Key result
Pemafibrate causes less retinal ANGPTL4 induction than GW7647, suggesting lower ischemic disease risk.
Why the study?
To elucidate the unidentified roles of the selective PPARα agonist pemafibrate on the pathogenesis of retinal ischemic diseases.
Pemafibrate induces less upregulation of the retinopathy-worsening factor ANGPTL4 compared to GW7647 in retinal pigment epithelial cells, suggesting a potentially lower risk for exacerbating retinal ischemic diseases.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Hypothesis-generating for pemafibrate in retinal ischemia; prospective trials needed before any practice consideration.
To elucidate the unidentified roles of a selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α (PPARα) agonist, pemafibrate (Pema), on the pathogenesis of retinal ischemic diseases (RID)s, the pharmacological effects of Pema on the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE), which is involved in the pathogenesis of RID, were compared with the pharmacological effects of the non-fibrate PPARα agonist GW7647 (GW). For this purpose, the human RPE cell line ARPE19 that was untreated (NT) or treated with Pema or GW was subjected to Seahorse cellular metabolic analysis and RNA sequencing analysis. Real-time cellular metabolic function analysis revealed that pharmacological effects of the PPARα agonist actions on essential metabolic functions in RPE cells were substantially different between Pema-treated cells and GW-treated cells. RNA sequencing analysis revealed the following differentially expressed genes (DEGs): (1) NT vs. Pema-treated cells, 37 substantially upregulated and 72 substantially downregulated DEGs; (2) NT vs. GW-treated cells, 32 substantially upregulated and 54 substantially downregulated DEGs; and (3) Pema vs. GW, 67 substantially upregulated and 51 markedly downregulated DEGs. Gene ontology (GO) analysis and ingenuity pathway analysis (IPA) showed several overlaps or differences in biological functions and pathways estimated by the DEGs between NT and Pema-treated cells and between NT and GW-treated cells, presumably due to common PPARα agonist actions or unspecific off-target effects to each. For further estimation, overlaps of DEGs among different pairs of comparisons (NT vs. Pema, NT vs. GW, and Pema vs. GW) were listed up. Angiopoietin-like 4 (ANGPTL4), which has been shown to cause deterioration of RID, was the only DEG identified as a common significantly upregulated DEG in all three pairs of comparisons, suggesting that ANGPTL4 was upregulated by the PPARα agonist action but that its levels were substantially lower in Pema-treated cells than in GW-treated cells. In qPCR analysis, such lower efficacy for upregulation of the mRNA expression of ANGPTL4 by Pema than by GW was confirmed, in addition to substantial upregulation of the mRNA expression of HIF1α by both agonists. However, different Pema and GW-induced effects on mRNA expression of HIF1α (Pema, no change; GW, significantly downregulated) and mRNA expression of ANGPTL4 (Pema, significantly upregulated; GW, significantly downregulated) were observed in HepG2 cells, a human hepatocyte cell line. The results of this study suggest that actions of the PPARα agonists Pema and GW are significantly organ-specific and that lower upregulation of mRNA expression of the DR-worsening factor ANGPTL4 by Pema than by GW in ARPE19 cells may minimize the risk for development of RID.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ohguro et al. (2024) studied Retinal ischemic diseases (in vitro). Pemafibrate vs. GW7647 (20 μM) and untreated control was evaluated on ANGPTL4 mRNA expression and cellular metabolic functions. Pemafibrate induced significantly lower upregulation of ANGPTL4 mRNA expression in ARPE19 cells compared to GW7647, suggesting it may minimize the risk of retinal ischemic diseases.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: