Role of KLF4 and SIAT7A interaction accelerates myocardial hypertrophy induced by Ang II

Résumé fourni par la source

Sialylation catalysed by sialyltransferase 7A (SIAT7A) plays a role in the development of cardiac hypertrophy. However, the regulatory mechanisms upstream of SIAT7A in this context remain poorly elucidated. Previous study demonstrated that KLF4 activates the SIAT7A gene in ischemic myocardium by binding to its promoter region. Nevertheless, the potential involvement of KLF4 in regulating SIAT7A expression in Ang II-induced hypertrophic cardiomyocytes remains uncertain. This study seeks to deepen the underlying mechanisms of the KLF4 and SIAT7A interaction in the progression of Ang II-induced cardiac hypertrophy. The results showed a concurrent increase in SIAT7A and KLF4 levels in hypertrophic myocardium of essential hypertension patients and in hypertrophic cardiomyocytes stimulated by Ang II. In vitro experiments revealed that reducing KLF4 levels led to a decrease in both SIAT7A synthesis and Sialyl-Tn antigen expression, consequently inhibiting Ang II-induced cardiomyocyte hypertrophy. Intriguingly, reducing SIAT7A levels also resulted in decreased KLF4 expression and suppression cardiomyocyte hypertrophy. Consistent with this, elevating SIAT7A levels increased KLF4 expression and exacerbated cardiomyocyte hypertrophy in both in vivo and in vitro experiments. Additionally, a time-course analysis indicated that KLF4 expression preceded that of SIAT7A. Luciferase reporter assays further confirmed that modulating SIAT7A levels directly influenced the transcriptional activity of KLF4 in cardiomyocytes. In summary, KLF4 expression is upregulated in cardiomyocytes treated with Ang II, which subsequently induces the expression of SIAT7A. The elevated levels of SIAT7A, in turn, enhance the transcription of KLF4. These findings suggest a positive feedback loop between KLF4 and SIAT7A-Sialyl-Tn, ultimately promoting Ang II-induced cardiac hypertrophy.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.