Evaluation of Prostaglandin Receptor Agonists and Eupatilin in the Context of Nephronophthisis
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (Arcadia Science)
Abstract
Background
Primary cilia are sensory antennas that are present on the majority of quiescent vertebrate cells where they mediate key signaling during development and in response to environmental stimuli. Defects in primary cilia result in a group of heterogeneous inherited disorders with overlapping phenotypes, called ciliopathies. Nephronophthisis is an autosomal recessive tubulo-interstitial kidney ciliopathy with more than 25 identified genes called NPHP . Presently, no treatment exists beyond supportive care and kidney transplant, underscoring the need for novel therapies.
Methods
Using a phenotypic screening approach in cultured cell lines, we previously identified prostaglandin analogues as candidate therapeutic molecules based on their ability to rescue ciliogenesis defects in kidney tubular cells from NPHP1 patients. Here, we have investigated the potential beneficial effects of ROCK inhibitors and Eupatilin, similarly identified by other groups in different NPHP contexts, in kidney cells from NPHP1 and IQCB1/NPHP5 patients as well as in a zebrafish NPHP mutant line ( traf3ip1/ift54 ).
Results
Eupatilin partially rescued NPHP1 -associated ciliogenesis defects. Transcriptomic analyses pointed out that cell cycle progression was inhibited by Eupatilin, likely explaining its broad effects on cilia assembly. Interestingly, while ciliary defects also observed in NPHP5 patient cells were rescued by both prostaglandins and Eupatilin, only prostaglandin analogues were able to reduce pronephric cysts size in the used nphp zebrafish model.
Conclusion
Our study indicates that these molecules can show beneficial effects across genetic contexts and shed light on their potential as therapeutic interventions for nephronophthisis.
Article activity feed
-
Altogether, our RNAseq analysis confirmed previous studies indicating the cytostatic effects of Eupatilin which therefore may increase ciliogenesis through cell-cycle regulation favoring entry/persistence of cells in G0.
Given that Eupatilin seems to promote cell quiescence, would pursuing this molecule directly as a therapeutic have a poor side effect profile in juveniles, who are still growing? How are prolferating non-kidney cells affected by Eupatilin?
-
