↓ Skip to main content

MAC inhibitors antagonize the pro-apoptotic effects of tBid and disassemble Bax / Bak oligomers

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Bioenergetics and Biomembranes, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
MAC inhibitors antagonize the pro-apoptotic effects of tBid and disassemble Bax / Bak oligomers
Published in
Journal of Bioenergetics and Biomembranes, December 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10863-015-9635-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pablo M. Peixoto, Oscar Teijido, Oygul Mirzalieva, Laurent M. Dejean, Evgeny V. Pavlov, Bruno Antonsson, Kathleen W. Kinnally

Abstract

Mitochondrial Apoptotic Channel inhibitors or iMACs are di-bromocarbazole derivatives with anti-apoptotic function which have been tested and validated in several mouse models of brain injury and neurodegeneration. Owing to the increased therapeutic potential of these compounds, we sought to expand our knowledge of their mechanism of action. We investigated the kinetics of MAC inhibition in mitochondria from wild type, Bak, and Bax knockout cell lines using patch clamp electrophysiology, fluorescence microscopy, ELISA, and semiquantitative western blot analyses. Our results show that iMACs work through at least two mechanisms: 1) by blocking relocation of the cytoplasmic Bax protein to mitochondria and 2) by disassembling Bax and Bak oligomers in the mitochondrial outer membrane. iMACs exert comparable effects on channel conductance of Bax or Bak and similarly affect cytochrome c release from Bax or Bak-containing mitochondria. Interestingly, wild type mitochondria were more susceptible to inhibition than the Bak or Bax knockouts. Western blot analysis showed that wild type mitochondria had lower steady state levels of Bak in the absence of apoptotic stimulation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 33%
Researcher 3 14%
Professor 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 24%
Engineering 2 10%
Neuroscience 2 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 3 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 December 2015.
All research outputs
#19,400,321
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Bioenergetics and Biomembranes
#357
of 466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,802
of 397,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Bioenergetics and Biomembranes
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 466 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 397,059 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.