Articles |
From the Department of Biochemistry, Medical College of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (W.V.R., K.J.W.); and Vascular and Cardiac Diseases, Parke-Davis Pharmaceutical Research, Division of Warner-Lambert Co, Ann Arbor, Mich (K.D.M., A.D.E., M.E.P., T.J.R., C.L.B.). Dr Williams is now with the Division of Endocrinology, Jefferson Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa.
Correspondence to Kevin Jon Williams, Division of Endocrinology, Thomas Jefferson University, 1020 Locust St, Suite 349, Philadelphia, PA 19107-6799 or Charles L. Bisgaier, Vascular and Cardiac Diseases, Parke-Davis Pharmaceutical Research, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, MI 48105 E-mail bisgaic{at}aa.wl.com.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
120-nm) and small (
35-nm) unilamellar
vesicles (LUVs and SUVs), both of which mediate reverse
cholesterol transport in vivo but were previously shown to
be targeted to different cell types within the liver. On days 1, 3, and
5, rabbits were intravenously injected with 300 mg
phosphatidylcholine (LUVs or SUVs) per kilogram body weight or with the
equivalent volume of saline. After each injection, LUV- and
SUV-injected animals showed large increases in plasma concentrations of
unesterified cholesterol, indicating mobilization of tissue
stores. After hepatic uptake of this cholesterol, however,
SUV-treated animals developed persistently elevated plasma LDL
concentrations, which by day 6 had increased to more than four times
the values in saline-treated controls. In contrast, LUV-treated animals
showed normal LDL levels. By RNase protection assay, SUVs suppressed
hepatic LDL receptor mRNA at day 6 (to 61±4% of control, mean±SEM),
whereas LUVs caused a statistically insignificant stimulation. Hepatic
HMG-CoA reductase message was also significantly suppressed with SUV,
but not LUV treatment, and hepatic 7
-hydroxylase message showed a
similar trend. These data on hepatic mRNA levels indicate that SUVs,
but not LUVs, substantially perturbed liver cholesterol
homeostasis. We conclude that LUVs and SUVs mobilize
peripheral tissue cholesterol and deliver it to
the liver, but to distinct metabolic pools that exert
different regulatory effects. The effects of one of these artificial
particles, SUVs, suggest that reverse cholesterol transport
may not always be benign. In contrast, LUVs may be a suitable
therapeutic agent, because they mobilize peripheral
cholesterol to the liver without suppressing hepatic LDL
receptor mRNA and without provoking a subsequent rise in plasma LDL
levels.
Key Words: atherosclerosis HDL gene expression cholesterol therapy
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Hepatic disposal of cholesterol transported from the periphery to the liver, however, is not well understood. Radioisotopic studies have suggested that cholesterol of HDL, the apparent natural mediator of RCT,8 is efficiently converted into bile acids by the liver and then excreted.9 10 11 12 In contrast, direct measurements of sterol mass showed that accelerated delivery of cholesterol to the liver in vivo by apoE-rich HDL produces no change in biliary output of cholesterol or bile acids, but instead stimulates hepatic acyl-CoA:cholesterol acyltransferase and enhances VLDL secretion.13 Similar results, including LDL receptor suppression, have been reported in other situations involving cholesterol enrichment of hepatic cells.14 15 16 17 Moreover, intravenous infusion of apoA-I/PL disks into humans to enhance RCT causes a sustained rise in plasma levels of LDL.18 Taken together, these effects are more consistent with events leading to the promotion, not the inhibition, of atherogenesis. Thus, depending on hepatic responses, not all agents that enhance RCT will be unambiguously beneficial.
In this study, we sought to determine the effect of liposomal structure
on hepatic responses to enhanced RCT mediated by these synthetic
particles. We compared LUVs (
120-nm), which have been shown to be
catabolized in the liver primarily by Kupffer cells,19
versus SUVs (
35-nm), which are directed mainly to parenchymal
cells.20 Prior work has shown that both LUVs and SUVs
mobilize cholesterol from lipoproteins and
peripheral tissues, thereby enhancing RCT in
vivo.6 The response of the liver to repeated injections of
these two liposomal preparations over several days was determined by
monitoring the concentrations of major plasma lipoprotein species and
by measuring mRNA levels of key hepatic enzymes and proteins
responsible for maintaining hepatic cholesterol
homeostasis.
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Preparation of Vesicles
Three days before the start of the experiment in vivo, LUVs and
SUVs were prepared at a concentration of 100 mg/mL. Six 6-g
portions of solid egg phosphatidylcholine were each placed into 50-mL
conical polypropylene centrifuge tubes, hydrated with 30 mL of
filter-sterilized 150 mmol/L NaCl, 20 mmol/L
HEPES, pH 7.4 (HEPES-buffered saline), and vortexed to generate MLVs.
These preparations were kept overnight at 4°C. To generate LUVs, the
MLVs were extruded 10 times under medium pressures (250 to 300 psi)
through two stacked polycarbonate filters (100-nm pore size) that had
been fitted into a 10-mL water-jacketed thermobarrel Extruder (Lipex
Biomembranes). To generate SUVs, 30-mL batches of MLVs were each
subjected to three 20-minute cycles of sonication in 50-mL round-bottom
Pyrex glass tubes at 0°C under nitrogen (power setting=3, duty
cycle=50%, Branson stud tip sonifier, VWR Co). The initially milky
suspension clarified during this procedure. After sonication, batches
were then centrifuged at 20 000g for 30 minutes to
remove titanium shed from the probe during sonication.
The two vesicle preparations, LUVs and SUVs, were sterilized by passage through 0.45-µm Nalgene bottle-top filters, assayed for PL concentrations,22 and diluted with sterile HEPES-buffered saline to 100 mg PL per milliliter before injection. Consistent with prior literature, the diameters of the LUVs and SUVs generated were found to be 123±35 and 34±30 nm (mean±SD), respectively, determined by quasielastic light scattering using a Nicomp model 370 submicron laser particle sizer, equipped with a 5-mW He-Ne laser (Pacific Scientific).6
Experimental Design In Vivo
Normal 3- to 4-kg female New Zealand White rabbits (Hazelton
Farms, Denver, Pa) were randomly distributed into three groups (n=4,
LUV or saline treatment; n=3, SUV treatment). Approximately 3 mL of
blood was collected from each animal via a medial auricular artery
every morning during the study. Blood samples were immediately mixed
with EDTA for anticoagulation (final concentration, 2
mmol/L in blood) and N-ethylmaleimide to inhibit
lecithin:cholesterol acyltransferase (final concentration,
5 mmol/L).
On days 1, 3, and 5, right after the morning's blood collection, LUVs
or SUVs (300 mg of PL per kilogram body weight), or the equivalent
volume of HEPES-buffered saline, were bolus-injected into a marginal
ear vein of each animal (approximately 10 mL per injection, infused
over
30 seconds). Immediately after blood collection on day 6, all
animals were killed (100 mg pentobarbitol per kilogram
IV),23 and several 100- to 200-mg liver samples were
collected from each animal and snap-frozen in liquid nitrogen. Tissue
samples were stored at -70°C until isolation of total RNA and lipid
analysis.
Analyses of Plasma and Plasma Fractions
Triglyceride concentrations in whole plasma were
determined by using a commercially available kit
(Triglyceride G, Wako Chemicals USA, Inc). Whole-plasma
concentrations of TC (equal to unesterified and esterified forms) and
UC concentrations in whole plasma were directly determined
enzymatically,24 and EC was calculated by difference.
Agarose gel electrophoresis of whole plasma followed by lipid staining
with Sudan black4 25 and rocket immunoelectrophoresis to
quantitate whole-plasma rabbit apoB, reported in AU,17 26
were performed as previously described. Preliminary studies indicated
that these rocket assays, which are performed in
detergent,26 are not affected by the presence of
liposomes. Size distributions of plasma particles carrying TC and UC
were determined by Superose 6HR high-performance gel
chromatography (Rainin Instrument Co, Inc), including
an on-line post-column analyzer, as previously
described.27 28 Areas under the peaks were used to
calculate the percent distribution of TC and UC corresponding to VLDL,
LDL, and HDL size ranges in the elution profiles (Dynamax and Compare
Module Software, Rainin Instrument Co, Inc, developed for Macintosh
computers). Next, the absolute concentrations of TC and UC in each
lipoprotein size range were determined by multiplying these percent
distribution values by the independently determined TC and UC values in
whole plasma. Absolute EC values in each lipoprotein fraction were
determined by the difference between the calculated TC and UC in each
lipoprotein fraction. Plots of the distributions of absolute lipid
content by particle size were prepared similarly, ie, the total area
under each TC and UC elution curve from the on-line post-column
analyzer was normalized to the corresponding whole-plasma assay
result. Absolute EC distribution curves were then determined by
difference.
Analytical Methods for Determination of Hepatic Lipids
Hepatic phosphatidylcholine, phosphatidylethanolamine, CE, UC,
and triglyceride were extracted in the presence of
4-hydroxycholesterol internal standard, separated by silica
column high-performance liquid chromatography,
and then quantitated by an evaporative light-scattering detector, as
previously described.28 Notice that these tissue CE
determinations include the mass of both the steryl and fatty acyl
moieties, whereas the EC measurements in plasma and plasma fractions
include only steryl mass.
Hepatic mRNA Analysis
Rabbit cDNAs encoding the LDL receptor, HMG-CoA reductase,
7
-hydroxylase, and CETP were prepared in polymerase chain reactions
using primers based on phylogenetically conserved sequences and then
cloned into the pBluescript II SK (+) plasmid (Stratagene Cloning
Systems). The identity of each cloned cDNA was confirmed by sequencing,
as described in detail by Rea et al.29 For each cloned
cDNA, an unlabeled sense mRNA product, to be used as an internal
standard, and a labeled antisense mRNA probe were synthesized. Both
synthetic mRNAs were designed to contain the partial coding sequence
from rabbit, linked to a short sequence from the plasmid.
Total RNA was isolated from the snap-frozen rabbit liver samples using
RNAzol (Cinna/Biotecx Inc), quantified by A260, and
assessed for degradation by agarose electrophoresis. Messenger RNAs of
interest were quantified by an internal standard/RNase protection
assay, as described previously in detail.30 Each
protection assay contained (1) 30 µg of total liver RNA, (2) the
synthetic unlabeled sense mRNA internal standard (30 pg LDL receptor,
10 pg HMG-CoA reductase, 10 pg 7
-hydroxylase, or 5 pg CETP), and (3)
1.0 ng of the synthetic radiolabeled antisense mRNA probe (specific
activity, 2x108 cpm/µg ). After digestion with RNase,
protected mRNA probes were quantified by polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis and then autoradiography using a
PhosphorImager (Molecular Dynamics). Probes protected by authentic
versus internal-standard mRNA differed in molecular weight by the size
of the incorporated plasmid sequence and were directly identified by
control reactions in which either rabbit liver RNA or the unlabeled
internal standard mRNA was individually omitted. The ratio of
radioactivity in the two protected bands, multiplied by the known
amount of internal-standard mRNA and corrected for molecular weight
differences between authentic and internal-standard mRNA, gave the mass
of hepatic liver mRNA of interest.
Protein Uptake by Large and Small PL Vesicles In Vitro
To determine whether there are systematic differences in the
acquisition of proteins by LUVs versus SUVs, these particles were
incubated in vitro for 4 hours at 37°C with HDL3, using a
PL ratio of 5:1 (vesicle:HDL), which is similar to ratios achieved in
vivo and does not disrupt vesicle structure.31 PL vesicles
were then separated from the HDL by passage over a 130x1.5-cm column
of Sepharose CL-6B. Purity of these modified liposomes was verified by
the absence of detectable esterified
cholesterol2 4 by gas-liquid
chromatography.32 33 The modified LUVs and
SUVs were analyzed for protein content by modified
Lowry,34 PL content enzymatically,35 and
protein species by SDSpolyacrylamide gel electrophoresis.
Statistical Analyses
ANOVA was used to compare the three experimental groups. When
ANOVA indicated differences among the groups, pairwise comparisons
between groups were performed using the Student-Neumann-Keuls
q statistic.36 Unless otherwise indicated, all
results are displayed as mean±SEM, (n=4, LUV and saline groups; n=3,
SUV group). Absent error bars in figures indicate SE values smaller
than the drawn symbols.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Because EC cannot be transported to any great extent by PL vesicles
owing to their lack of a hydrophobic core, we sought to determine which
lipoprotein carried the extra plasma EC after SUV injection. Gel
filtration revealed that most of the increase in whole-plasma EC was
transported by LDL-sized particles (Fig 1C
, Table 1
, and Fig 2A
). Under these conditions, liposomal
remnants would not appear in this size range, because vesicle structure
is stable in plasma at 300 mg/kg4 5 31 and remnants
that form at lower vesicle doses are exclusively PL-apoprotein disks
that coelute with HDL.31 38 Quantitatively, SUVs increased
plasma concentrations of LDL EC to over fourfold compared with saline
control (Table 1
), whereas injections of LUVs caused a small but
statistically insignificant decrease during the study (Fig 1
). Rabbit
apoB assays of plasma from day 6 showed a trend toward higher values in
the SUV group (0.31±0.04 AU) than the LUV group (0.16±0.07 AU). These
results suggest a proportionately greater increase in LDL EC than in
plasma apoB after SUV administration, raising the possibility of
increased LDL size, which was confirmed by a slight shift on the EC
elution profile (Fig 2A
, EC profile after SUV treatment). No shifts
were evident in any HDL EC peaks (Fig 2A
). The SUV-mediated increase in
LDL concentration was confirmed by agarose gel electrophoresis followed
by Sudan black staining,25 which revealed a darker but
otherwise unremarkable ß-band (Fig 2B
). As previously
reported,4 the SUVs in plasma exhibited a mobility ahead
of LDL owing to their acquisition of plasma proteins, chiefly from HDL.
In contrast, plasma LUVs exhibited essentially the same mobility as
freshly prepared, protein-free vesicles, ie, just above the origin (Fig 2B
; discussion to follow).
|
|
Fractionation data for all particle sizes from the final bleed on day 6
are summarized in Table 1
. Notice that the additional UC mobilized into
the plasma of LUV-treated animals was mainly confined to the VLDL size
range, while the additional UC in the SUV-treated animals was in both
the VLDL and LDL size ranges, consistent with the smaller size
but greater heterogeneity of SUVs compared with LUVs
(see "Methods"). Also, lipoprotein fractionation revealed an
increase in the concentration of HDL EC in SUV-treated animals. This
increase in HDL EC, however, represented only a small
fraction of the total cholesterol mass mobilized by the
injected vesicles. No significant changes in plasma concentrations of
triglycerides were observed (data not shown),
consistent with prior studies.37
Alterations in Hepatic Lipids and mRNA in Response to Repeated
Injections of PL Vesicles
On day 6, 24 hours after the third injection, hepatic samples were
taken for lipid and mRNA analyses. Because vesicles in the
bloodstream eventually achieve a molar ratio of UC:PL of about
0.8,6 which is far higher than the ratio of 0.12 found in
normal hepatic tissue (Table 2
), we
anticipated that hepatic uptake of vesicles might increase this ratio
in liver. Both types of PL vesicles did substantially increase the
hepatic UC:PL ratio (Table 2
; P<.01), consistent
with liposomal delivery of cholesterol mass to the liver.
With both types of particles, the significant increase in the hepatic
UC:PL ratio appeared to result from increased hepatic UC and decreased
hepatic PL, although only the SUV-induced decrease in hepatic PL
reached statistical significance compared with saline control. No
effects on hepatic triglyceride content were observed (data
not shown).
|
Hepatic mRNA levels for key enzymes in cholesterol
homeostasis are shown in Fig 3
. The three
injections of SUVs caused
40% to 50% suppression of hepatic mRNA
levels for the LDL receptor and HMG-CoA reductase. A similar though
statistically insignificant trend was seen with 7
a-hydroxylase.
These results are consistent with regulatory effects seen after
substantial cholesterol loading of parenchymal cells, which
compensate by suppressing their uptake of LDL and their synthesis of
sterol (see References 15, 17, 39, and 4015 17 39 40 ). In contrast, the three
injections of LUVs caused increases, though statistically
insignificant, in each of these messages. Finally, LUVs, but not SUVs,
significantly suppressed hepatic mRNA for CETP.
|
Protein Uptake by Large and Small PL Vesicles In Vitro
Based on the electrophoretic mobilities in Fig 2B
, we sought to
quantitate the acquisition of proteins by LUVs versus SUVs. After
incubation with HDL, LUVs acquired 1.09 µg of protein per milligram
of liposomal PL, whereas SUVs acquired 40.4 µg/mg, ie, almost
40 times as much. Consistent with prior
literature,4 41 SDSpolyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis confirmed that the major protein acquired by both LUVs
and SUVs was apoA-I (data not shown).
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Our results with SUVs are entirely consistent with prior
literature concerning cholesterol enrichment of
hepatocytes. When liver cells were cholesterol
enriched in vivo by a single injection of apoE-rich HDL that was
rapidly cleared from plasma into liver13 or by feeding
nonhuman primates long term on atherogenic diets,39
similar results were observed, including LDL receptor suppression and
lipoprotein oversecretion. Similarly, cholesterol
enrichment of hepatocytes in vitro causes suppression of
LDL receptors42 43 and HMG-CoA
reductase,44 45 46 47 as well as enhancement of apoB
secretion.16 43 48 49 The expression of hepatic
7
-hydroxylase is stimulated by cellular cholesterol
enrichment in rats50 but inhibited in
rabbits,17 40 consistent with the trend in Fig 3
.
Thus, RCT by these synthetic SUVs was associated with events that are
entirely consistent with known molecular consequences of
cellular cholesterol enrichment: sterol-responsive messages
in the liver, such as the LDL receptor, were suppressed, and
consequently, plasma LDL concentrations rose. It is nonetheless
surprising that the metabolic effects on the liver of RCT
mediated by SUVs in the current study or by apoE-rich particles in a
previous study13 appear to be inconsistent with
antiatherogenic actions.
Our results with LUVs, however, were starkly different. Prior work has
shown that LUVs transport significantly more peripheral
cholesterol in vivo to the liver than do
SUVs,6 and yet there was no suppression of
sterol-responsive messages in the liver and no rise in plasma LDL
concentrations (Figs 1 through 3![]()
![]()
). We propose three possible
explanations for the difference in metabolic response to
LUVs versus SUVs. First, it has been reported that LUVs are taken up by
Kupffer cells,19 whereas SUVs are primarily directed
toward hepatic parenchymal cells.20 Presumably, this is
partly a mechanical consequence of hepatic architecture: hepatic
endothelial fenestrae are oval openings of about
100x115 nm,51 52 through which SUVs of 35-nm diameter can
readily pass and gain access to parenchymal cells. LUVs of 120-nm
diameter or slightly larger will not pass easily and are cleared
instead by the macrophage Kupffer cells that line liver
sinusoids. While SUVs also have access to Kupffer cells, their sheer
number (
10 times as many SUVs as LUVs per milligram of PL) appears
to saturate the reticuloendothelial system, and so
parenchymal cells predominate in their clearance (see Reference
2020 ).
Cholesterol-clearance pathways mediated by parenchymal versus Kupffer cells are likely to have distinct metabolic consequences. Direct delivery of cholesterol to parenchymal cells by SUVs would be expected to suppress sterol-responsive messages. Delivery of cholesterol to Kupffer cells can be followed by gradual transfer of lipid to parenchymal cells,19 53 for example, via the extensions of Kupffer cells that reach down through the space of Disse to make physical contact with parenchymal cells.53 The rate of sterol delivery to the parenchymal cells by transfer from Kupffer cells can be slower than by direct uptake; the chemical form of the sterol may be altered by the Kupffer cells before transfer (see Reference 5454 ); and, on the basis of other pathways for lipid transfer among liver cells,54A the process of transfer from Kupffer to parenchymal cells may be regulated, whereas SUV clearance does not appear to be.5 20
The second possible explanation for the difference in
metabolic response to LUVs versus SUVs is based solely on
differences in the kinetics of their delivery of
cholesterol to the liver. In mice, LUVs are cleared from
plasma somewhat more slowly than are SUVs and thereby produce a
relatively constant delivery of cholesterol mass to the
liver from the time of injection until the bulk of injected material is
cleared.6 Similarly, in rabbits, LUVs are cleared with a
t1/2 of
27 hours (W.V. Rodrigueza, M.J. Hope,
unpublished studies, 1997), whereas SUVs are cleared more
rapidly,5 thereby delivering a large bolus of
cholesterol mass to the liver between 4 and 12 hours after
injection, which is followed by a rise in plasma EC
concentration.5 The slow, steady delivery by LUVs may
avoid disrupting hepatic cholesterol homeostasis, while the
more rapid uptake of SUV cholesterol may overwhelm the
ability of the liver to maintain homeostasis, thereby provoking
suppression of hepatic LDL receptors (see Reference 1515 ).
The third possible explanation is based on the striking quantitative
difference in protein adsorption between the two types of vesicles (Fig 2B
and "Results"), which is presumably a result of their distinct
surface curvatures.55 Thus, it is conceivable that SUVs,
but not LUVs, would avidly strip apoE from VLDL, thereby slowing its
clearance from plasma and favoring its conversion to LDL (see Reference
5656 ). This scenario, however, would not explain the divergent effects of
the two types of vesicles on hepatic gene expression (Fig 3
).
Alternatively, differences in adsorbed apoproteins might play a role in
directing the PL vesicles into different hepatic metabolic
pools, although there is no direct evidence that apoproteins mediate
hepatic uptake of these particles.5 57
Our results with hepatic CETP message were unexpected; namely,
suppression by LUV injections and no significant effect of SUV
injections, despite cholesterol delivery. Notice that CETP
mRNA differs from the other three messages that we studied: it is
equally distributed between hepatic parenchymal and nonparenchymal
cells on a per-gram basis, whereas hepatic mRNAs for the LDL
receptor, HMG-CoA reductase, and 7
-hydroxylase are >90% in
parenchymal cells.29 Prior reports indicate that
hyperlipidemia in rabbits is associated with increases
in plasma CETP mass and hepatic message,58 although
separate effects on parenchymal and nonparenchymal cells are not known.
Also, suppression of CETP is usually followed by increases in HDL
EC,59 which we did not see here after LUV injections. Our
results may not be directly comparable to the study by Quinet et
al,58 however, because we investigated the redistribution
of endogenous cholesterol among tissues by
artificial particles, whereas the prior work in animals involved
enhanced dietary intake. Thus, it is likely that LUVs suppressed
hepatic CETP mRNA by depleting cholesterol from a
regulatory pool that ordinarily stimulates CETP production and
then disposed of this cholesterol into a nonstimulatory
pool. SUVs, which are cleared differently, produced no overall effect
on CETP message. Because the role of CETP in provoking or preventing
atherosclerosis is controversial,60 61 62 the
importance in atherogenesis of our finding that CETP mRNA is suppressed
after LUV injections is not clear. Nevertheless, because LUVs and SUVs
produced different effects on CETP mRNA, as well as on the other
messages, there is a consistent pattern of divergent regulatory
effects between these two synthetic mediators of RCT.
For many reasons, the safe enhancement of RCT is an important medical goal. First, it has been recently accepted that most human heart attacks are caused by rupture-prone lesions that are rich in lipid and foam cell macrophages.63 64 One goal for treatment of preestablished disease is to stabilize these lesions. Apparently, these lesions can be gradually rendered less dangerous by aggressive lipid-lowering therapy,65 which presumably reduces lesional content of lipid65 and possibly tissue factor.66 We speculate that massive enhancement of cholesterol transport from peripheral tissues to the liver by LUVs in vivo should achieve the same beneficial result quickly and directly. Second, enrichment of vessel wall cells with cholesterol or oxidized derivatives is known to produce substantial dysfunction.66 67 68 69 Cholesterol-enriched endothelial cells lose their ability to produce endothelial-derived relaxing factor,70 71 and cholesterol-enriched smooth muscle cells exhibit supranormal levels of cytosolic calcium72 and enhanced proliferation.73 Many of these effects can be quickly reversed in vitro by removal of the excess cellular UC.74 We speculate that enhanced RCT should accomplish the same in vivo, with rapid therapeutic benefit. Third, platelet hyperreactivity can be caused by an increased platelet membrane ratio of UC:PL, which has been described in some human hyperlipidemias.75 76 77 78 Again, a massive enhancement of RCT might produce a rapid therapeutic benefit in this situation by reducing platelet reactivity in vivo.
Overall, our findings indicate that these synthetic particles, LUVs and SUVs, mediate RCT in vivo, though with markedly different regulatory effects on the liver. LUVs appear to be the better therapeutic agent, because they mobilize cholesterol from the periphery to the liver without suppressing hepatic LDL receptor message and without provoking a rise in plasma LDL concentrations.
| Selected Abbreviations and Acronyms |
|---|
|
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
Received February 29, 1996; accepted December 18, 1996.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Williams KJ, Werth VP, Wolff JA. Intravenously administered lecithin liposomes: a synthetic antiatherogenic lipid particle. Perspect Biol Med. 1984;27:417-431.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
3. Bangham AD, Standish MM, Watkins JC. Diffusion of univalent ions across the lamellae of swollen phospholipids. J Mol Biol. 1965;13:238-252.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
4. Williams KJ, Scanu AM. Uptake of endogenous cholesterol by a synthetic lipoprotein. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1986;875:183-194.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
5.
Williams KJ, Vallabhajosula S, Rahman IU, Donnelly TM,
Parker TS, Weinrauch M, Goldsmith SJ. Low density lipoprotein
receptor-independent hepatic uptake of a synthetic,
cholesterol-scavenging lipoprotein: implications for the
treatment of receptor-deficient
atherosclerosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci
U S A. 1988;85:242-246.
6. Rodrigueza WV, Pritchard PH, Hope MJ. The influence of size and composition on the cholesterol mobilizing properties of liposomes in vivo. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1993;1153:9-19.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
7.
Rodrigueza WV, Williams KJ, Rothblat GH, Phillips
MC. Remodeling and shuttling: mechanisms for synergistic effects
between different acceptor particles in the mobilization of cellular
cholesterol. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc
Biol. 1997;17:383-393.
8. Glomset JA. The plasma lecithin:cholesterol acyltransferase reaction. J Lipid Res. 1968;9:155-167.[Abstract]
9.
Schwartz CC, Halloran LG, Vlahcevic ZR, Gregory DH,
Swell L. Preferential utilization of free
cholesterol from high-density lipoproteins for biliary
cholesterol secretion in man. Science. 1978;200:62-64.
10. Miller LK, Tiell ML, Paul I, Spaet TH, Rosenfeld RS. Side-chain oxidation of lipoprotein-bound [24,25-3H]cholesterol in the rat: comparison of HDL and LDL and implications for bile acid synthesis. J Lipid Res. 1982;23:335-344.[Abstract]
11. Esnault-Dupuy C, Chanussot F, Lafont H, Chabert C, Hauton J. The relationship between HDL-, LDL-, liposome-free cholesterol, biliary cholesterol and bile salts in the rat. Biochimie. 1987;69:45-52.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
12. Pieters MN, Schouten D, Bakkeren HF, Esbach B, Brouwer A, Knook DL, Van Berkel TJ. Selective uptake of cholesteryl esters from apolipoprotein-Efree high-density lipoproteins by rat parenchymal cells in vivo is efficiently coupled to bile acid synthesis. Biochem J. 1991;280:359-365.
13. Stone BG, Schreiber D, Alleman LD, Ho CY. Hepatic metabolism and secretion of a cholesterol-enriched lipoprotein fraction. J Lipid Res. 1987;28:162-172.[Abstract]
14. Franklin F, Watkins J, Clowes A, Breslow J. Serum lipids and regulation of liver cholesterol synthesis during total parenteral nutrition. Circulation. 1976;54:165. Abstract.
15. Spady DK, Turley SD, Dietschy JM. Rates of low density lipoprotein uptake and cholesterol synthesis are regulated independently in the liver. J Lipid Res. 1985;26:465-472.[Abstract]
16.
Williams KJ, Brocia RW, Fisher EA. The unstirred
water layer as a site of control of apolipoprotein B secretion.
J Biol Chem. 1990;265:16741-16744.
17.
Krause BR, Pape ME, Kieft K, Auerbach B, Bisgaier CL,
Homan R, Newton RS. ACAT inhibition decreases LDL
cholesterol in rabbits fed a cholesterol-free
diet: marked changes in LDL cholesterol without changes in
LDL receptor mRNA abundance. Arterioscler Thromb. 1994;14:598-604.
18. Kuivenhoven JA, Demacker PNM, Stalenhoef AFH, Pajkrt D, van Deventer SJH, Doran JE, Pritchard PH, Kastelein JJP. Infusion of reconstituted HDL: reverse cholesterol transport in hereditary HDL deficiencies. Circulation. 1996;94(suppl I):I-343-I-344. Abstract.
19. Roerdink F, Dijkstra J, Hartman G, Bolscher B, Scherphof G. The involvement of parenchymal, Kupffer and endothelial liver cells in the hepatic uptake of intravenously injected liposomes: effects of lanthanum and gadolinium salts. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1981;677:79-89.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
20.
Chow DD, Essien HE, Padki MM, Hwang KJ.
Targeting small unilamellar liposomes to hepatic parenchymal cells by
dose effect. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1989;248:506-513.
21. Lund-Katz S, Phillips MC. Packing of cholesterol molecules in human low-density lipoprotein. Biochemistry. 1986;25:1562-1568.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
22.
Fiske CH, Subbarow Y. The
colorimetric determination of phosphorus.
J Biol Chem. 1924;66:375-400.
23. Anonymous. 1986 Report of the AVMA Panel on Euthanasia. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1986;188:252-268.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
24. Allain CC, Poon LS, Chan CS, Richmond W, Fu PC. Enzymatic determination of total serum cholesterol. Clin Chem. 1974;20:470-475.[Abstract]
25. Sparks DL, Phillips MC. Quantitative measurement of lipoprotein surface charge by agarose gel electrophoresis. J Lipid Res. 1992;33:123-130.[Abstract]
26.
Reardon MF, Poapst ME, Uffelman KD, Steiner G.
Improved method for quantitation of B apoprotein in plasma lipoproteins
by electroimmunoassay. Clin Chem. 1981;27:892-895.
27. Kieft KA, Bocan TM, Krause BR. Rapid on-line determination of cholesterol distribution among plasma lipoproteins after high-performance gel filtration chromatography. J Lipid Res. 1991;32:859-866.[Abstract]
28. Wolle S, Via DP, Chan L, Cornicelli JA, Bisgaier CL. Hepatic overexpression of bovine scavenger receptor type I in transgenic mice prevents diet-induced hyperbetalipoproteinemia. J Clin Invest. 1995;96:260-272.
29. Rea TJ, DeMattos RB, Pape ME. Hepatic expression of genes regulating lipid metabolism in rabbits. J Lipid Res. 1993;34:1901-1910.[Abstract]
30. Pape ME, Melchior GW, Marotti KR. mRNA quantitation by a simple and sensitive RNase protection assay. Genet Anal Tech Appl. 1991;8:206-213.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
31. Tall AR, Tabas I, Williams KJ. Lipoprotein-liposome interactions. Methods Enzymol. 1986;128:647-657.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
32. Ishikawa TT, MacGee J, Morrison JA, Glueck CJ. Quantitative analysis of cholesterol in 5 to 20 microliters of plasma. J Lipid Res. 1974;15:286-291.[Abstract]
33. Klansek J, Yancey PG, St Clair RW, Fischer RT, Johnson WJ, Glick JM. Cholesterol quantitation by GLC: artifactual formation of short-chain steryl esters. J Lipid Res. 1995;36:2261-2266.[Abstract]
34. Markwell MA, Haas SM, Bieber LL, Tolbert NE. A modification of the Lowry procedure to simplify protein determination in membrane and lipoprotein samples. Anal Biochem. 1978;87:206-210.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
35. Takayama M, Itoh S, Nagasaki T, Tanimizu I. A new enzymatic method for determination of serum choline-containing phospholipids. Clin Chim Acta. 1977;79:93-98.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
36. Glantz SA. Primer of Biostatistics. 3rd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc; 1992.
37.
Friedman M, Byers SO. Role of
hyperphospholipidemia and neutral fat increase in plasma in the
pathogenesis of hypercholesterolemia.
Am J Physiol. 1956;186:13-18.
38.
Tall AR, Green PH. Incorporation of
phosphatidylcholine into spherical and discoidal lipoproteins during
incubation of egg phosphatidylcholine vesicles with isolated high
density lipoproteins or with plasma. J Biol
Chem. 1981;256:2035-2044.
39. Rudel L, Deckelman C, Wilson M, Scobey M, Anderson R. Dietary cholesterol and downregulation of cholesterol 7-alpha hydroxylase and cholesterol absorption in African green monkeys. J Clin Invest. 1994;93:2463-2472.
40. Xu G, Salen G, Shefer S, Ness GC, Nguyen LB, Parker TS, Chen TS, Zhao Z, Donnelly TM, Tint GS. Unexpected inhibition of cholesterol 7 alpha-hydroxylase by cholesterol in New Zealand White and Watanabe heritable hyperlipidemic rabbits. J Clin Invest. 1995;95:1497-1504.
41. Chonn A, Semple SC, Cullis PR. Separation of large unilamellar liposomes from blood components by a spin column procedure: towards identifying plasma proteins which mediate liposome clearance in vivo. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1991;1070:215-222.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
42. Leichtner AM, Krieger M, Schwartz AL. Regulation of low density lipoprotein receptor function in a human hepatoma cell line. Hepatology. 1984;4:897-901.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
43. Fuki IV, Preobrazhensky SN, Misharin AY, Bushmakina NG, Menschikov GB, Repin VS, Karpov RS. Effect of cell cholesterol content on apolipoprotein B secretion and LDL receptor activity in the human hepatoma cell line, HepG2. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1989;1001:235-238.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
44. Bloch K. Some aspects of the control of lipid biosynthesis. Adv Exp Med Biol. 1975;60:1-12.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
45. Edwards PA. Effect of plasma lipoproteins and lecithin-cholesterol dispersions on the activity of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase of isolated rat hepatocytes. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1975;409:39-50.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
46. Breslow JL, Spaulding DR, Lothrop DA, Clowes AW. Effect of lipoprotein on 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG CoA) reductase activity in rat liver cell culture: special suppressant effect of a lipoprotein isolated from hypercholesterolemic rat plasma. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1975;67:119-125.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
47. Cooper AD. The regulation of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase in the isolated perfused rat liver. J Clin Invest. 1976;57:1461-1470.
48. Dixon JL, Ginsberg HN. Regulation of hepatic secretion of apolipoprotein B-containing lipoproteins: information obtained from cultured liver cells. J Lipid Res. 1993;34:167-179.[Abstract]
49. Tanaka M, Otani H, Yokode M, Kita T. Regulation of apolipoprotein B secretion in hepatocytes from Watanabe heritable hyperlipidemic rabbit, an animal model for familial hypercholesterolemia. Atherosclerosis. 1995;114:73-82.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
50. Shefer S, Nguyen LB, Salen G, Ness GC, Chowdhary IR, Lerner S, Batta AK, Tint GS. Differing effects of cholesterol and taurocholate on steady state hepatic HMG-CoA reductase and cholesterol 7 alpha-hydroxylase activities and mRNA levels in the rat. J Lipid Res. 1992;33:1193-1200.[Abstract]
51. Wisse E. An electron microscope study of the fenestrated endothelial lining of rat liver sinusoids. J Ultrastruct Res. 1970;31:125-150.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
52. Fraser R, Dobbs BR, Rogers GW. Lipoproteins and the liver sieve: the role of the fenestrated sinusoidal endothelium in lipoprotein metabolism, atherosclerosis, and cirrhosis. Hepatology. 1995;21:863-874.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
53. Pieters MN, Esbach S, Schouten D, Brouwer A, Knook DL, Van Berkel TJ. Cholesteryl esters from oxidized low-density lipoproteins are in vivo rapidly hydrolyzed in rat Kupffer cells and transported to liver parenchymal cells and bile. Hepatology. 1994;19:1459-1467.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
54.
Bjorkhem I, Andersson O, Diczfalusy U, Sevastik B, Xiu
RJ, Duan C, Lund E. Atherosclerosis and sterol
27-hydroxylase: evidence for a role of this enzyme in elimination of
cholesterol from human macrophages.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996;91:8592-8596.
54A.
Blomoff R, Helgerud P,
Rasmussen M, Berg T, Norum KR. In vivo uptake of chylomicron
[3H]retinyl ester by rat liver: evidence for retinol
transfer from parenchymal to nonparenchymal cells. Proc
Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1982;79:7326-7330.
55.
Wetterau JR, Jonas A. Effect of
dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine vesicle curvature on the reaction with
human apolipoprotein A-I. J Biol Chem.. 1992;257:10961-10966.
56. Williams KJ, Tall AR, Bisgaier C, Brocia R. Phospholipid liposomes acquire apolipoprotein E in atherogenic plasma and block cholesterol loading of cultured macrophages. J Clin Invest. 1987;79:1466-1472.
57.
Bisgaier CL, Siebenkas MV, Williams KJ. Effects
of apolipoproteins A-IV and A-I on the uptake of phospholipid liposomes
by hepatocytes. J Biol Chem. 1989;264:862-866.
58. Quinet EM, Agellon LB, Kroon PA, Marcel YL, Lee YC, Whitlock ME, Tall AR. Atherogenic diet increases cholesteryl ester transfer protein messenger RNA levels in rabbit liver. J Clin Invest. 1990;85:357-363.
59. Whitlock ME, Swenson TL, Ramakrishnan R, Leonard MT, Marcel YL, Milne RW, Tall AR. Monoclonal antibody inhibition of cholesteryl ester transfer protein activity in the rabbit: effects on lipoprotein composition and high density lipoprotein cholesteryl ester metabolism. J Clin Invest. 1989;84:129-137.
60.
Marotti KR, Castle CK, Murray RW, Rehberg EF, Polites
HG, Melchior GW. The role of cholesteryl ester transfer protein
in primate apolipoprotein A-I metabolism: insights from
studies with transgenic mice. Arterioscler Thromb. 1992;12:736-744.
61. Marotti KR, Castle CK, Boyle TP, Lin AH, Murray RW, Melchior GW. Severe atherosclerosis in transgenic mice expressing simian cholesteryl ester transfer protein. Nature. 1993;364:73-75.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
62. Hayek T, Masucci-Magoulas L, Jiang X, Walsh A, Rubin E, Breslow JL, Tall AR. Decreased early atherosclerotic lesions in hypertriglyceridemic mice expressing cholesteryl ester transfer protein transgene. J Clin Invest. 1995;96:2071-2074.
63. Constantinides P. Plaque fissures in human coronary thrombosis. J Atheroscler Res. 1966;61:1-17.
64.
Davies MJ, Richardson PD, Woolf N, Katz DR, Mann
J. Risk of thrombosis in human atherosclerotic plaques: role of
extracellular lipid, macrophage, and smooth muscle cell
content. Br Heart J. 1993;69:377-381.
65.
Brown BG, Zhao XQ, Sacco DE, Albers JJ. Lipid
lowering and plaque regression: new insights into prevention of plaque
disruption and clinical events in coronary disease.
Circulation. 1993;87:1781-1791.
66.
Lesnik P, Rouis M, Skarlatos S, Kruth HS, Chapman
MJ. Uptake of exogenous free cholesterol induces
upregulation of tissue factor expression in human monocyte-derived
macrophages. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1992;89:10370-10374.
67.
Bottalico LA, Keesler GA, Fless GM, Tabas I.
Cholesterol loading of macrophages leads to marked
enhancement of native lipoprotein(a) and apoprotein(a) internalization
and degradation. J Biol Chem. 1993;268:8569-8573.
68. Watson KE, Bostrom K, Ravindranath R, Lam T, Norton B, Demer LL. TGF-beta 1 and 25-hydroxycholesterol stimulate osteoblast-like vascular cells to calcify. J Clin Invest. 1994;93:2106-2113.
69.
Williams KJ, Tabas I. The response-to-retention
hypothesis of early atherogenesis. Arterioscler Thromb
Vasc Biol. 1995;15:551-561.
70. Ludmer PL, Selwyn AP, Shook TL, Wayne RR, Mudge GH, Alexander RW, Ganz P. Paradoxical vasoconstriction induced by acetylcholine in atherosclerotic coronary arteries. N Engl J Med. 1986;315:1046-1051.[Abstract]
71. Rubba P, Mancini M. Lipid lowering treatment: effects on endothelial dysfunction. Curr Opin Lipidol. 1996;6:348-353.
72.
Henry PD. Atherosclerosis,
calcium, and calcium antagonists.
Circulation. 1985;72:456-459.
73. Tulenko TN. Cholesterol enrichment of arterial smooth muscle cells promotes cell proliferation by induction of mitogen synthesis/release. FASEB J. 1994;8:A401. Abstract.
74. Bialecki RA, Tulenko TN, Colucci WS. Cholesterol enrichment increases basal and agonist-stimulated calcium influx in rat vascular smooth muscle cells. J Clin Invest. 1991;88:1894-1900.
75. Stuart MJ, Gerrard JM, White JG. Effect of cholesterol on production of thromboxane B2 by platelets in vitro. N Engl J Med. 1980;302:6-10.[Abstract]
76. Hochgraf E, Levy Y, Aviram M, Brook JG, Cogan U. Lovastatin decreases plasma and platelet cholesterol levels and normalizes elevated platelet fluidity and aggregation in hypercholesterolemic patients. Metabolism. 1994;43:11-17.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
77. Opper C, Clement C, Schwarz H, Krappe J, Steinmetz A, Schneider J, Wesemann W. Increased number of high sensitive platelets in hypercholesterolemia, cardiovascular diseases, and after incubation with cholesterol. Atherosclerosis. 1995;113:211-217.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
78.
Notarbartolo A, Davi G, Averna M, Barbagallo CM, Ganci
A, Giammarressi C, La Planca FP, Patrono C. Inhibition of
thromboxane biosynthesis and platelet function by
simvastatin in type IIa
hypercholesterolemia.
Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 1995;15:247-251.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
D. Duffy and D. J. Rader Emerging Therapies Targeting High-Density Lipoprotein Metabolism and Reverse Cholesterol Transport Circulation, February 28, 2006; 113(8): 1140 - 1150. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. J. Williams and I. Tabas Lipoprotein Retention--and Clues for Atheroma Regression Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., August 1, 2005; 25(8): 1536 - 1540. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. M. Ballantyne and V. Nambi Apolipoprotein A-I and high-density lipoprotein: Is this the beginning of the era of noninvasive angioplasty? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 6, 2004; 44(7): 1436 - 1438. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. W. Burgess, J. Boucher, T. A-M. Neville, P. Rouillard, C. Stamler, S. Zachariah, and D. L. Sparks Phosphatidylinositol promotes cholesterol transport and excretion J. Lipid Res., July 1, 2003; 44(7): 1355 - 1363. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Chiesa, E. Monteggia, M. Marchesi, P. Lorenzon, M. Laucello, V. Lorusso, C. Di Mario, E. Karvouni, R. S. Newton, C. L. Bisgaier, et al. Recombinant Apolipoprotein A-IMilano Infusion Into Rabbit Carotid Artery Rapidly Removes Lipid From Fatty Streaks Circ. Res., May 17, 2002; 90(9): 974 - 980. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. T. Thuahnai, S. Lund-Katz, D. L. Williams, and M. C. Phillips Scavenger Receptor Class B, Type I-mediated Uptake of Various Lipids into Cells. INFLUENCE OF THE NATURE OF THE DONOR PARTICLE INTERACTION WITH THE RECEPTOR J. Biol. Chem., November 16, 2001; 276(47): 43801 - 43808. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. K. Shah, S. Kaul, J. Nilsson, and B. Cercek Exploiting the Vascular Protective Effects of High-Density Lipoprotein and its Apolipoproteins: An Idea Whose Time for Testing Is Coming, Part II Circulation, November 13, 2001; 104(20): 2498 - 2502. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. J. Williams, R. Scalia, K. D. Mazany, W. V. Rodrigueza, and A. M. Lefer Rapid Restoration of Normal Endothelial Functions in Genetically Hyperlipidemic Mice by a Synthetic Mediator of Reverse Lipid Transport Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., April 1, 2000; 20(4): 1033 - 1039. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. K. Spady Reverse Cholesterol Transport and Atherosclerosis Regression Circulation, August 10, 1999; 100(6): 576 - 578. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. N. Nanjee, J. E. Doran, P. G. Lerch, and N. E. Miller Acute Effects of Intravenous Infusion of ApoA1/Phosphatidylcholine Discs on Plasma Lipoproteins in Humans Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., April 1, 1999; 19(4): 979 - 989. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ATVB Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1997 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |