↓ Skip to main content

Relative Contribution of Prolyl Hydroxylase-Dependent and -Independent Degradation of HIF-1alpha by Proteasomal Pathways in Cerebral Ischemia

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Relative Contribution of Prolyl Hydroxylase-Dependent and -Independent Degradation of HIF-1alpha by Proteasomal Pathways in Cerebral Ischemia
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2017.00239
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yomna Badawi, Honglian Shi

Abstract

Hypoxia inducible factor-1 (HIF-1) is a key regulator in hypoxia and can determine the fate of brain cells during ischemia. However, the mechanism of HIF-1 regulation is still not fully understood in ischemic brains. We tested a hypothesis that both the 26S and the 20S proteasomal pathways were involved in HIF-1α degradation under ischemic conditions. Using in vitro ischemic model (oxygen and glucose deprivation) and a mouse model of middle cerebral artery occlusion, we tested effects of inhibitors of proteasomes and prolyl hydroxylase (PHD) on HIF-1α stability and brain injury in cerebral ischemia. We observed that 30 and 60 min of oxygen-glucose deprivation significantly increased the 20S proteasomal activity. We demonstrated that proteasome inhibitors increased HIF-1α stabilization and cell viability and were more effective than PHD inhibitors in primary cultured cortical neurons exposed to oxygen and glucose deprivation. Furthermore, the administration of the proteasome inhibitor, epoxomicin, to mice resulted in smaller infarct size and brain edema than a PHD inhibitor. Our results indicate that 20S proteasomes are involved in HIF-1α degradation in ischemic neurons and that proteasomal inhibition provides more HIF-1α stabilization and neuroprotection than PHD inhibition in cerebral ischemia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Other 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 6 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 8%
Neuroscience 2 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 8%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 6 23%
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 02 June 2017.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,070
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,721
of 327,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#148
of 204 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 327,133 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 204 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.