Why the study?
Does exposure to THS2.2 aerosol reduce transcriptomic changes in heart tissue compared to 3R4F smoke in Apoe-/- mice?
Does exposure to THS2.2 aerosol reduce transcriptomic changes in heart tissue compared to 3R4F smoke in Apoe-/- mice?
Exposure to aerosol from a modified risk tobacco product (THS2.2) did not induce the adverse transcriptomic changes in heart tissue seen with conventional cigarette smoke in a mouse model.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
THS2.2 aerosol induced fewer cardiac gene expression changes than cigarette smoke in ApoE−/− mice; leaves open translation to human cardiovascular risk reduction.
Experimental studies clearly demonstrate a causal effect of cigarette smoking on cardiovascular disease. To reduce the individual risk and population harm caused by smoking, alternative products to cigarettes are being developed. We recently reported on an apolipoprotein E-deficient (Apoe−/-) mouse inhalation study that compared the effects of exposure to aerosol from a candidate modified risk tobacco product, Tobacco Heating System 2.2 (THS2.2), and smoke from the reference cigarette (3R4F) on pulmonary and vascular biology. Here, we applied a transcriptomics approach to evaluate the impact of the exposure to 3R4F smoke and THS2.2 aerosol on heart tissues from the same cohort of mice. The systems response profiles demonstrated that 3R4F smoke exposure led to time-dependent transcriptomics changes (False Discovery Rate (FDR) < 0.05; 44 differentially expressed genes at 3-months; 491 at 8-months). Analysis of differentially expressed genes in the heart tissue indicated that 3R4F exposure induced the downregulation of genes involved in cytoskeleton organization and the contractile function of the heart, notably genes that encode beta actin (Actb), actinin alpha 4 (Actn4), and filamin C (Flnc). This was accompanied by the downregulation of genes related to the inflammatory response. None of these effects were observed in the group exposed to THS2.2 aerosol.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Szostak et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: