Abstract:Clinical and Translational MedicineVolume 12, Issue 6 e936 LETTER TO EDITOROpen Access Induced neural stem/progenitor cell-derived extracellular vesicles promote recovery post-stroke Ge Gao, Ge Gao Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorCongcong Li, Congcong Li Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorJie Zhu, Jie Zhu Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorShiyang Sheng, Shiyang Sheng Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorZhanping Liang, Zhanping Liang Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorShengyang Fu, Shengyang Fu Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorXiangyu Li, Xiangyu Li Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorYiyan Sun, Yiyan Sun Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorYi Wang, Yi Wang Translational Research Center, Shanghai Yangzhi Rehabilitation Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China Shanghai Frontiers Science Center of Nanocatalytic Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorXuanran Feng, Xuanran Feng Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorXiaohuan Xia, Corresponding Author Xiaohuan Xia xiaohuan_xia1@163.com orcid.org/0000-0002-0287-6319 Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China Shanghai Frontiers Science Center of Nanocatalytic Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China Translational Research Institute of Brain and Brain-Like Intelligence, Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China Correspondence Jialin C. Zheng and Xiaohuan Xia, Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200065, China. Email: jialinzheng@tongji.edu.cn; xiaohuan_xia1@163.comSearch for more papers by this authorJialin C. Zheng, Corresponding Author Jialin C. Zheng jialinzheng@tongji.edu.cn Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China Shanghai Frontiers Science Center of Nanocatalytic Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China Translational Research Institute of Brain and Brain-Like Intelligence, Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China Collaborative Innovation Center for Brain Science, Tongji University, Shanghai, China Correspondence Jialin C. Zheng and Xiaohuan Xia, Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200065, China. Email: jialinzheng@tongji.edu.cn; xiaohuan_xia1@163.comSearch for more papers by this author Ge Gao, Ge Gao Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorCongcong Li, Congcong Li Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorJie Zhu, Jie Zhu Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorShiyang Sheng, Shiyang Sheng Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorZhanping Liang, Zhanping Liang Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorShengyang Fu, Shengyang Fu Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorXiangyu Li, Xiangyu Li Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorYiyan Sun, Yiyan Sun Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorYi Wang, Yi Wang Translational Research Center, Shanghai Yangzhi Rehabilitation Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China Shanghai Frontiers Science Center of Nanocatalytic Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorXuanran Feng, Xuanran Feng Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorXiaohuan Xia, Corresponding Author Xiaohuan Xia xiaohuan_xia1@163.com orcid.org/0000-0002-0287-6319 Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China Shanghai Frontiers Science Center of Nanocatalytic Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China Translational Research Institute of Brain and Brain-Like Intelligence, Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China Correspondence Jialin C. Zheng and Xiaohuan Xia, Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200065, China. Email: jialinzheng@tongji.edu.cn; xiaohuan_xia1@163.comSearch for more papers by this authorJialin C. Zheng, Corresponding Author Jialin C. Zheng jialinzheng@tongji.edu.cn Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China Shanghai Frontiers Science Center of Nanocatalytic Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China Translational Research Institute of Brain and Brain-Like Intelligence, Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China Collaborative Innovation Center for Brain Science, Tongji University, Shanghai, China Correspondence Jialin C. Zheng and Xiaohuan Xia, Center for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Tongji Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200065, China. Email: jialinzheng@tongji.edu.cn; xiaohuan_xia1@163.comSearch for more papers by this author First published: 22 June 2022 https://doi.org/10.1002/ctm2.936Citations: 1 Ge Gao, Congcong Li, and Jie Zhu contributed equally to this work. AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat To the editor, Ischemic stroke (IS) is one of the leading causes of mortality and disability worldwide.1 Among various therapeutic strategies for IS, the application/administration of stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs), heterogeneous populations of small bilipid layer-enclosed vesicles, has emerged as a promising one.2, 3 The administration of EVs derived from stem cells obtain similar neuroprotective and neuroregenerative effects to stem cell transplantation post IS.3 More importantly, compared to cell-therapy, EV-based therapy is with low immunogenicity, more flexible administration options, no vascular obstructive effect, reduced risk of secondary microvascular thrombosis, and ability to surface and content modification.3 Although mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) are the most commonly used stem cells for EVs generation, studies have demonstrated that neural stem/progenitor cell (NPC)-derived EVs (NPC-EVs) have better effects in improving post-stroke recovery than MSC-derived EVs.4 However, the application of NPCs as EVs producers is struggled with many concerns including religious/ethical questions and problematic logistics of acquiring fetal tissues, which can be overcame by reprogramming somatic cells into induced NPCs (iNPCs).5 Our previous studies found that iNPC-EVs are with proliferation and cell survival promotion potential no less than NPC-EVs in vitro, indicating iNPC-EVs as eligible substitutes of NPC-EVs.6, 7 Herein, we compared the therapeutic effects of NPC-EVs and iNPC-EVs on a model of IS using transient middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) mice. MCAO was validated by triphenyltetrazolium chloride staining (Figure S1). NPCs were isolated from brain tissues of embryonic day 13.5 mice. iNPCs were generated by direct reprogramming of astrocyte via transgene approach.5 EVs were isolated from NPC and iNPC culture medium via ultracentrifugation, and characterized by western blotting, NTA analyses, and transmission electron microscopy (Figure S2). Indocyanine green-labeled EVs were injected intravenously and could be observed in whole mouse body and mouse brains including brain 5 min after administration (Figure S3). Moreover, we analyzed the brain distribution of EVs after intravenously injecting Dil-labeled NPC- and iNPC-EVs. Dil signals were co-localized with the immunoreactivities of GFAP (Figure S4A), Iba1 (Figure S4B), and Tuj1 (Figure S4C), implying the uptake of NPC- and iNPC-EVs by glial and neuronal cells in mouse brains. We then assessed the sensorimotor functions of MCAO mice (Figure 1A). We examined the forelimb grip strength of the mice using hanging wire test, where both NPC- and iNPC-EV-injected MCAO mice significantly outperformed control MCAO animals (Figure 1B). The rotarod test also showed alleviation in both NPC- and iNPC-EVs injection groups, which outperformed the control MCAO groups (Figure 1C). Similarly, the adhesive removal test demonstrated significant reduction of the tape-remove times in both NPC- and iNPC-EVs injection groups versus MCAO controls (Figure 1E). Interestingly, only iNPC-EV-injected mice showed significantly shorter tape-contact times than MCAO controls (Figure 1D). Furthermore, we observed long-term improvements in cognitive function of iNPC-EV-injected MCAO mice, but not NPC-EV-injected ones, in the morris water maze test versus MCAO controls, including a significantly reduction in the latency to find the platform (Figure 1F,G), increased platform crossing numbers (Figure 1F,H), and more distance traveled/time spent in the target quadrant when the platform was removed (Figure 1I,J). No difference in swimming speed among different groups was observed, indicating similar gross motor skills across groups (Figure 1K). Overall, our results demonstrated that iNPC-EVs displayed comparable therapeutic effects as NPC-EVs in promoting sensorimotor function recovery and higher capacity in cognitive function improvement than NPC-EVs post MCAO. FIGURE 1Open in figure viewerPowerPoint Post-stroke administration of induced neural stem/progenitor cell (iNPC)-extracellular vesicles (EVs) improves neurological functions after middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO). Mice received intravenous injection of 300 μl EVs (0.5 μg/μl) or PBS 24 h after 30-min MCAO and at 2 days intervals on days 1–5 after stroke. (A) Experimental design. (A–E) Sensorimotor functions were assessed up to 14 d after MCAO or sham operation via hanging wire test (B), rotarod test (C), and adhesive removal test (D and E). (F–K) Long-term cognitive functions were evaluated in the Morris water maze. (F) Representative images of the swim paths of mice in each group. The escape times (G, learning), the time spent (H)/distance traveled (I)/platform crossing numbers (J) in the target quadrant (memory), and the swim speed (K) were recorded. n = 9–13/group. Error bars denote s.d.. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, and ****p < .0001. ns denotes non-significance. The statistical difference among groups was assessed with the parametric one-way the analysis of variance (ANOVA) with post hoc Bonferroni test. Next, we examined the effects of both NPC- and iNPC-EVs on the histopathological changes post MCAO. Both EVs increased the proportions of Sox2+ and Ki67+ cells in the hippocampus (Figure 2A), peri-infarct cortex (Figure 2B), and sub-ventricular zone (SVZ) (Figure 2C) of EV-injected MCAO mice versus that of control MCAO mice, indicating a positive role of EVs on the expansion of NPC pool and the proliferation of NPCs post MCAO. Both NPC- and iNPC-EVs restored the loss of neurons in the hippocampus (Figure 2D), cortex (Figure 2E), and SVZ (Figure 2F) of MCAO mouse brains, ascertained by the significant elevation of proportions of NeuN+ and DCX+ cells. The significantly higher proportions of NeuN+ cells might also indicate the neuroprotection effects of EVs in the initial phase of post-stroke. Therefore, both EVs enhance neurogenesis post MCAO, and iNPC-EVs may be with higher efficacy in promoting NPC proliferation (Figure 2B) and neuroregeneration in the MCAO brain (Figure 2D–F). Besides, western blotting results indicated significant down-regulation and up-regulation of the expression levels of pro-inflammatory factor Cox2 and anti-inflammatory protein MRC1, respectively, in the hippocampal (Figure 3A) and peri-infarct cortical (Figure 3B) tissue lysates of EV-injected MCAO mice, compared with that of control mice. EV-injected mice also showed a significant decline in the proportions of Iba1+ cells in the hippocampus (Figure 3C) and peri-infarct cortex (Figure 3D) versus control mice, suggesting comparable anti-inflammatory effects of both NPC- and iNPC-EVs post MCAO. Furthermore, the administration of EVs abrogated the MCAO-induced down-regulation of anti-apoptotic Bcl2 expression in the hippocampus (Figure 3E) and peri-infarct cortex (Figure 3F). The injection of iNPC-EVs but not NPC-EVs inhibited pro-apoptotic Casp3 and Casp8 expression in tested brain regions (Figure 3E,F). The TUNEL assay also showed anti-apoptotic effects of EVs in the MCAO mouse hippocampus, suggesting that both NPC- and iNPC-EVs promote cell survival in the MCAO mouse brain, and iNPC-EVs exhibited higher anti-apoptotic potential than NPC-EVs (Figure 3G,H). We also examined the levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines TNF-α and IL-6 in mouse sera 3 days after intravenous injection of EVs via ELISA assay. No significant difference has been observed among PBS-, NPC-EV-, and iNPC-EV-injected mice and control ones, suggesting minor effects of EVs on peripheral immune system (Figure S5). It is worth-noting that the long-term therapeutic outcomes of NPC- and iNPC-EVs post IS may be mediated, partially at least, by the shot-term therapeutic effects of EVs, which needs to be determined in the future study. Thus, both behavioral test and histological/molecular studies suggested outstanding therapeutic potential of both NPC- and iNPC-EVs in treating IS without significant adverse effect. Since promising results have been reported for the clinical safety of clinical-grade EVs,8 the production and clinical safety of clinical-grade iNPC-EVs are required to be investigated in our future study. FIGURE 2Open in figure viewerPowerPoint Post-stroke administration of induced neural stem/progenitor cell (iNPC)-extracellular vesicles (EVs) improves neurogenesis, inhibits neuroinflammation and represses apoptosis. Focal cerebral ischemic brains treated with or without EVs, and their sham controls were collected on day 28 after middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO). (A–C) Representative confocal microscopy images of Sox2 (green) and Ki67 (green) in the hippocampus (A), peri-infarct cortex (B) and sub-ventricular zone (SVZ) (C). Proportions of cells with Sox2 and Ki67 immunoreactivities in each group were given on the right panel (n = 4). (D–F) Representative confocal microscopy images of DCX (green) and NeuN (red) in the hippocampus (D), peri-infarct cortex (E), and SVZ (F). Proportions of cells with DCX and NeuN immunoreactivities in each group were given on the right panel (n = 4). Scale bar: 100 μm. Error bars denote s.d.. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001 and ****p < .0001. ns denotes non-significance. The statistical difference among groups was assessed with the parametric one-way ANOVA with post hoc Bonferroni test FIGURE 3Open in figure viewerPowerPoint Post-stroke administration of induced neural stem/progenitor cell (iNPC)-extracellular vesicles (EVs) inhibits neuroinflammation. Focal cerebral ischemic brains treated with or without EVs, and their sham controls were collected on day 28 after middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO). (A and B) Representative blot (left) and quantification (right) of Cox2 and MRC1 protein expression levels in the hippocampus (A) and the peri-infarct cortex (B) (n = 3). (C and D) Representative confocal microscopy images of Iba1 immunostaining (green) in the hippocampus (C) and the peri-infarct cortex (D). Proportions of cells with Iba1 immunoreactivities were given on the right panel (n = 4). (E and F) Transcript levels of Casp3, Casp8 and Bcl2 in the hippocampus (E) and the peri-infarct cortex (F) were determined by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) analyses (n = 4). (G and H) Representative confocal microscopy images of TUNEL (red) staining in the hippocampus (G) and the peri-infarct cortex (H). Proportions of TUNEL positive cells were given on the right panel (n = 4). RT-qPCR data were normalized to Gapdh and presented as fold changes compared with sham control groups. Western blotting data were normalized to β-actin. Scale bar: 100 μm. Error bars denote s.d.. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, and ****p < .0001. ns denotes non-significance. The statistical difference among groups was assessed with the parametric one-way ANOVA with post hoc Bonferroni test We then carried out preliminary studies to identify the potential mechanisms underlying the iNPC-EV-mediated recovery post MCAO. Since our proteomic analysis has implied enrichment of growth factor domains in iNPC-EVs,6 we examined the protein levels of multiple growth factors that are commonly expressed in the brain cells in EVs. Western blotting results detected EGF, FGF2, and IGF2 in both EVs, and iNPC-EVs contains higher levels of growth factors than NPC-EVs (Figure S6). Both EVs activated MEK-ERK pathway, but not PI3K-AKT pathway, in both hippocampal and cortical tissues, ascertained by the up-regulation of MEK and ERK phosphorylation (Figure S7). Moreover, iNPC-EVs are with stronger promoting effects on the activities of MEK-ERK pathway than NPC-EVs (Figure S7). EV-enhanced phosphorylation of ERK was further confirmed by immunohistochemistry, which displayed a significant increase of proportions of p-ERK+ cells in both NPC- and iNPC-EV treatment groups versus PBS controls (Figure S8). Given the important roles of MEK-ERK signaling in the neurogenesis, inflammation, and apoptosis,9, 10 our preliminary results implied that EVs achieve their therapeutic effects via modulating MEK-ERK signaling activities, and explained the potential mechanisms for the greater therapeutic effects of iNPC-EVs. In summary, iNPC-EVs are with therapeutic effects no less than NPC-EVs, suggesting iNPC-EVs as an outstanding succedaneum of NPC-EVs in treating IS. More importantly, since multiple histopathological features (e.g., neuroinflammation and neuronal damage/degeneration) are shared in neurological disorders, iNPC-EVs may also achieve therapeutic effects on treating acute brain injury like traumatic brain injury and chronic neurodegenerative diseases, which is under investigation. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We acknowledge Dr. Xinrui Qi, Jie Zhu, and Yanyan Zhang for the valuable comments for our study. This work was supported in part by research grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant numbers: 91949204, 81830037, 81971145 and 81901333). CONFLICT OF INTEREST The authors declare no competing commercial or financial interests. Supporting Information Filename Description ctm2936-sup-0001-SuppMat.docx2.4 MB Supporting Information Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article. REFERENCES 1Virani SS, Alonso A, Benjamin EJ, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2020 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2020; 141(9): e139- e596. 2Xia X, Wang Yi, Huang Y, Zhang H, Lu H, Zheng JC. Exosomal miRNAs in central nervous system diseases: biomarkers, pathological mediators, protective factors and therapeutic agents. Prog Neurobiol. 2019; 183:101694. 3Chen J, Chopp M. Exosome therapy for stroke. Stroke. 2018; 49(5): 1083- 1090. 4Webb RL, Kaiser EE, Scoville SL, et al. Human neural stem cell extracellular vesicles improve tissue and functional recovery in the murine thromboembolic stroke model. Transl Stroke Res. 2018; 9(5): 530- 539. 5Ma K, Deng X, Xia X, et al. Direct conversion of mouse astrocytes into neural progenitor cells and specific lineages of neurons. Transl Neurodegener. 2018; 7: 29. 6Ma Y, Wang K, Pan J, et al. Induced neural progenitor cells abundantly secrete extracellular vesicles and promote the proliferation of neural progenitors via extracellular signal-regulated kinase pathways. Neurobiol Dis. 2018; 124: 322- 334. 7Ma Y, Xu X, Li C, et al. Induced neural progenitor cell-derived extracellular vesicles promote neural progenitor cell survival via extracellular signal-regulated kinase pathway. CNS Neurosci Ther. 2021; 27: 1605- 1609. 8Shi M-M, Yang Q-Y, Monsel A, et al. Preclinical efficacy and clinical safety of clinical-grade nebulized allogenic adipose mesenchymal stromal cells-derived extracellular vesicles. J Extracell Vesicles. 2021; 10(10):e12134. 9Sun Y, Liu W-Z, Liu T, Feng X, Yang N, Zhou H-F. Signaling pathway of MAPK/ERK in cell proliferation, differentiation, migration, senescence and apoptosis. J Recept Signal Transduct Res. 2015; 35(6): 600- 604. 10Kim EK, Choi E-J. Compromised MAPK signaling in human diseases: an update. Arch Toxicol. 2015; 89(6): 867- 882. Citing Literature Volume12, Issue6June 2022e936 FiguresReferencesRelatedInformation

Abstract:Clinical and Translational MedicineVolume 11, Issue 2 e301 LETTER TO EDITOROpen Access Activation of CXCL16/CXCR6 axis aggravates cardiac ischemia/reperfusion injury by recruiting the IL-17a-producing CD1d+ T cells Shijun Wang, Shijun Wang Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Institutes of Biomedical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorLeilei Ma, Leilei Ma Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorJi'e Yang, Ji'e Yang Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorZhen Dong, Zhen Dong Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorJian Wu, Corresponding Author Jian Wu wu.jian@zs-hospital.sh.cn Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Institutes of Biomedical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Correspondence Yunzeng Zou, Junbo Ge, and Jian Wu, M.D., Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Feng Lin Road, Shanghai 200032, China. Email: zou.yunzeng@zs-hospital.sh.cn; jbge@zs-hospital.sh.cn; wu.jian@zs-hospital.sh.cnSearch for more papers by this authorXiancheng Lu, Xiancheng Lu Department of outpatient, Shanghai Yangpu Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorJiahong Wang, Jiahong Wang Department of Cardiology, Yangpu Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorFangjie Dai, Fangjie Dai Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorGuowei Tu, Guowei Tu Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorLei Xu, Lei Xu Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorGang Zhao, Gang Zhao Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorFeng Zhang, Feng Zhang Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorYunzeng Zou, Corresponding Author Yunzeng Zou zou.yunzeng@zs-hospital.sh.cn Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Institutes of Biomedical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Correspondence Yunzeng Zou, Junbo Ge, and Jian Wu, M.D., Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Feng Lin Road, Shanghai 200032, China. Email: zou.yunzeng@zs-hospital.sh.cn; jbge@zs-hospital.sh.cn; wu.jian@zs-hospital.sh.cnSearch for more papers by this authorJunbo Ge, Corresponding Author Junbo Ge jbge@zs-hospital.sh.cn orcid.org/0000-0002-9360-7332 Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Institutes of Biomedical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Correspondence Yunzeng Zou, Junbo Ge, and Jian Wu, M.D., Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Feng Lin Road, Shanghai 200032, China. Email: zou.yunzeng@zs-hospital.sh.cn; jbge@zs-hospital.sh.cn; wu.jian@zs-hospital.sh.cnSearch for more papers by this author Shijun Wang, Shijun Wang Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Institutes of Biomedical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorLeilei Ma, Leilei Ma Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorJi'e Yang, Ji'e Yang Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorZhen Dong, Zhen Dong Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorJian Wu, Corresponding Author Jian Wu wu.jian@zs-hospital.sh.cn Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Institutes of Biomedical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Correspondence Yunzeng Zou, Junbo Ge, and Jian Wu, M.D., Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Feng Lin Road, Shanghai 200032, China. Email: zou.yunzeng@zs-hospital.sh.cn; jbge@zs-hospital.sh.cn; wu.jian@zs-hospital.sh.cnSearch for more papers by this authorXiancheng Lu, Xiancheng Lu Department of outpatient, Shanghai Yangpu Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorJiahong Wang, Jiahong Wang Department of Cardiology, Yangpu Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorFangjie Dai, Fangjie Dai Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorGuowei Tu, Guowei Tu Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorLei Xu, Lei Xu Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorGang Zhao, Gang Zhao Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorFeng Zhang, Feng Zhang Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorYunzeng Zou, Corresponding Author Yunzeng Zou zou.yunzeng@zs-hospital.sh.cn Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Institutes of Biomedical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Correspondence Yunzeng Zou, Junbo Ge, and Jian Wu, M.D., Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Feng Lin Road, Shanghai 200032, China. Email: zou.yunzeng@zs-hospital.sh.cn; jbge@zs-hospital.sh.cn; wu.jian@zs-hospital.sh.cnSearch for more papers by this authorJunbo Ge, Corresponding Author Junbo Ge jbge@zs-hospital.sh.cn orcid.org/0000-0002-9360-7332 Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Institutes of Biomedical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China Correspondence Yunzeng Zou, Junbo Ge, and Jian Wu, M.D., Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Feng Lin Road, Shanghai 200032, China. Email: zou.yunzeng@zs-hospital.sh.cn; jbge@zs-hospital.sh.cn; wu.jian@zs-hospital.sh.cnSearch for more papers by this author First published: 27 January 2021 https://doi.org/10.1002/ctm2.301 Shijun Wang, Leilei Ma, Ji'e Yang, and Zhen Dong contributed equally to this work. AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Dear Editor, Reperfusion is commonly used for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction, but inflammation-related reperfusion injury limits its clinical application. Blockade of IL-17a is considered one of the effective therapies for myocardial ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury.1 However, the generation of cardiac IL-17a and the subpopulations of IL-17a-producing cells remain obscure. In the present study, we reveal that the CXCL16/CXCR6 signal axis plays a key role in IL-17a production and cardiac reperfusion inflammation in a mouse model of cardiac I/R injury. CXCL16 is a proinflammatory chemokine that widely expressed in endothelial cells, vascular smooth muscle cells, and fibroblasts.2 CXCL16 is a novel diagnostic hallmark of acute coronary syndrome,3, 4 and CXCL16 is essential for the migration and recruitment of IL-17a-producing T cells to the atherosclerotic lesions.5 After myocardial ischemia for 40 min, we observed that the protein level of CXCL16 increased rapidly in the left ventricle (LV) of mice at 2 h after reperfusion and maintained high level during the reperfusion period (Figure 1A). With the highest abundance, CXCL16 in the heart stood out among those in the other organs after I/R (Figure 1B), suggesting that myocardial I/R-induced CXCL16 activation was cardiac specific. Moreover, we examined the transcriptional levels of a number of proinflammatory chemokines and their receptors in mouse heart with I/R stress. Compared with other chemokines, the mRNA levels of CXCL16, CCL5, CXCL1, and CXCR2 were significant upregulated after I/R (Figure S1A).To investigate the precise role of CXCL16 in cardiac I/R injury, we knocked down the endogenous CXCL16 by delivering adenovirus-shRNA targeting CXCL16 gene 24 h before I/R injury (Figure S1B). The results showed that cardiac IL-17a production (Figure 1C) and cell apoptosis were significantly attenuated in CXCL16-deficient mice compared with those in wild-type (WT) mice (Figure 1D and E). The severity of myocardial lesion is evaluated by two indexes, one is the ratio of the myocardial infarcted (INF) size to the size of area at risk (AAR) based on the method of Evans Blue and triphenyltetrazolium chloride (TTC) double staining, the other is the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Compared to mice transfected by scramble shRNA, INF/AAR reduced by 33% (30.83±6.72% vs. 46.04±15.18%, p < 0.05, Figure 1F and G) and LVEF increased by 31% (44.79±4.33% vs. 58.43±5.37%, p < 0.05, Figure 1H) in mice transfected by CXCL16 shRNA. Importantly, CXCL16 shRNA transfection in vivo also diminished the cardiac infiltration of CD1d+ monocytes in the heart under I/R (Figure 1I). These data are consistent with recent published data in the hepatic I/R mouse model,6 indicating that suppression of CXCL16 ameliorated organ I/R injury through reducing the recruitment of inflammatory cells and cytokine production. FIGURE 1Open in figure viewerPowerPoint Inhibition of CXCL16 attenuated cardiac infiltration of CD1d+ cells, IL-17a production, and I/R-induced myocardial injury. Mice were subjected to 40-min ischemia and followed by 48-h reperfusion. (A) The protein levels of CXCL16 in the LV tissues of WT mice were examined at different time-points after reperfusion. (B) Profiling of CXCL16 expressed on aorta, heart, brain, liver, lung, kidney, spleen, and intestine at 6 h after reperfusion. Then, mice were injected with recombinant adenoviruses delivered CXCL16 shRNA or scramble shRNA 24 h before I/R injury. (C) The serum level of IL-17a was detected by ELISA. *p < 0.05 vs. scramble shRNA, n = 3 per group. (D) Cell apoptosis was detected by TUNEL staining. (E) Cell apoptosis was quantified by counting average number of the TUNEL positive cells in five randomly selected fields in border zone regions (n = 5, **p < 0.05, vs. I/R-induced WT mice pretreated with scramble shRNA). (F) Representative images of heart cross sections stained by Evans blue and TTC double staining (Scale bar, 1 mm). (G) INF/AAR and AAR/LV were quantified (n = 4 per group, **p < 0.05). (H) Echocardiographic analysis of the cardiac function (LVEF) in different group of mice (n = 6, **p < 0.05). (I) Representative images showed that frozen sections of ischemic heart tissue stained by anti-CD1d and anti-β-actin antibodies post I/R for 48 h CXCR6 is the only specific chemokine receptor for CXCL16, previous studies imply that CXCR6 expression is essential for the activation, migration, and homing of CD1d-restricted T-cell subsets.7 Here, we aim to determine whether cardiac infiltrating CD1d+ monocytes are T-subsets, whether these cells contribute to cardiac IL-17a production, and whether disrupting the CXCL16/CXCR6 axis can prevent the recruitment of IL-17a-producing cells in the heart and attenuate myocardial I/R injury. By FACS sorting, we found a high proportion of IL-17a-producing CD3+ subpopulation in the heart tissue of I/R-induced mice, while almost no CD3− IL-17a-producing cells were found by isotype treatment (Figure 2A), which further confirmed that T-cell subpopulations were the major driving forces for IL-17a production. Compared with WT mice, both CD45+ and CD3+ subpopulations were significantly reduced in CXCR6−/– mice (Figure 2B and C). Further, the proportions of IL-17a-producing T subsets, including IL23R+, CD1d+, and γδTCR+ cells, were all lower in CXCR6−/– mice than in WT mice (Figure 2D–F). Obviously, CXCR6 deficiency caused a pronounced reduction of CD1d+ IL-17a-producing T subset, which was confirmed by in situ immunofluorescence (Figure 2G). These data suggested that blocking the CXCL16/CXCR6 axis was sufficient to abolish the recruitment of IL-17a+ T cells, especially the CD1d+T subset, in the heart with I/R injury. FIGURE 2Open in figure viewerPowerPoint CXCR6 deficiency prevented cardiac infiltration of the IL-17a-producing T cells in response to I/R stress. Both CXCR6−/− and wild-type (WT) mice were subjected to 40-min ischemia and followed by 48-h reperfusion. The mice were then euthanized under (4%) isoflurane anesthesia and heart tissues were harvested. (A–C) The LV border zone tissue-derived single-cell suspension was isolated from CXCR6−/− and WT mice, and cells were sorted by anti-CD45 antibody, followed by gating on anti-CD3 antibody or anti-IgG1 isotype, and CD45+ subpopulation and CD3+ IL17a-expressing subpopulation were quantified (n = 4, *p < 0.05 vs. WT mice with I/R). (D and E) Representative gate plots of cardiac IL-23R+, CD1d+, and TCRγδ+ IL-17-producing T-cell subsets in WT and CXCR6−/− mice. (F) Quantification of IL-17-producing cells in different T-subsets from WT and CXCR6−/− mice (n = 4, *p < 0.05 vs. WT mice with I/R). (G) Immunofluorescence staining showed the representative frozen sections of ischemic heart tissue stained with both anti-CD1d and anti-β-actin antibodies after cardiac I/R injury Another finding was that circulating IL-17a level increased in a time-dependent manner in WT mice, while it maintained low level in CXCR6−/– mice during reperfusion (Figure 3A). Meanwhile, the expression of IL-17a receptor (IL-17RA) after I/R was significantly higher in WT mice than that in CXCR6−/− mice (Figure 3B). IL-17a signaling is critically involved in I/R-mediated organ injury, including heart, brain, lung, liver, kidney, and intestine.1, 7, 8 Secukinumab, a human-derived monoclonal antibody against IL-17a, has been approved in many countries for the therapy of ankylosing spondylitis, another IL-17a neutralizing antibody (ixekizumab) and the antibody targeting IL-17a receptor (brodalumab) have also been used in the treatment of inflammation-related diseases.9, 10 Considering that cardiac infiltration of CD1d+ IL-17a-producing cells and IL-17a production were significantly reduced in both CXCL16-deficient mice and CXCR6−/– mice, we further determined whether IL-17a is critically involved in CXCL16/CXCR6 axis-mediated cardiac I/R injury. The recombinant mouse IL-17a (rIL-17a) was injected into the heart of CXCR6−/− mice at 6 h after reperfusion. After reperfusion for 48 h, cardiac cell apoptosis (Figure 3C and D) and apoptotic-related genes (Figure S1C and D) were significantly enhanced by rIL-17a pretreatment. rIL-17a also reduced LVEF by 26% (Figure 3G) and increased INF/AAR by approximately 60% (48.94±14.37% vs. 30.68±5.46%, p < 0.05, Figure 3E and F). In addition, we found that the survival benefit of CXCR6 deficiency was evident within 1 week post myocardial I/R surgery, but it was markedly reduced by the pretreatment with rIL-17a (Figure 3H). Collectively, current data suggest that IL-17a acts downstream of CXCL16/CXCR6 signal axis, and IL-17a plays a central role in I/R-induced myocardial injury and dysfunction. FIGURE 3Open in figure viewerPowerPoint IL-17a aggravated myocardial injury and dysfunction and increased the mortality of CXCR6−/− mice in response to I/R stress. (A) The serum level of IL-17a was determined at different time-points after reperfusion, n = 3 per group, *p < 0.01 vs. WT mice. (B) The expression of IL-17RA in the LV tissue of WT and CXCR6−/− mice was determined by Western blot. Then, CXCR6−/− mice were pretreated with recombined IL-17a by ultrasound-guided myocardial injection of rIL-17a (10 ng/ml) in 20 μl 1 × PBS 2 h after reperfusion. (C and D) Representative images, infarct size relative to area at risk (INF/AAR, D, left), and AAR relative to left ventricle (AAR/LV, D, right) were shown by Evans blue and TTC double-stained heart cross sections (Scale bar, 1 mm). n = 4 per group, **p < 0.05 vs. WT mice with I/R; #p < 0.05 vs. CXCR6−/− mice with I/R. (E and F) Cardiac cell apoptosis was measured by TUNEL staining, and quantification of apoptotic cells by counting the number of TUNEL positive cells in 10 randomly selected fields from border zone regions (n = 10 per group, **p < 0.05, #p < 0.05). (G) Quantitative analysis of the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of mice by M-mode echocardiograms (n = 5–8, **p < 0.05 vs. I/R-induced WT mice, #p < 0.05 vs. I/R-induced CXCR6−/− mice, one-way ANOVA with Tukey's post hoc test). (H) Kaplan–Meier analyses were performed to evaluate overall survival of sham-operated or I/R-mediated WT or CXCR6−/− mice pretreated with or without IL-17a (***p < 0.05 vs. CXCR6−/− mice, log-rank test) In summary, our study demonstrates that I/R-mediated CXCL16 activation promotes the recruitment of CXCR6+ IL-17a-producing T-cell subsets in the heart, which enhances myocardial IL-17a secretion and aggravates IL-17a-dependent cardiac remodeling and dysfunction. Considering the side effects of anti-IL-17a antibody in the treatment of autoimmune disorder, we think that CXCL16 might be a better candidate for targeted therapy of cardiac inflammation during reperfusion injury. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81770274, 81730009, 81300097, 81670228, and 81870290) and the Natural Science Foundation of Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai (13ZR1406800 and 16ZR1406200). CONFLICT OF INTEREST The authors declare no conflict of interest. AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS S.W. designed the study, performed most of the experiments, and wrote the paper. L.M., J.Y., and Z.D. performed the animal models. J.W. completed the echocardiographic evaluation of LV function. X.L and J.W. provided critical reagents. F.D., G.T., and L.X. analyzed and interpreted data. G.Z. and F.Z. provided critical reviews. Y.Z. and J.G. planned and supervised the project and data analysis of the experiments. All authors revised and approved the final manuscript. Supporting Information Filename Description ctm2301-sup-0001-figurelegends.docx13.7 KB Supporting Information ctm2301-sup-0002-SuppMat1.jpg125.1 KB Supporting Information ctm2301-sup-0003-SuppMat2.jpg49.5 KB Supporting Information ctm2301-sup-0004-FigureS1.tif387.9 KB Supporting Information ctm2301-sup-0005-TableS1.doc37.5 KB Supporting Information Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article. REFERENCES 1Geha M, Tsokos MG, Bosse RE, et al. IL-17A produced by innate lymphoid cells is essential for intestinal ischemia-reperfusion injury. J Immunol. 2017; 199(8): 2921- 2929. Google Scholar 2Chandrasekar B, Mummidi S, Valente AJ, et al. The pro-atherogenic cytokine interleukin-18 induces CXCL16 expression in rat aortic smooth muscle cells via MyD88, interleukin-1 receptor-associated kinase, tumor necrosis factor receptor-associated factor 6, c-Src, phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, Akt, c-Jun N-terminal kinase, and activator protein-1 signaling. J Biol Chem. 2005; 280(28): 26263- 26277. Google Scholar 3Andersen T, Ueland T, Ghukasyan Lakic T, et al. C-X-C ligand 16 is an independent predictor of cardiovascular death and morbidity in acute coronary syndromes. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2019; 39(11): 2402- 2410. Google Scholar 4Cullen R, Germanov E, Shimaoka T, et al. Enhanced tumor metastasis in response to blockade of the chemokine receptor CXCR6 is overcome by NKT cell activation. J Immunol. 2009; 183(9): 5807- 5815. Google Scholar 5Butcher MJ, Wu CI, Waseem T, et al. CXCR6 regulates the recruitment of pro-inflammatory IL-17A-producing T cells into atherosclerotic aortas. Int Immunol. 2016; 28(5): 255- 261. Google Scholar 6Zhang Y, Pan Q, Liu Y. Cxcl16 silencing alleviates hepatic ischemia reperfusion injury during liver transplantation by inhibiting p38 phosphorylation. Pathol Res Pract. 2020; 216(5):152913. Google Scholar 7Germanov E, Veinotte L, Cullen R, et al. Critical role for the chemokine receptor CXCR6 in homeostasis and activation of CD1d-restricted NKT cells. J Immunol. 2008; 181(1): 81- 91. Google Scholar 8Liao YH, Xia N, Zhou SF, et al. Interleukin-17A contributes to myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury by regulating cardiomyocyte apoptosis and neutrophil infiltration. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 59(4): 420- 429. Google Scholar 9Bosmann M, Ward PA. Therapeutic potential of targeting IL-17 and IL-23 in sepsis. Clin Transl Med. 2012; 1(1): 4. Google Scholar 10Dubash S, Bridgewood C, McGonagle D, et al. The advent of IL-17A blockade in ankylosing spondylitis: secukinumab, ixekizumab and beyond. Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2019; 15(2): 123- 134. Google Scholar Volume11, Issue2February 2021e301 FiguresReferencesRelatedInformation

ISDN2014_0330: Activation of T‐LAK‐cell‐originated Protein Kinase Contribute to the Anti‐oxidative Function Against Focal Cerebral Ischemia‐reperfusion

Activation of T‐LAK‐cell‐originated Protein Kinase‐mediated Antioxidation Protects Against Focal Cerebral Ischemia–reperfusion Injury

Ischemic Postconditioning Relieves Cerebral Ischemia and Reperfusion Injury Through Activating T-LAK Cell–Originated Protein Kinase/Protein Kinase B Pathway in Rats

Protection of Hepatocyte Growth Factor on Astrocytes Exposed to Simulated Ischemia/reperfusion in Vitro

The Protective Effects of Axitinib on Blood-Brain Barrier Dysfunction and Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury in Acute Ischemic Stroke

Induced neural stem/progenitor cell‐derived extracellular vesicles promote recovery post‐stroke

Activation of CXCL16/CXCR6 Axis Aggravates Cardiac Ischemia/reperfusion Injury by Recruiting the IL‐17a‐producing CD1d+ T Cells

Abstract W P109: Nitrosative Stress Preconditioning Ameliorated Neurovascular Injury in Stroke

The Effects of Different KI Intake on H2O2 Content, Calcium Channel and Anti‐oxidative Ability in FRTL Cells

Correction to “A Co-Doped Fe3O4 Nanozyme Shows Enhanced Reactive Oxygen and Nitrogen Species Scavenging Activity and Ameliorates the Deleterious Effects of Ischemic Stroke”

Abstract WMP77: Ischemic Preconditioning Improves Long-Term Outcomes and Preserves Blood-Brain Barrier after Ischemic Stroke Via Oxidative Signaling and Nrf2 Activation

Letter by Gao and Shao Regarding Article, "Microrna-126-3p/-5p Overexpression Attenuates Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption in a Mouse Model of Middle Cerebral Artery Occlusion".

Alpha-Lipoic Acid Preconditioning and Ischaemic Postconditioning Synergistically Protect Rats from Cerebral Injury Induced by Ischemia and Reperfusion Partly via Inhibition TLR4/MyD88/ NF-κB Signaling Pathway.

Endothelial lincRNA-p21 alleviates cerebral ischemia/reperfusion injury by maintaining blood-brain barrier integrity

Noninvasive Limb Remote Ischemic Preconditioning Contributes Neuroprotective Effects Via Activation of Adenosine A1 Receptor and Redox Status after Transient Focal Cerebral Ischemia in Rats

Effect of Estrogen on Oxygen-Glucose Deprived Injury of Astrocytes

Early and enduring: Targeting the endothelium for blood-brain barrier protection

Peptide OM-LV20 protects astrocytes against oxidative stress via the ‘PAC1R/JNK/TPH1’ axis

Role of Nadph Oxidase in Total Salvianolic Acid Injection Attenuating Ischemia-Reperfusion Impaired Cerebral Microcirculation and Neurons: Implication of Ampk/Akt/Pkc

Tumor Necrosis Factor-Α Inhibitor: A Promising Therapeutic Approach for Attenuating Myocardial Ischemia–reperfusion by Antioxidant Stress

Transcranial direct current stimulation enhances the protective effect of isoflurane preconditioning on cerebral ischemia/reperfusion injury: A new mechanism associated with the nuclear protein Akirin2