| Literature DB >> 25954309 |
Kuo-Sheng Wu1, Yi-Jen Hung2, Chien-Hsing Lee2, Fone-Ching Hsiao2, Po-Shiuan Hsieh3.
Abstract
Growth arrest-specific 6 (GAS6), a vitamin K-dependent protein, plays a role in the survival, proliferation, migration, differentiation, adhesion, and apoptosis of cells. GAS6 is highly expressed during growth arrest, followed by a sharp decrease during differentiation in adipocytes. The functions of GAS6 signaling are limited to TAM (Tyro3, Axl, and Mer) receptors and are dependent on the cell type. While many studies have focused on the role of GAS6 in inflammation and cancer, only few studies focused on its roles of GAS6 in obesity. Accordingly, the participation of GAS6 in the progression of obesity remains controversial. In this review, we summarize the results of current studies from clinical and basic research to elucidate the possible role of GAS6 signaling in obesity and associated disorders. In addition, this summary may offer a direction to develop clinical therapeutic strategies for the prevention and treatment of obesity and related complications.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25954309 PMCID: PMC4411443 DOI: 10.1155/2015/202513
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Endocrinol ISSN: 1687-8337 Impact factor: 3.257
GAS6 signaling molecules and the development of obesity in mouse model.
| Model | Comparison | Treatment | GAS6 (tissue) | Axl (tissue) | Mer (tissue) | Tyro3 (tissue) | Body weight (g) | SC fat weight (mg) | GON fat weight (mg) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Axl+/+ mice | Axl+/+ versus WT | ↑ (Axl+/+) | Augustine et al., 1999 [ | |||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| GAS6−/− mice | GAS6−/− versus WT | — (GAS6−/−) (SC and GON) | NS | ↓ (GAS6−/−) | ↓ (GAS6−/−) | Maquoi et al., 2005 [ | ||||
|
| ||||||||||
| GAS6−/− mice | GAS6−/− versus WT | — (GAS6−/−) (vaginas) | ↑ (GAS6−/−) (vaginas) | ↑ (GAS6−/−) (vaginas) | ↑ (GAS6−/−) (vaginas) |
Salian-Mehta et al., 2014 [ | ||||
|
| ||||||||||
| C57BL/6 mice | Vehicle versus R428 | R428 oral | 4.3 ± 0.2 versus 4.1 ± 0.3 (ΔCT) (SC) | 4.5 ± 0.2 versus 4.5 ± 0.2 (ΔCT) (SC) | 7.5 ± 0.3 versus 7.2 ± 0.2 (ΔCT) (SC) | 10.7 ± 0.3 versus 10.4 ± 0.3 (ΔCT) (SC) | 30.3 ± 0.7 versus 25.3 ± 0.7∗ | 831.0 ± 58.0 versus 421.0 ± 69.0∗ | 123.0 ± 263.0 versus 685.0 ± 92.0∗ | Lijnen et al., 2011 [ |
|
| ||||||||||
| C57BL/6 mice | Vehicle versus R428 | R428 oral | 3.1 ± 0.1 versus 2.6 ± 0.1∗ (ΔCT) (GON) | 3.9 ± 0.1 versus 3.6 ± 0.1 (ΔCT) (GON) | 6.7 ± 0.2 versus 6.2 ± 0.2∗ (ΔCT) (GON) | 10.0 ± 0.2 versus 10.1 ± 0.1 (ΔCT) (GON) | 30.3 ± 0.7 versus 25.3 ± 0.7∗ | 831.0 ± 58.0 versus 421.0 ± 69.0∗ | 123.0 ± 263.0 versus 685.0 ± 92.0∗ |
Lijnen et al., 2011 [ |
|
| ||||||||||
| Axl−/− mice | Axl−/− versus WT | SFD | 321.0 ± 59.0 versus 363.0 ± 77.0 (CN) (SC) | 102.0 ± 20.0 versus 420.0 ± 109.0 (CN) (SC) | 74.0 ± 24.0 versus 83.0 ± 16.0 (CN) (SC) | 5.1 ± 1.0 versus 7.6 ± 1.5 (CN) (SC) | 22.0 ± 0.5 versus 22.0 ± 0.5 | 183.0 ± 23.0 versus 182.0 ± 9.6 | Scroyen et al., 2012 [ | |
|
| ||||||||||
| Axl−/− mice | Axl−/− versus WT | SFD | 1776.0 ± 85.0 versus 1777.0 ± 105.0 (CN) (GON) | 362.0 ± 80.0 versus 1278.0 ± 102.0 (CN) (GON) | 227.0 ± 24.0 versus 225.0 ± 24.0 (CN) (GON) | 13.0 ± 0.9 versus 15.0 ± 1.1 (CN) (GON) | 22.0 ± 0.5 versus 22.0 ± 0.5 | 249.0 ± 44.0 versus 253.0 ± 19.0 | Scroyen et al., 2012 [ | |
|
| ||||||||||
| Axl−/− mice | Axl−/− versus WT | HFD | 1135.0 ± 57.0 versus 976.0 ± 106.0 (CN) (SC) | 371.0 ± 97.0 versus 1127.0 ± 169.0 (CN) (SC) | 147.0 ± 14.0 versus 126.0 ± 18.0 (CN) (SC) | 13.0 ± 1.2 versus 12.0 ± 1.1 (CN) (SC) | 30.0 ± 1.2 versus 30.0 ± 1.3 | 888.0 ± 92.0 versus 781.0 ± 96.0 | Scroyen et al., 2012 [ | |
|
| ||||||||||
| Axl−/− mice | Axl−/− versus WT | HFD | 1193.0 ± 124.0 versus 1181.0 ± 111.0 (CN) (GON) | 299.0 ± 79.0 versus 1168.0 ± 128.0 (CN) (GON) | 187.0 ± 30.0 versus 166.0 ± 19.0 (CN) (GON) | 12 ± 0.9 versus 14 ± 1.1 (CN) (GON) | 30.0 ± 1.2 versus 30.0 ± 1.3 | 1476.0 ± 165.0 versus 1160.0 ± 120.0 | Scroyen et al., 2012 [ | |
∗ P < 0.05; R428, Axl receptor antagonist; SC, subcutaneous fat; GON, gonadal fat; HFD, high-fat diet; SFD, standard fat diet; NS, No significant difference; and CN, copy number.
GAS6 signaling molecules and the development of obesity in clinical studies.
| Model | Comparison | Age | GAS6 (plasma, ng/mL) | Axl (plasma, ng/mL) | BMI (kg/m2) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T2DM | Normal versus T2DM | 50.2 ± 1.5 versus 52.4 ± 1.5 | 14.3 ± 0.7 versus 11.5 ± 0.4∗ | 23.9 ± 0.4 versus 26.0 ± 0.4∗ |
Lee et al., 2012 [ | |
|
| ||||||
| T2DM | Normal versus T2DM | 51.3 ± 1.5 versus 53.8 ± 1.3∗ | 15.2 ± 0.4 versus 11.2 ± 0.3∗ |
Lee et al., 2014 [ | ||
|
| ||||||
| Human | Male versus female | 49.1 ± 1.5 versus 55.8 ± 0.1∗ | 12.6 ± 0.5 versus 13.4 ± 0.5 | 24.8 ± 0.3 versus 25.4 ± 0.4 | Kuo et al., 2014 [ | |
|
| ||||||
| Female | Pre- versus postmenopausal | 34.1 ± 10.7 versus 58.9 ± 7.1∗ | 21.8 ± 8.9 versus 18.6 ± 9.4∗ | 25.3 ± 3.7 versus 25.2 ± 3.9 | Hung et al., 2014 [ | |
|
| ||||||
| Adolescents | Lean versus obesity | 13.3 ± 0.9 versus 13.2 ± 1.0 | 12.3 ± 4.4 versus 13.9 ± 3.9∗ | 3.8 ± 1.0 versus 4.7 ± 1.3∗ | 19.5 ± 1.5 versus 27.8 ± 2.7∗ | Hsiao et al., 2013 [ |
|
| ||||||
| Boys with GAS6 rs8191974 genotype | GG versus AA | 13.1 ± 3.7 versus 13.0 ± 3.1 | 22.5 ± 4.2 versus 20.7 ± 3.3∗ | Hsiao et al., 2014 [ | ||
∗ P < 0.05. T2DM: type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.
GAS6 signaling molecules and the development of obesity-associated inflammation in clinical studies.
| Model | Comparison | Age | GAS6 (plasma, ng/mL) | Axl (plasma, ng/mL) | TNF- | IL-6 (plasma, pg/mL) | hsCRP (plasma, mg/L) | BMI (kg/m2) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T2DM | Normal versus T2DM | 50.2 ± 1.5 versus 52.4 ± 1.5 | 14.3 ± 0.7 versus 11.5 ± 0.4∗ | 3.2 ± 0.2 versus 3.3 ± 0.2 | 2.6 ± 0.5 versus 5.9 ± 1.4 | 0.7 ± 0.1 versus 1.2 ± 0.1∗ | 23.9 ± 0.4 versus 26.0 ± 0.4∗ | Lee et al., 2012 [ | |
|
| |||||||||
| T2DM | Normal versus T2DM | 51.3 ± 1.5 versus 53.8 ± 1.3∗ | 15.2 ± 0.4 versus 11.2 ± 0.3∗ |
Lee et al., 2014 [ | |||||
|
| |||||||||
| Human | Male versus female | 49.1 ± 1.5 versus 55.8 ± 0.1∗ | 12.6 ± 0.5 versus 13.4 ± 0.5 | 3.2 ± 0.2 versus 3.3 ± 0.2 | 4.7 ± 1.0 versus 4.2 ± 1.0 | 0.8 ± 0.1 versus 1.1 ± 0.1∗ | 24.8 ± 0.3 versus 25.4 ± 0.4 | Kuo et al., 2014 [ | |
|
| |||||||||
| Female | Pre- versus postmenopausal | 34.1 ± 10.7 versus 58.9 ± 7.1∗ | 21.8 ± 8.9 versus 18.6 ± 9.4∗ | 25.3 ± 3.7 versus 25.2 ± 3.9 | Hung et al., 2014 [ | ||||
|
| |||||||||
| Adolescents | 13.3 ± 0.9 versus 13.2 ± 1.0 | 13.3 ± 0.9 versus 13.2 ± 1.0 | 12.3 ± 4.4 versus 13.9 ± 3.9∗ | 3.8 ± 1.0 versus 4.7 ± 1.3∗ | 14.0 ± 3.0 versus 62.9 ± 15.9∗ | 3.0 ± 0.1 versus 3.5 ± 5.8∗ | 0.6 ± 1.1 versus 1.0 ± 1.2∗ | 19.5 ± 1.5 versus 27.8 ± 2.7∗ | Hsiao et al., 2013 [ |
|
| |||||||||
| Boys with gas6 rs8191974 genotype | GG versus AA | 13.1 ± 3.7 versus 13.0 ± 3.1 | 26.7 ± 8.2 versus 23.8 ± 4.6 | 3.4 ± 2.8 versus 2.5 ± 1.3 | 0.8 ± 1.2 versus 0.4 ± 0.2∗ | 22.5 ± 4.2 versus 20.7 ± 3.3∗ | Hsiao et al., 2014 [ | ||
∗ P < 0.05. T2DM: type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.
GAS6 signaling molecules and the development of obesity-associated inflammation in mouse model.
| Model | Comparison | Treatment | GAS6 (tissue) | Axl (tissue) | Mer (tissue) | Tyro3 (tissue) | TNF- | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Axl+/+ mice | Axl+/+ versus WT | ↑ (Axl+/+) | Augustine et al., 1999 [ | |||||
|
| ||||||||
| GAS6−/− mice | GAS6−/− versus WT | — (GAS6−/−) (SC and GON) | Maquoi et al., 2005 [ | |||||
|
| ||||||||
| GAS6−/− mice | GAS6−/− versus WT | — (GAS6−/−) (vaginas) | ↑ (GAS6−/−) (vaginas) | ↑ (GAS6−/−) (vaginas) | ↑ (GAS6−/−) (vaginas) |
Salian-Mehta et al., 2014 [ | ||
|
| ||||||||
| C57BL/6 mice | Vehicle versus R428 | R428 oral | 4.3 ± 0.2 versus 4.1 ± 0.3 (ΔCT) (SC) | 4.5 ± 0.2 versus 4.5 ± 0.2 (ΔCT) (SC) | 7.5 ± 0.3 versus 7.2 ± 0.2 (ΔCT) (SC) | 10.7 ± 0.3 versus 10.4 ± 0.3 (ΔCT) (SC) | Lijnen et al., 2011 [ | |
|
| ||||||||
| C57BL/6 mice | Vehicle versus R428 | R428 oral | 3.1 ± 0.1 versus 2.6 ± 0.1∗ (ΔCT) (GON) | 3.9 ± 0.1 versus 3.6 ± 0.1 (ΔCT) (GON) | 6.7 ± 0.2 versus 6.2 ± 0.2∗ (ΔCT) (GON) | 10.0 ± 0.2 versus 10.1 ± 0.1 (ΔCT) (GON) | Lijnen et al., 2011 [ | |
|
| ||||||||
| Axl−/− mice | Axl−/− versus | SFD | 321.0 ± 59.0 versus 363.0 ± 77.0 (CN) (SC) | 102.0 ± 20.0 versus 420.0 ± 109.0 (CN) (SC) | 74.0 ± 24.0 versus 83.0 ± 16.0 (CN) (SC) | 5.1 ± 1.0 versus 7.6 ± 1.5 (CN) (SC) | Scroyen et al., 2012 [ | |
|
| ||||||||
| Axl−/− mice | Axl−/− versus | SFD | 1776.0 ± 85.0 versus 1777.0 ± 105.0 (CN) (GON) | 362.0.0 ± 80 versus 1278.0 ± 102.0 (CN) (GON) | 227.0 ± 24.0 versus 225.0 ± 24.0 (CN) (GON) | 13.0 ± 0.9 versus 15.0 ± 1.1 (CN) (GON) | Scroyen et al., 2012 [ | |
|
| ||||||||
| Axl−/− mice | Axl−/− versus | HFD | 1135.0 ± 57.0 versus 976.0 ± 106.0 (CN) (SC) | 371.0 ± 97.0 versus 1127.0 ± 169.0 (CN) (SC) | 147.0 ± 14.0 versus 126.0 ± 18.0 (CN) (SC) | 13.0 ± 1.2 versus 12.0 ± 1.1 (CN) (SC) | Scroyen et al., 2012 [ | |
|
| ||||||||
| Axl−/− mice | Axl−/− versus | HFD | 1193.0 ± 124.0 versus 1181.0 ± 111.0 (CN) (GON) | 299.0 ± 79.0 versus 1168.0 ± 128.0 (CN) (GON) | 187.0 ± 30.0 versus 166.0 ± 19.0 (CN) (GON) | 12 ± 0.9 versus 14 ± 1.1 (CN) (GON) | Scroyen et al., 2012 [ | |
∗ P < 0.05; R428, Axl receptor antagonist; SC, subcutaneous fat; GON, gonadal fat; HFD, high-fat diet; SFD, standard fat diet; and CN, copy number.