Why the study?
Does cardiac-specific overexpression of STAT3 improve survival and protect against doxorubicin-induced cardiomyopathy in mice?
Does cardiac-specific overexpression of STAT3 improve survival and protect against doxorubicin-induced cardiomyopathy in mice?
Cardiac-specific overexpression of STAT3 in mice provides a protective signal against doxorubicin-induced cardiomyopathy, significantly improving survival and preserving cardiac contractile gene expression.
The signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) 3, a transcriptional factor downstream of several cytokines, is activated by Janus kinase families and plays a pivotal role in cardiac hypertrophy through gp130. To determine the physiological significance of STAT3 in vivo, transgenic mice with cardiac-specific overexpression of the Stat3 gene (STAT3-TG) were generated. STAT3-TG manifested myocardial hypertrophy at 12 wk of age with increased expression of the atrial natriuretic factor (ANF), beta-myosin heavy chain (MHC), and cardiotrophin (CT)-1 genes. The animals were injected i.p. with 15 mg/kg doxorubicin (Dox), an antineoplastic drug with restricted use because of its cardiotoxicity. The survival rates after 10 days were 25% (5/20) for control littermates (WT), but 80% (16/20) for STAT3-TG (P < 0.01). WT showed increased expression of beta-MHC and ANF mRNAs in the hearts 1 day after Dox treatment; this expression peaked at 3 days, suggesting that the WT suffered from congestive heart failure. Although the expression of these mRNAs was elevated in STAT3-TG hearts before Dox treatment, no additional increase was observed after the treatment. Dox administration significantly reduced the expression of the cardiac alpha-actin and Stat3 genes in WT hearts but not in STAT3-TG. These results provide direct evidence that STAT3 transduces not only a hypertrophic signal but also a protective signal against Dox-induced cardiomyopathy by inhibiting reduction of cardiac contractile genes and inducing cardiac protective factors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kunisada et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: