Key result
The AT2 receptor exerts potentially opposite effects to the AT1 receptor in cell growth and blood pressure regulation, with its physiological functions and signaling mechanisms reviewed.
The Angiotensin II type 2 (AT2) receptor has distinct signaling mechanisms from the AT1 receptor and may exert opposite effects on cell growth and blood pressure regulation.
AT2 receptor effects remain theoretical for hypertension management; leaves open selective modulation as a research target beyond AT1 blockade.
Angiotensin II (Ang II) plays an important role in regulating cardiovascular hemodynamics and structure. Multiple lines of evidence have suggested the existence of Ang II receptor subtypes, and at least 2 distinct receptor subtypes have been defined on the basis of their differential pharmacological and biochemical properties and designated as type 1 (AT1) and type 2 (AT2) receptors. To date, most of the known effects of Ang II in adult tissues are attributable to the AT1 receptor. Recent cloning of the AT2 receptor contributes to reveal its physiological functions, but many functions of the AT2 receptor are still an enigma. AT1 and AT2 receptors belong to the 7-transmembrane, G protein-coupled receptor family. However, accumulating evidence demonstrates that the function and signaling mechanisms of these receptor subtypes are quite different, and these receptors may exert opposite effects in terms of cell growth and blood pressure regulation. We will review the role of the AT2 receptor in the cardiovascular system and the molecular and cellular mechanisms of AT2 receptor action.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Horiuchi et al. (1999) conducted a review in Cardiovascular system. Angiotensin II Type 2 Receptor (AT2 receptor) vs. Angiotensin II Type 1 (AT1) receptor was evaluated. The AT2 receptor exerts potentially opposite effects to the AT1 receptor in cell growth and blood pressure regulation, with its physiological functions and signaling mechanisms reviewed.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: