but not in MMP-9 knockout mice, and was associated with less fibrosis, greater capillary density and smooth muscle-containing vessel density, and enhanced BMPC incorporation. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy consisting of intramyocardial Shh gene transfer and AMD3100-induced progenitor-cell mobilization improves cardiac functional recovery after MI and is superior to either individual treatment for promoting therapeutic neovascularization.
OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of Sonic hedgehog (Shh) gene transfer, AMD3100-induced progenitor-cell mobilization, and Shh-AMD3100 combination therapy for treatment of surgically induced myocardial infarction (MI) in mice. BACKGROUND:Shh gene transfer improves myocardial recovery by up-regulating angiogenic genes and enhancing the incorporation of bone marrow-derived progenitor cells (BMPCs) in infarcted myocardium. Here, we investigated whether the effectiveness of Shh gene therapy could be improved with AMD3100-induced progenitor-cell mobilization. METHODS: Gene expression and cell function were evaluated in cells cultured with medium collected from fibroblasts transfected with plasmids encoding humanShh (phShh). MI was induced in wild-type mice, in matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-9 knockout mice, and in mice transplanted with bone marrow that expressed green-fluorescent protein. Mice were treated with 100 μg of phShh (administered intramyocardially), 5 mg/kg of AMD3100 (administered subcutaneously), or both; cardiac function was evaluated echocardiographically, and fibrosis, capillary density, and BMPC incorporation were evaluated immunohistochemically. RESULTS: phShh increased vascular endothelial growth factor and stromal cell-derived factor 1 expression in fibroblasts; the medium from phShh-transfected fibroblasts increased endothelial-cell migration and the migration, proliferation, and tube formation of BMPCs. Combination therapy enhanced cardiac functional recovery (i.e., left ventricular ejection fraction) in wild-type mice, but not in MMP-9 knockout mice, and was associated with less fibrosis, greater capillary density and smooth muscle-containing vessel density, and enhanced BMPC incorporation. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy consisting of intramyocardial Shh gene transfer and AMD3100-induced progenitor-cell mobilization improves cardiac functional recovery after MI and is superior to either individual treatment for promoting therapeutic neovascularization.
Authors: T Asahara; T Murohara; A Sullivan; M Silver; R van der Zee; T Li; B Witzenbichler; G Schatteman; J M Isner Journal: Science Date: 1997-02-14 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: P R Vale; D W Losordo; C E Milliken; M C McDonald; L M Gravelin; C M Curry; D D Esakof; M Maysky; J F Symes; J M Isner Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-05-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Arman T Askari; Samuel Unzek; Zoran B Popovic; Corey K Goldman; Farhad Forudi; Matthew Kiedrowski; Aleksandr Rovner; Stephen G Ellis; James D Thomas; Paul E DiCorleto; Eric J Topol; Marc S Penn Journal: Lancet Date: 2003-08-30 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Guosheng Xiang; Michael D Schuster; Tetsunori Seki; Alfred A Kocher; Shawdee Eshghi; Andrew Boyle; Silviu Itescu Journal: J Exp Med Date: 2004-12-13 Impact factor: 14.307
Authors: Alexander R Mackie; Ekaterina Klyachko; Tina Thorne; Kathryn M Schultz; Meredith Millay; Aiko Ito; Christine E Kamide; Ting Liu; Rajesh Gupta; Susmita Sahoo; Sol Misener; Raj Kishore; Douglas W Losordo Journal: Circ Res Date: 2012-05-10 Impact factor: 17.367
Authors: Ciaran J Mooney; Roya Hakimjavadi; Emma Fitzpatrick; Eimear Kennedy; Dermot Walls; David Morrow; Eileen M Redmond; Paul A Cahill Journal: Stem Cells Int Date: 2015-05-06 Impact factor: 5.443