| Literature DB >> 35699239 |
Yamei Jiang1,2, Chengzhe Cai3, Pingbao Zhang1,2, Yongsheng Luo1,2, Jingjing Guo1,2, Jiawei Li1,2, Ruiming Rong1,2, Yi Zhang2,4, Tongyu Zhu1,2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is characterized by renal fibrosis without effective therapy. 18β-Glycyrrhetinic acid (GA) is reported to have detoxification and anti-inflammatory functions and promotes tissue repair. However, the role of GA in CKD remains unclear. In this study, we investigated whether GA has a potential therapeutic effect in kidney fibrosis.Entities:
Keywords: 18β-Glycyrrhetinic acid; RNA-seq; fibrosis; ischemia reperfusion injury; kidney; transcriptional profile
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35699239 PMCID: PMC9225714 DOI: 10.1080/0886022X.2022.2061998
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ren Fail ISSN: 0886-022X Impact factor: 3.222
Primer sequence for qPCR analysis.
| Genes (Mouse) | Forward | Reverse |
|---|---|---|
|
| GTCCCAGACATCAGGGAGTAA | TCGGATACTTCAGCGTCAGGA |
|
| GAGGGCGAGTGCTGTGCTTTC | GGAGACCACGAGGACCAGAAGG |
|
| CCAGCTCCCCATTAGCTCTG | GCACTTGCCTCTTTAGGAAGTC |
|
| TGCGCTAAATGCACGTACC | TCCCAGATTTTGAAAGAAGGCAG |
|
| AGAGCCCTAGACCCATTTCCT | TGACATTTAGGCAGCTGATACC |
|
| TCGATGCTGACACCAATTCAA | TCCCAATAGACAAGTGAGACCAA |
|
| CCAACCACCAGGCTACAGG | GCGTCACACTCAAGCTCTG |
|
| CTGGGATTCACCTCAAGAACATC | CAGGGTCAAGGCAAGCCTC |
|
| TATACTGGGGGTGGTTGCCAA | GCAGGTCAGCCATAGTGAGATTC |
|
| GCAACTCGGACCTGGTCATAA | CGGCCCGTGATGAGAAACT |
|
| GCTGGCCTCATACAAGAAATGG | GCTTAGGCACCTCTGAACTCTC |
|
| CCCTCTCCTTCCTCATTCTTACA | AGTCTTGAAAGCCCATGTGAAA |
|
| GACCAGTGCCAAGATTCAGAGACC | TTCCTTCCAGCGACCCGTAGAG |
|
| AAGCACCTCCGAAAGTACGTG | CTCCAGCTCTACCTTACAGTTGA |
|
| TGCTTTTTCCAGGGGTGTGTT | TTACTTCCTGCACTAATTTGGCA |
|
| TGGCAGAGAGGCACTATACAG | TGGAGTTGTTGCTTGTGATGT |
|
| ATCCACGGCATACTATCAACATC | CAAGGCTCACCATCATCGTAG |
Figure 1.18β-GA attenuated I/R-induced mice renal injury and fibrosis. On day 14 after I/R injury, both the insulted left kidney and the contralateral right kidney were harvested for analysis. (A) Kidney function of both kidneys. ###p < .001 compared with left kidneys in Sham group; †p < .05, ‡p < .01 compared with right kidneys in Sham group; *p < .05, ***p < .001 compared with left kidneys in I/R + vehicle 14d group; ∗∗∗p < .001 compared the left and right kidneys. (B) Representative images of H&E, Masson and Sirius Red staining (400). (C) Representative images of IHC staining: α-SMA, Fibronectin (400). Quantification of positive area by ImageJ. (D) mRNA expression confirmed the reduced fibrosis after GA treatment. (E) Western blot of Fibronectin, Collagen I and α-SMA expression. ###p < .001 compared with the Sham group. ∗p < .05, ∗∗p < .01, ∗∗∗p < .001 compared with the I/R + vehicle 14d group for (B–E).
Figure 2.Identification of DEGs in the transcriptional level between I/R + vehicle and I/R + GA 25 mg kg−1 mice on day 14. (A) Heatmap of DEGs. The left three columns show I/R + vehicle samples and the right three columns represent I/R + GA samples. Red and green colors represent upregulated and downregulated expression respectively. (B) Volcano plot of DEGs. Red dots represent upregulated genes and green dots represent downregulated genes of I/R + GA group compared with the I/R + vehicle group.
Figure 3.The top five GO functions for the DEGs, including (A) biological process, (B) cellular components, (C) molecular function and (D) top 10 KEGG pathways.
Figure 4.The protein–protein interaction (PPI) network, showing (A) the string interactions between the DEGs and (B) 15 hub genes. The upregulated hub genes are colored red and the downregulated hub genes are green.
Figure 5.Confirmation of hub genes. (A) qPCR test of 15 hub genes compared with RNA-seq result. The trend of fold change were similar between RNA-seq and qPCR; (B) IF staining of protein PF4, which is encoded by hub gene Pf4; (C) IHC staining of protein C3, CCL6, CCR2, PAFr, and TIMP1, which are coded by hub genes C3, Ccl6, Ccr2, Ptafr, and Timp1,(×400).