Jianli Hao1, Weiqing Zhang1, Rui Tong2, Zeqing Huang1. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, No. 44 Xiaoheyan Road, Dadong District, Shenyang 110042, Liaoning Province, PR China. 2. Department of Oncologynecology, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, No. 44 Xiaoheyan Road, Dadong District, Shenyang 110042, Liaoning Province, PR China.
Abstract
Background and purpose: A high risk of brain injury has been reported with the usage of general anesthetics such as propofol in infants. Experimental data indicated that oxidative stress and inflammation are involved in the neurotoxicity induced by propofol. Febuxostat is a novel anti-gout agent recently reported to exert an anti-inflammatory effect. The present study aims to investigate the protective property of febuxostat against the cytotoxicity of propofol in brain endothelial cells as well as the underlying preliminary mechanism. Methods: The 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay was utilized to screen the optimized incubation concentration of febuxostat. bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells were stimulated with 2% propofol in the presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM) for 24 h. The lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) release assay was conducted to detect cytotoxicity. The reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels were evaluated using dichloro-dihydro-fluorescein diacetate (DCFH-DA) staining, and the concentration of reduced glutathione (GSH) was determined using a commercial kit. The expressions of TNF-α, IL-6, IL-12, CXCL-1, PDPN, CXCL8, VCAM-1, and E-selectin were determined using a quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Western blot and qRT-PCR were utilized to determine the expressions of COX-2 and KLF6. The production of PGE2 was evaluated by ELISA. Results: First, increased LDH release induced by propofol was significantly suppressed by febuxostat. The oxidative stress (elevated ROS levels and decreased GSH level) induced by propofol was alleviated by febuxostat. Second, the upregulated inflammatory factors (TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-12), pro-inflammatory chemokines (CXCL-1, PDPN, and CXCL8), adhesion molecules (VCAM-1 and E-selectin), and inflammatory mediators (COX-2 and PGE2) induced by propofol were greatly downregulated by febuxostat. Lastly, the expression of KLF6 was significantly suppressed by propofol but greatly elevated by febuxostat. Conclusion: Febuxostat prevented the cytotoxicity of propofol in brain endothelial cells by alleviating oxidative stress and inflammatory response through KLF6.
Background and purpose: A high risk of brain injury has been reported with the usage of general anesthetics such as propofol in infants. Experimental data indicated that oxidative stress and inflammation are involved in the neurotoxicity induced by propofol. Febuxostat is a novel anti-gout agent recently reported to exert an anti-inflammatory effect. The present study aims to investigate the protective property of febuxostat against the cytotoxicity of propofol in brain endothelial cells as well as the underlying preliminary mechanism. Methods: The 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay was utilized to screen the optimized incubation concentration of febuxostat. bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells were stimulated with 2% propofol in the presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM) for 24 h. The lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) release assay was conducted to detect cytotoxicity. The reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels were evaluated using dichloro-dihydro-fluorescein diacetate (DCFH-DA) staining, and the concentration of reduced glutathione (GSH) was determined using a commercial kit. The expressions of TNF-α, IL-6, IL-12, CXCL-1, PDPN, CXCL8, VCAM-1, and E-selectin were determined using a quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Western blot and qRT-PCR were utilized to determine the expressions of COX-2 and KLF6. The production of PGE2 was evaluated by ELISA. Results: First, increased LDH release induced by propofol was significantly suppressed by febuxostat. The oxidative stress (elevated ROS levels and decreased GSH level) induced by propofol was alleviated by febuxostat. Second, the upregulated inflammatory factors (TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-12), pro-inflammatory chemokines (CXCL-1, PDPN, and CXCL8), adhesion molecules (VCAM-1 and E-selectin), and inflammatory mediators (COX-2 and PGE2) induced by propofol were greatly downregulated by febuxostat. Lastly, the expression of KLF6 was significantly suppressed by propofol but greatly elevated by febuxostat. Conclusion: Febuxostat prevented the cytotoxicity of propofol in brain endothelial cells by alleviating oxidative stress and inflammatory response through KLF6.
With the rapid development of modern medical technology, operative
treatments are being performed on a number of newborns and infants
with congenital defects or acquired diseases, and are inevitably accompanied
by the usage of general anesthetics. However, Jevtovic-Todorovic reported
that extensive degeneration of neurons and persistent learning disabilities
could be induced in the brains of developing rats when immature rats
were treated with general anesthetics at an early stage.[1] As warned by the US Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) in 2016, the development of children’s brains will be
impacted under more than 3 h of anesthesia or repeated usage of general
anesthetics and sedative drugs in infants or women at mid-pregnancy.
Currently, multiple high-quality, polycentric, and large-sample clinical
studies are being conducted to investigate the influence of general
anesthetics on development and long-term cognitive and learning functions
in infants.[2−4] Propofol is a short-acting intravenous anesthetic
widely used in clinics, especially for anesthesia in infants.[5,6] Propofol was first developed by the British Imperial Chemical Industry
verified by sedation function in animal experiments. It was initially
reported to exert an anesthetic property in 1973[7,8] and
was approved by the FDA in 1989. Similar to other intravenous anesthetics,
propofol exerts sedative and hypnotic effects by activating γ-aminobutyric
acid (GABA), which is an inhibitory neurotransmitter.[9] Although approved by the FDA as an anesthetic, it has limitations,
which include the maintenance of anesthesia in infants over 2 months
old only and anesthesia induction for infants over 3 years old only,[10] indicating the potential risk that propofol
could affect the development of the brain in infants. Fundamental
studies indicate that neurotoxicity in the brain of immature animals,
including the rhesus monkey,[11] can be induced
by the application of propofol,[12,13] which further triggers
long-term learning and memory dysfunctions.[14,15] It is reported that the overactivation of the apoptotic pathway,[16] overexpression of inflammatory factors,[17,18] activation of oxidative stress,[19] activation
of microglia, development of neural inhibition,[20,21] changes of dendritic processes, and destruction of the blood–brain
barrier (BBB)[22] are involved in the mechanism
underlying the neurotoxicity of propofol. Therefore, there is an urgent
need to explore potential therapeutic methods for the safe usage of
propofol in infants.Febuxostat is an anti-gout agent. It is a non-purine selective
xanthine oxidase inhibitor, which was approved for the treatment of
gout in 2008 by the European Union and in 2009 by the US.[23] The molecular structure of febuxostat is shown
in Figure A. Recently,
febuxostat was reported to ameliorate myocardial ischemia injury by
inhibiting the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS).[24] In addition, multiple pieces of research reported
the anti-inflammatory and antioxidative stress effects of febuxostat.[25−27] In the present study, the effects of febuxostat on inflammation
and oxidative stress in brain endothelial cells induced by propofol
will be investigated to explore its potential therapeutic property
against clinical neurotoxicity induced by propofol.
Figure 1
Effects of febuxostat on the cell viability of bEnd.3 brain endothelial
cells. (A) Molecular structure of febuxostat. (B) Cells were stimulated
with 0.1, 0.2, 1, 2, 10, 20, 100, and 200 μM febuxostat for
24 h. Cell viability was measured using the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium
bromide (MTT) assay (#P < 0.05, ##P < 0.01 vs the vehicle group, n = 6).
Effects of febuxostat on the cell viability of bEnd.3 brain endothelial
cells. (A) Molecular structure of febuxostat. (B) Cells were stimulated
with 0.1, 0.2, 1, 2, 10, 20, 100, and 200 μM febuxostat for
24 h. Cell viability was measured using the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium
bromide (MTT) assay (#P < 0.05, ##P < 0.01 vs the vehicle group, n = 6).
Results
Effects
of Febuxostat on the Cell Viability of bEnd.3 Brain Endothelial Cells
To screen the optimized incubation concentration of febuxostat
in bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells, the cells were stimulated with
0.1, 0.2, 1, 2, 10, 20, 100, and 200 μM febuxostat for 24 h.
The cell viability of each well was evaluated using the MTT assay.
As shown in Figure B, no significant difference in the cell viability was observed as
the concentration of febuxostat increased from 0.1 to 20 μM.
However, when the concentration of febuxostat exceeded 100 μM,
the cell viability decreased greatly. Therefore, 10 and 20 μM
febuxostat were utilized as the incubation concentrations in the subsequent
experiments.
Febuxostat
Prevented Propofol-Induced Release of Lactate Dehydrogenase (LDH)
in bEnd.3 Brain Endothelial Cells
To evaluate the effect
of febuxostat against the toxicity in bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells
induced by propofol, the cells were stimulated with 2% propofol in
the presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM) for 24 h,
and LDH of the cells was detected. As shown in Figure A, irregular cell morphology was observed
in the cells treated with propofol but was reversed by treatment with
febuxostat. In addition, the LDH releases (Figure B) in the control, propofol, 10 μM
febuxostat, and 20 μM febuxostat groups were 5.7, 35.2, 26.1,
and 15.8%, respectively.
Figure 2
Febuxostat prevented propofol-induced release of LDH in bEnd.3
brain endothelial cells. Cells were stimulated with 2% propofol in
the presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM) for 24 h.
(A) Cell morphology of bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells; scale bar,
50 μm. (B) LDH release (####P <
0.0001 vs the vehicle group; **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 vs the propofol group, n =
6).
Febuxostat prevented propofol-induced release of LDH in bEnd.3
brain endothelial cells. Cells were stimulated with 2% propofol in
the presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM) for 24 h.
(A) Cell morphology of bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells; scale bar,
50 μm. (B) LDH release (####P <
0.0001 vs the vehicle group; **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 vs the propofol group, n =
6).
Oxidative
Stress in bEnd.3 Brain Endothelial Cells Induced by Propofol was Alleviated
by Febuxostat
As shown in Figure A, the levels of ROS were significantly elevated
by stimulation with propofol but were greatly suppressed by the administration
of febuxostat in a dose-dependent manner. The decreased concentration
of reduced glutathione (GSH) induced by the stimulation with propofol
was significantly elevated by treatment with febuxostat in a dose-dependent
manner. These data indicate that the activated oxidative stress induced
by propofol was alleviated by febuxostat.
Figure 3
Febuxostat ameliorated propofol-induced oxidative stress in bEnd.3
brain endothelial cells. Cells were stimulated with 2% propofol in
the presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM) (A) for 24
h. The levels of ROS were measured using dichloro-dihydro-fluorescein
diacetate (DCFH-DA) staining; 200 μm. (B) Levels of reduced
glutathione (GSH) (####P < 0.0001 vs
the vehicle group; **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 vs the propofol group, n = 6).
Febuxostat ameliorated propofol-induced oxidative stress in bEnd.3
brain endothelial cells. Cells were stimulated with 2% propofol in
the presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM) (A) for 24
h. The levels of ROS were measured using dichloro-dihydro-fluorescein
diacetate (DCFH-DA) staining; 200 μm. (B) Levels of reduced
glutathione (GSH) (####P < 0.0001 vs
the vehicle group; **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 vs the propofol group, n = 6).
Febuxostat
Inhibited Propofol-Induced Expression and Production of Pro-Inflammatory
Cytokines in bEnd.3 Brain Endothelial Cells
To investigate
the effects of febuxostat against inflammation induced by propofol
in the bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells, the concentrations of inflammatory
factors released by the cells were detected following stimulation
with 2% propofol in the presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20
μM) for 24 h. As shown in Figure A–C, the gene expressions of TNF-α, IL-6,
and IL-12 were significantly elevated by stimulation with propofol
but greatly suppressed by the treatment of febuxostat in a dose-dependent
manner. The concentrations of TNF-α in the control, propofol,
10 μM febuxostat, and 20 μM febuxostat groups were 76.5,
253.8, 188.1, and 143.6 pg/mL, respectively (Figure D). As shown in Figure E, approximately 103.5, 562.7, 433.2, and
311.4 pg/mL IL-6 were detected in the control, propofol, 10 μM
febuxostat, and 20 μM febuxostat groups, respectively. Lastly,
the concentrations of IL-12 (Figure F) in the control, propofol, 10 μM febuxostat,
and 20 μM febuxostat groups were 91.5, 387.3, 271.9, and 212.5
pg/mL, respectively.
Figure 4
Febuxostat inhibited propofol-induced expression and production
of pro-inflammatory cytokines in bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells. Cells
were stimulated with 2% propofol in the presence or absence of febuxostat
(10, 20 μM) for 24 h. (A) mRNA levels of TNF-α. (B) mRNA
of IL-6. (C) mRNA of IL-12. (D) Secretions of TNF-α. (E) Secretions
of IL-6. (F) Secretions of IL-12 (####P < 0.0001 vs the vehicle group; **P < 0.01,
***P < 0.001 vs the propofol group, n = 6).
Febuxostat inhibited propofol-induced expression and production
of pro-inflammatory cytokines in bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells. Cells
were stimulated with 2% propofol in the presence or absence of febuxostat
(10, 20 μM) for 24 h. (A) mRNA levels of TNF-α. (B) mRNA
of IL-6. (C) mRNA of IL-12. (D) Secretions of TNF-α. (E) Secretions
of IL-6. (F) Secretions of IL-12 (####P < 0.0001 vs the vehicle group; **P < 0.01,
***P < 0.001 vs the propofol group, n = 6).
Febuxostat
Inhibited Propofol-Induced Expression and Production of the Pro-Inflammatory
Chemokines
As shown in Figure A–C, the gene expressions of CXCL-1, PDPN, and
CXCL8 were significantly elevated by stimulation with propofol but
were greatly suppressed by treatment with febuxostat in a dose-dependent
manner. The concentrations of CXCL-1 in the control, propofol, 10
μM febuxostat, and 20 μM febuxostat groups were 125.6,
465.9, 376.6, and 288.5 pg/mL, respectively (Figure D). As shown in Figure E, approximately 53.5, 122.8, 89.5, and 75.3
pg/mL PDPN were detected in the control, propofol, 10 μM febuxostat,
and 20 μM febuxostat groups, respectively. Lastly, the concentrations
of CXCL8 (Figure F)
in the control, propofol, 10 μM febuxostat, and 20 μM
febuxostat groups were 66.4, 166.5, 121.7, and 99.8 pg/mL, respectively.
Figure 5
Febuxostat inhibited propofol-induced expression and production
of the pro-inflammatory chemokines. Cells were stimulated with 2%
propofol in the presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM)
for 24 h. (A) mRNA of CXCL-1. (B) mRNA of PDPN. (C) mRNA of CXCL8.
(D) Secretions of CXCL-1. (E) Secretions of PDPN. (F) Secretions of
CXCL8 (####P < 0.0001 vs the vehicle
group; **P < 0.01, ***P <
0.001 vs the propofol group, n = 6).
Febuxostat inhibited propofol-induced expression and production
of the pro-inflammatory chemokines. Cells were stimulated with 2%
propofol in the presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM)
for 24 h. (A) mRNA of CXCL-1. (B) mRNA of PDPN. (C) mRNA of CXCL8.
(D) Secretions of CXCL-1. (E) Secretions of PDPN. (F) Secretions of
CXCL8 (####P < 0.0001 vs the vehicle
group; **P < 0.01, ***P <
0.001 vs the propofol group, n = 6).
Febuxostat
Inhibited Propofol-Induced Expression and Production of VCAM-1 and
E-Selectin
To evaluate the effects of febuxostat against
the elevated expression of adhesion molecules induced by propofol,
the expressions of VCAM-1 and E-selectin were detected. As shown in Figure A,B, the gene expression
levels of VCAM-1 and E-selectin were significantly promoted by incubation
with propofol but were greatly suppressed by the introduction of febuxostat
in a dose-dependent manner. The concentrations of VCAM-1 and E-selectin
are illustrated in Figure C,D. The concentrations of VCAM-1 in the control, propofol,
10 μM febuxostat, and 20 μM febuxostat groups were 156.8,
621.6, 519.9, and 422.3 pg/mL, respectively. Approximately 88.3, 375.5,
282.9, and 191.6 pg/mL E-selectin were detected in the control, propofol,
10 μM febuxostat, and 20 μM febuxostat groups, respectively.
Figure 6
Febuxostat inhibited propofol-induced expression and production
of VCAM-1 and E-selectin. Cells were stimulated with 2% propofol in
the presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM) for 24 h.
(A) mRNA of VCAM-1. (B) mRNA of E-selectin. (C) Secretions of VCAM-1.
(D) Secretions of E-selectin (####P <
0.0001 vs the vehicle group; **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 vs the propofol group, n =
6).
Febuxostat inhibited propofol-induced expression and production
of VCAM-1 and E-selectin. Cells were stimulated with 2% propofol in
the presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM) for 24 h.
(A) mRNA of VCAM-1. (B) mRNA of E-selectin. (C) Secretions of VCAM-1.
(D) Secretions of E-selectin (####P <
0.0001 vs the vehicle group; **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 vs the propofol group, n =
6).
Febuxostat
Prevented Propofol-Induced Expression of Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2)
and the Production of Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2)
To explore the effect of febuxostat on the expression of inflammatory
mediators induced by propofol, the expressions of COX-2 and PGE2 were detected. As shown in Figure A,B, COX-2 was significantly upregulated
by stimulation with propofol but greatly downregulated by the introduction
of febuxostat in a dose-dependent manner. Further, the concentrations
of the released PGE2 in the control, propofol, 10 μM
febuxostat, and 20 μM febuxostat groups were 78.9, 235.5, 176.4,
and 138.2 pg/mL, respectively.
Figure 7
Febuxostat prevented propofol-induced expression of cyclooxygenase-2
(COX-2) and the production of prostaglandin E2 (PGE2). Cells were
stimulated with 2% propofol in the presence or absence of febuxostat
(10, 20 μM) for 24 h. (A) mRNA of COX-2. (B) Protein of COX-2
as measured using Western blot analysis. (C) Production of PGE2 (####P < 0.0001 vs the vehicle group; **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 vs the propofol
group, n = 6).
Febuxostat prevented propofol-induced expression of cyclooxygenase-2
(COX-2) and the production of prostaglandin E2 (PGE2). Cells were
stimulated with 2% propofol in the presence or absence of febuxostat
(10, 20 μM) for 24 h. (A) mRNA of COX-2. (B) Protein of COX-2
as measured using Western blot analysis. (C) Production of PGE2 (####P < 0.0001 vs the vehicle group; **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 vs the propofol
group, n = 6).
Febuxostat
Restored Propofol-Induced Reduction of the Transcriptional Factor
KLF6
To explore the possible mechanism underlying the neuroprotective
property of febuxostat, the expression of the transcriptional factor
KLF6 was evaluated. As shown in Figure , the expression of KLF6 was significantly inhibited
by the stimulation of propofol but greatly elevated by the treatment
of febuxostat in a dose-dependent manner.
Figure 8
Febuxostat restored propofol-induced reduction of the transcriptional
factor KLF6. Cells were stimulated with 2% propofol in the presence
or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM) for 24 h. (A) mRNA of KLF6.
(B) Expression of KLF6 (####P < 0.0001
vs the vehicle group; **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 vs the propofol group, n = 6).
Febuxostat restored propofol-induced reduction of the transcriptional
factor KLF6. Cells were stimulated with 2% propofol in the presence
or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM) for 24 h. (A) mRNA of KLF6.
(B) Expression of KLF6 (####P < 0.0001
vs the vehicle group; **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 vs the propofol group, n = 6).
Discussion
As the intermediate metabolite of oxidation, ROS play an important
role in conducting the cellular signal transition and maintaining
the oxidant–antioxidant homeostasis.[28] Under a normal physiological state, the oxidative system and the
antioxidative system interact with each other to maintain the balance
of production and elimination of ROS.[29] When the balance is broken, direct or indirect toxicity against
cells or biomolecules is triggered by the accumulated ROS, which further
contributes to the excessive production of inflammatory factors, as
well as irreversible injuries and apoptosis on cells.[30] Oxidative stress is a biological state of cellular or tissue
injuries resulting from the excessive production of ROS;[31] it has been proven to be a significant inducer
of the neurotoxicity caused by propofol.[32] Although researchers have already reported the role of ROS-scavenging
agents such as acetyl-l-carnitine, Trolox, and EUK-134 in
alleviating neurotoxicity induced by propofol,[33] there are still limitations for clinical applications.
In the present study, significant toxicity was induced by propofol
and was confirmed by the irregular morphology and elevated release
of LDH. By treatment with febuxostat, the pathological state of the
bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells was improved, indicating a potential
protective effect of febuxostat against neurotoxicity induced by propofol.
Furthermore, oxidative stress was found to be greatly activated by
the stimulation of propofol, as confirmed by the elevated ROS levels
and decreased reduced GSH. It was greatly reversed by the treatment
with febuxostat, indicating its inhibitory effect against oxidative
stress. Based on these preliminary data, we suspect that the neurotoxicity
induced by propofol might be alleviated by febuxostat through inhibiting
the state of oxidative stress, which, however, will be further confirmed
using the animal anesthesia model in our future work.Inflammation induces secondary injuries on the endothelial cells
following direct damage from anesthesia. When the system senses the
apoptosis of brain endothelial cells, the brain immune cells such
as microglia and astrocytes will be recruited to the lesions by pro-inflammatory
chemokines, including the CXCL family[34] and podoplanin (PDPN).[35] Adhesion molecules
such as VCAM-1 and E-selectin promote the adhesion of astrocytes and
microglia to the lesions; these are then activated to release excessive
pro-inflammatory factors under the mediation of inflammatory mediators,
such as COX-2 and PGE2. As a consequence, inflammation
is induced in the cells, which finally contributes to the apoptosis
of brain endothelial cells and dysfunction of the blood–brain
barrier.[36,37] In the present study, the expression levels
of inflammatory factors, pro-inflammatory chemokines, adhesion molecules,
and inflammatory mediators were all upregulated by stimulation with
propofol, indicating an elevated inflammation state induced by propofol.
By treatment with febuxostat, the inflammation state was significantly
ameliorated, indicating a promising anti-inflammatory property of
febuxostat. This was consistent with the reports of the effects of
febuxostat in other inflammation-related diseases.[38−40] The in vivo
anti-inflammatory effect in the brain will be further investigated
and verified in our future animal experiments.KLF6 is reported to be an important transcriptional factor that
mediates inflammation and polarization of macrophages.[41,42] Also, cell proliferation ability is reported to be regulated by
KLF6.[43] In the present study, KLF6 was
found to be significantly downregulated by stimulation with propofol,
an effect reversed by treatment with febuxostat, indicating the possible
mechanism by which febuxostat exerted its anti-inhibitory property
by mediating the expression of KLF6. However, further verifications
will be conducted on the hypothesis proposed based on the preliminary
data collected in the present study, such as knocking down the expression
of KLF6 using RNA interference technology, to provide evidence of
the involvement of KLF6 in the anti-inflammatory effect of febuxostat.Febuxostat has displayed clinical efficacy in reducing the levels
of serum urate and its long-term use is important for improving gout
flare frequency and tophus burden. However, concerns on the side effects
of febuxostat have been raised. A recent cardiovascular safety study
reported that febuxostat showed no difference in the primary endpoint
compared to another gout medicine, allopurinol. However, administration
of febuxostat led to an increased risk of heart-related deaths and
death from all causes.[44,45] Based on this study, the FDA
issued a drug safety communication to limit the approved use of febuxostat
to certain patients who are not treated effectively.[46] Interestingly, natural products have increasingly received
attention from both scientists and physicians due to their benefits
on human health. First, natural products possess enormous structural
diversity as they usually have more chiral centers and have greater
molecular rigidity than synthetic chemicals. Second, natural polyphenols
originating from tea or other fruits and vegetables are much safer
and biologically friendlier than artificial synthetic drugs.[47] Therefore, safer naturally occurring antioxidants
such as dietary polyphenols from living organisms could be alternatives
used as agents against oxidative stress and inflammation caused by
propofol in the body.Taken together, our results demonstrate that treatment with febuxostat
mitigated the cytotoxicity of propofol in brain endothelial cells
by alleviating oxidative stress and inflammatory response through
KLF6.
Materials
and Methods
Cell Culture
and Treatments
The bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells were obtained
from the cell culture collections of ATCC-LGC Standards (ATCC, Manassas),
which were cultured in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium
(DMEM) containing 10% fetal bovine serum, 10 mM 4-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-piperazineethanesulfonic
acid (HEPES), pH 7.4, gentamycin (50 mg/mL), ascorbic acid (5 mg/mL),
1% chemically defined lipid concentrate, and basic fibroblast growth
factor (1 ng/mL) at 37 °C. The medium was changed every 3 days.
For most experiments, cells were stimulated with 2% propofol in the
presence or absence of febuxostat (10, 20 μM) for 24 h. For
the MTT assay, cells were stimulated with 0.1, 0.2, 1, 2, 10, 20,
100, and 200 μM febuxostat for 24 h.
MTT Assay
After the treatments, the bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells were incubated
with a medium containing 10 μL of MTT solution (5 mg/mL, Sigma-Aldrich)
at 37 °C for 4 h, followed by the addition of 150 μL of
dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) to terminate the reaction. After shaking
the plates for 15 min, the absorbance of each well at 490 nm was measured
with a microplate reader (Bio-Tek Instruments, Winooski). The OD values
were used to calculate cell viability.
LDH Release
Assay
Briefly, the treated bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells
were seeded on 96-well plates at a density of 2 × 104 cells/mL, followed by centrifugation to collect the supernatants.
Subsequently, the supernatants were mixed with 20 μL of 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine
at 37 °C for 15 min, followed by the addition of 250 μL
of 0.4 M NaOH, and incubated at 37 °C for another 15 min. Lastly,
the absorbance at 450 nm was measured with a microplate reader (Bio-Tek
Instruments, Winooski).
DCFH-DA
Assay
The cells were seeded on wells at a density of 1 ×
105 cells/well for 24 h, and 1 mL of DCFH-DA (Sigma-Aldrich,
MO) solution was added following the removal of the culture medium;
it was diluted with serum-free medium at a ratio of 1:1000. Subsequently,
the treated bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells were washed using phosphate-buffered
saline (PBS) buffer to clear the residual DCFH-DA solution following
incubation at 37 °C for 20 min. Lastly, fluorescence was measured
at 488 nm (excitation) and 525 nm (emission) using an inverted fluorescence
microscope (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) and quantified with a fluorescent
microplate reader (Thermo Fisher, MA).
Measurement
of Intracellular GSH
The concentration of the intracellular
GSH was detected using a reduced GSH quantification kit (Dojindo,
MD). Briefly, the treated bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells were lysed,
followed by pretreatment with a coenzyme working solution. Subsequently,
the enzyme working solution was added to the supernatants, followed
by incubation for 2 h at room temperature. The substrate working solution
was added to the plates, followed by incubation at room temperature
for 2 h. Lastly, the absorbance at 405 nm was measured using a microplate
reader (Bio-Tek Instruments, Winooski).
The trizol reagents
(Thermo Fisher Scientific, MA) were used to isolate the total RNA
from the treated bEnd.3 brain endothelial cells, which were reverse-transcribed
to cDNA using the RT Master Mix kit (Takara, Tokyo, Japan). The SYBR
Master Mix kit (Takara, Tokyo, Japan) with the StepOne-Plus system
(Takara, Tokyo, Japan) was used to perform the PCR by denaturing at
95 °C for 30 s, annealing at 60 °C for 1 min, and extending
at 95 °C for 5 s. The relative gene expressions of related proteins
were quantified using the 2–ΔΔCt method,
with glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) as the internal
negative control.
Enzyme-Linked
Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA)
The production of TNF-α,
IL-6, IL-12, CXCL-1, PDPN, CXCL8, VCAM-1, E-selectin, and PGE2 was measured using ELISA kits (Thermo Fisher Scientific,
MA). First, the samples were incubated with 1% bovine serum albumin
(BSA) for 1 h to remove nonspecific binding proteins, followed by
mixing with the primary antibodies against each protein at room temperature
for 1 h. Subsequently, the samples were incubated with streptavidin–horseradish
peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated secondary antibodies for 20 min at room
temperature. Lastly, the absorbance at 450 nm was measured using a
microplate spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher, MA).
Western
Blot Assay
The radioimmunoprecipitation assay (RIPA) lysis
buffer (Beyotime, Shanghai, China) was used to lyse the treated bEnd.3
brain endothelial cells for 15 min on ice and the proteins were quantified
using a bicinchoninic acid (BCA) protein quantitative kit (Beyotime,
Shanghai, China). Subsequently, approximately 30 μg samples
were loaded and separated using 12% sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide
gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE). The samples were then transferred
to a poly(vinylidene difluoride) (PVDF) membrane, followed by blotting
with antibodies against KLF6 (1:1000, Cat#sc-365633, Santa Cruz Biotechnology)
and COX-2 (1:1000, Cat#12282, Cell Signaling Technologies) for 2 h
at room temperature. After washing with Tris-buffered saline with
Tween 20 (TBST) buffer, the membranes were incubated with the secondary
anti-rabbit (1:1000, #7074, Cell Signaling Technologies) and anti-mouse
antibodies (1:1000, #7076, Cell Signaling Technologies) for 1.5 h
at room temperature. β-Actin (1:10 000, Cat#4970, Cell
Signaling Technologies) was used as the negative control. Images were
taken and analyzed with the software Image J.
Statistical
Analysis
All procedures were repeated with three biological
replicates to verify the results. GraphPad Prism 7.0 (GraphPad Software)
was employed to perform statistical analysis. Data are presented as
mean ± SD. Results were statistically analyzed using one-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey’s post hoc test for
multigroup comparisons. Data with P values < 0.05
were considered statistically significant.
Authors: Hari S Sharma; Emma Pontén; Torsten Gordh; Per Eriksson; Anders Fredriksson; Aruna Sharma Journal: CNS Neurol Disord Drug Targets Date: 2014 Impact factor: 4.388