Expression and significance of response gene to complement 32 in liver regeneration after partial hepatectomy in mice

Xingyuan LI; Yanfang YANG; Yan CHEN; Wenhui HU; Xiaoying ZHAO; Junming TANG; Deying KONG

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2023.10.018

Volume 39 Issue 10

Oct. 2023

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Article Navigation > Journal of Clinical Hepatology > 2023 > 39(10): 2396-2405

PDF( 3088 KB)

Expression and significance of response gene to complement 32 in liver regeneration after partial hepatectomy in mice

DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2023.10.018

1.
Department of Physiology，School of Basic Medical Sciences，Zunyi Medical University，Zunyi，Guizhou 563000，China
2.
Department of Central Laboratory，Guizhou Provincial People’s Hospital，Guiyang 550002，China
3.
Department of Physiology，School of Basic Medicine，Hubei University of Medicine，Shiyan，Hubei 442000，China

Research funding:

National Natural Science Foundation of China (31760339);

Scientific Research Program of Education Department of Hubei Province (Q20212107);

Guizhou Provincial Science and Technology Plan Project (Qiankehe Foundation－ZK ［2022］ General 594)

More Information

Corresponding author: KONG Deying， vsysongyer@126.com （ORCID： 0000－0002－6851－955X）
Received Date: 2022-12-19
Published Date: 2023-10-30

Abstract

Abstract

Objective To investigate the expression and role of response gene to complement 32 （RGC32） in liver regeneration after partial hepatectomy （PH）. Methods A total of 42 male C57BL/6 mice， aged 10 weeks， were randomly divided into control group， postoperative day 1 group （1－d group）， postoperative day 2 group （2－d group）， postoperative day 4 group （4－d group）， postoperative day 6 group （6－d group）， postoperative day 8 group （8－d group）， and postoperative day 10 group （10－d group）， with 6 mice in each group. In the control group， the complete liver of the mice was resected for weighing and photography as the normal control group （sham group）； further， the left and middle lobes of the liver were resected for weighing and photography as the surgical control group （0－day group）； the sham group and the 0－day group shared the same group of mice. After successful modeling by PH， the mice were sacrificed on days 1， 2， 4， 6， 8， and 10 after surgery， and the liver was collected to measure the change in size. HE staining and oil red O staining were used to evaluate liver histomorphological changes； serum alanine aminotransferase （ALT） and aspartate aminotransferase （AST） were measured to evaluate the changes in liver function； immunohistochemical staining was used to measure the expression of proliferating cell nuclear antigen （PCNA） and Ki67 and analyze the change in cell proliferation during liver regeneration； quantitatie real－time PCR and immunohistochemical staining were uused to measure the expression and subcellular distribution of RGC32 during liver regeneration； EdU cell proliferation assay was used to analyze the effect of RGC32 overexpression or knocknout on hepatocyte proliferation in L02 cells. For continuous data， comparison between multiple groups was made by analysis of variance， and further pairwise comparisons were conducted using the LSD－t test. The independent samples t－test was used for comparison of continuous data between two groups. A Pearson correlation analysis was performed. Results The liver gradually enlarged after PH， and the liver/body weight ratio rose to the peak from days 0 to 6， with significant differences between different time points （all P<0.05）， while there was no significant change in liver size from days 6 to 10. The number of liver lipid droplets significantly increased after PH surgery and gradually decreased with liver regeneration， with a significant difference between the portal vein region and the central vein region （all P<0.05）. Compared with the sham group， the 1d group had significant increases in the serum levels of ALT and AST （all P<0.05）， which gradually returned to the levels of the sham group on day 6 and day 2 after surgery， respectively （P>0.05）. Immunohistochemical staining showed that there were rapid increases in the numbers of PCNA－ and Ki67－positive liver parenchymal cells after PH surgery， with the highest numbers of 86±5 and 89±5， respectively， on day 2， which then gradually decreased； however， there were gradual increases in the numbers of PCNA－ and Ki67－positive nonparenchymal cells， with the peak numbers of 34±5 and 25±3， respectively， on day 6， which then gradually decreased. The total expression of RGC32 increased to the highest level on day 2 after PH surgery and then gradually decreased， and the changing trend of RGC32 expression in cytoplasm was consistent with that of total RGC32 expression； however， the expression of RGC32 in nucleus decreased to the lowest level on day 2 after PH surgery and then increased gradually. The correlation analysis showed that the expression of RGC32 in nucleus was negatively correlated with the proliferation of liver parenchymal cells （R²=0.308 3， P=0.016 7）， and the expression of RGC32 in cytoplasm was positively correlated with the proliferation of liver parenchymal cells （R²=0.808 6， P<0.000 1）. Cell experiments showed that compared with the control group， the EdU－positive rate was reduced by 15.6% after RGC32 overexpression （P<0.01） and was increased by 19.2% after RGC32 knockdown （P<0.01）. Conclusion Liver parenchymal cells and nonparenchymal cells show asynchronous proliferation and participate in liver regeneration together. During liver regeneration after hepatectomy， there are differences in the expression of RGC32 between nucleus and cytoplasm， and RGC32 in nucleus may inhibit hepatocyte proliferation.
- RGC32,
- Hepatectomy,
- Liver Regeneration,
- Mice， Inbred C57BL

FullText(HTML)

References(19)

References

[1]	MICHALOPOULOS GK, BHUSHAN B. Liver regeneration: biological and pathological mechanisms and implications[J]. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2021, 18( 1): 40－ 55. DOI: 10.1038/s41575－020－0342－4.
[2]	LIN S, NASCIMENTO EM, GAJERA CR, et al. Distributed hepatocytes expressing telomerase repopulate the liver in homeostasis and injury[J]. Nature, 2018, 556( 7700): 244－ 248. DOI: 10.1038/s41586－018－0004－7.
[3]	CHEN HX, HUANG SJ, CHEN JY, et al. Role of complement in liver injury and regeneration[J]. Central South Pharm, 2021, 19( 10): 2123－ 2127. DOI: 10.7539/j.issn.1672－2981.2021.10.023. 陈海霞, 黄少杰, 陈锦仪, 等. 补体在肝脏损伤与再生中的作用[J]. 中南药学, 2021, 19( 10): 2123－ 2127. DOI: 10.7539/j.issn.1672－2981.2021.10.023.
[4]	WANG Q, QU X. New insights into the roles of RGC32[J]. Cell Mol Immunol, 2018, 15( 8): 803－ 804. DOI: 10.1038/cmi.2017.154.
[5]	LI JX, LI MY. Research progress in animal models of regeneration[J]. Med Recapitulate, 2021, 27( 23): 4629－ 4633. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006－2084.2021.23.011. 李嘉兴, 李明意. 肝脏再生动物模型研究进展[J]. 医学综述, 2021, 27( 23): 4629－ 4633. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006－2084.2021.23.011.
[6]	NEVZOROVA YA, TOLBA R, TRAUTWEIN C, et al. Partial hepatectomy in mice[J]. Lab Anim, 2015, 49( Suppl 1): 81－ 88. DOI: 10.1177/0023677215572000.
[7]	LÓPEZ－LUQUE J, FABREGAT I. Revisiting the liver: from development to regeneration－what we ought to know![J]. Int J Dev Biol, 2018, 62( 6－ 7－ 8): 441－ 451. DOI: 10.1387/ijdb.170264JL.
[8]	van HAELE M, SNOECK J, ROSKAMS T. Human liver regeneration: an etiology dependent process[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2019, 20( 9): 2332. DOI: 10.3390/ijms20092332.
[9]	YAGI S, HIRATA M, MIYACHI Y, et al. Liver regeneration after hepatectomy and partial liver transplantation[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2020, 21( 21): 8414. DOI: 10.3390/ijms21218414.
[10]	YU ZY, LIN X, HAN Y, et al. Role of liver sinusoidal endothelial cells in liver regeneration and the development of liver fibrosis[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2019, 35( 9): 2072－ 2074. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001－5256.2019.09.041. 于子越, 蔺鑫, 韩英, 等. 肝血窦内皮细胞在肝再生和肝纤维化发生中的作用[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2019, 35( 9): 2072－ 2074. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001－5256.2019.09.041.
[11]	LI N, LIU C, MA G, et al. Asparaginyl endopeptidase may promote liver sinusoidal endothelial cell angiogenesis via PI3K/Akt pathway[J]. Rev Esp Enferm Dig, 2019, 111( 3): 214－ 222. DOI: 10.17235/reed.2018.5709/2018.
[12]	VLAICU SI, TATOMIR A, ANSELMO F, et al. RGC32 and diseases: the first 20 years[J]. Immunol Res, 2019, 67( 2－ 3): 267－ 279. DOI: 10.1007/s12026－019－09080－0.
[13]	YU L, YU YH. Research of RGC32 in tumor[J]. Mil Med J Southeast China, 2020, 22( 1): 71－ 75. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672－271X.2020.01.016. 禹乐, 余英豪. RGC32在肿瘤中的研究进展[J]. 东南国防医药, 2020, 22( 1): 71－ 75. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672－271X.2020.01.016.
[14]	VLAICU SI, TATOMIR A, BOODHOO D, et al. RGC32 is expressed in the human atherosclerotic arterial wall: Role in C5b－9－induced cell proliferation and migration[J]. Exp Mol Pathol, 2016, 101( 2): 221－ 230. DOI: 10.1016/j.yexmp.2016.09.004.
[15]	CUI XB, GUO X, CHEN SY. Response gene to complement 32 deficiency causes impaired placental angiogenesis in mice[J]. Cardiovasc Res, 2013, 99( 4): 632－ 639. DOI: 10.1093/cvr/cvt121.
[16]	CUI XB, LUAN JN, DONG K, et al. RGC32(response gene to complement 32) deficiency protects endothelial cells from inflammation and attenuates atherosclerosis[J]. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol, 2018, 38( 4): e36－e47. DOI: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.117.310656.
[17]	HU C, WU Z, LI L. Mesenchymal stromal cells promote liver regeneration through regulation of immune cells[J]. Int J Biol Sci, 2020, 16( 5): 893－ 903. DOI: 10.7150/ijbs.39725.
[18]	ZHENG J, LI JT, JIN J, et al. Characteristics of incision bacterial infection and changes of immune cytokines in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy[J]. Chin J Microecol, 2022, 34( 7): 819－ 823, 845. DOI: 10.13381/j.cnki.cjm.202207014. 郑杰, 李江涛, 金晶, 等. 肝癌患者肝切除术后切口细菌感染特征及免疫细胞因子水平变化[J]. 中国微生态学杂志, 2022, 34( 7): 819－ 823, 845. DOI: 10.13381/j.cnki.cjm.202207014.
[19]	SAIGUSA K, IMOTO I, TANIKAWA C, et al. RGC32, a novel p53－inducible gene, is located on centrosomes during mitosis and results in G2/M arrest[J]. Oncogene, 2007, 26( 8): 1110－ 1121. DOI: 10.1038/sj.onc.1210148.

Relative Articles

[1]	Yanheng DUAN, Jiaze AN. Application of near-infrared fluorescence imaging in hepatectomy of hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2023, 39(3): 677-683. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2023.03.031
[2]	Zhilong SHI, Hao XU, Changpeng CHAI, Sijie YANG, Wence ZHOU. Clinical application value of difficulty score systems before laparoscopic liver resection[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2021, 37(8): 1888-1893. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2021.08.027
[3]	Junjun WANG, Lungen LU, Xiaobo CAI. Association between liver progenitor cells and liver regeneration[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2021, 37(8): 1966-1969. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2021.08.048
[4]	Lei WANG, Kangwei LIU, Yuling DUAN, Xinyao LI, Cijun PENG. Current status of the application of robot-assisted laparoscopic hepatectomy[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2021, 37(11): 2732-2736. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2021.11.054
[5]	Wang XueWen, Li Han, Wu YanBin, Niu HongKai, Kong LingQun, Cheng Yu. Hepatectomy as the preferred approach for radical resection of Bismuth Ⅳ hilar cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2020, 36(9): 2059-2062. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2020.09.030
[6]	Zeng Qi, Shadike Apaer, Wu Jing, Nuerzhatijiang Anweier, Li Tao, Tuerhongjiang Tuxun. Left hemihepatectomy for Schnelldorfer type C polycystic liver disease: A case report[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2020, 36(8): 1829-1831. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2020.08.032
[7]	Ceng TaoFei, Chen GuangLei, Liu CaiGang, Dai ChaoLiu, Xu Feng. Mechanism of liver regeneration after associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2020, 36(10): 2344-2348. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2020.10.040
[8]	Han Bing, Ding YiTao, Zhu XinHua, Wu YaFu, Tang Ning, Gao JiaLin, Dai Jun, Xu QingXiang, Cui Heng, He NingNing, Shi XiaoLei. Clinical effect and safety of enhanced recovery after surgery in laparoscopic hepatectomy[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2018, 34(3): 567-572. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2018.03.024
[9]	Li Le, Chen JinMing, Liu ZhongHua, Li Qiang, Shi Ying. Application of enhanced recovery after surgery versus traditional rehabilitation program in hepatectomy: a Meta-analysis[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2018, 34(2): 303-308. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2018.02.017
[10]	Tian Zhou, Zhang JianHuai, Sun XiTai, Liu Bin, Qi FuZhen, Wang YeBo, Wu JinSheng, Gu DianHua. Experience in laparoscopic hepatectomy in treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2018, 34(8): 1712-1716. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2018.08.024
[11]	Wang DianBei, Zhao LiJin, Tu Kui, Yu Qin. Clinical effect of anatomical hepatectomy in treatment of intrahepatic bile duct stones[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2017, 33(1): 102-105. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2017.01.022
[12]	Chen Kai, Li XiangNong, Liu Kun, Nan YunGuang, Yang Jun. Clinical effect of hepatectomy versus extracapsular peeling in treatment of hepatic hemangioma[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2017, 33(4): 699-704. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2017.04.020
[13]	Liu Bin, Li WenGang, Chen FuZhen. Laparoscopic hepatectomy: the choice in the era of minimally invasive surgery[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2017, 33(4): 643-646. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2017.04.008
[14]	Han WeiJia, Shi HongBo, Chen Yu. Research progress in the role of autophagy in liver regeneration[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2016, 32(9): 1827-1831. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2016.09.044
[15]	Wang JinWei, Zhang YaMin. Research advances in methods for determination of tumor boundary in hepatectomy[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2016, 32(2): 374-377. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2016.02.039
[16]	Wu Xiao, Xia Hao, Wu Jian, Zhang Ming. Clinical experience in treatment of complex intrahepatic bile duct stones by regular hepatectomy[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2016, 32(9): 1756-1759. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2016.09.025
[17]	Zhang ShengJun, Liu MinLi, Chang Qi, Liu YongFeng. Efficacy comparison of precise and traditional liver resection in treatment of intrahepatic bile duct stones[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2015, 31(10): 1648-1651. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2015.10.022
[18]	Xu JunHui, Ding YouMing, Wang Bin, Fang HanGang. Clinical value of laparoscopic hepatectomy in liver cancer patients with cirrhosis[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2014, 30(6): 552-555. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2014.06.019
[19]	Zhu Yu, Zhang Wei. Clinical application of absorbable clips in hepatectomy[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2013, 29(12): 932-935. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2013.12.015
[20]	Zhan YuTao, Chen HongSong, Liu Bin, Wei Lai, Wang Yu. Differentiation of rat bone marrow stem cells in liver regeneration.[J]. Journal of Clinical Hepatology, 2006, 22(2): 121-122.

Supplements(0)

Cited By

Cited by
Periodical cited type(1)
1. 许永宁，黄雪桓，唐芷盼，李若涵，秦雯. 2型糖尿病胰腺癌裸鼠模型的建立及活体成像观察. 临床肝胆病杂志. 2024(06): 1231-1239 . 本站查看
Other cited types(0)

Proportional views

Proportional views

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

1.
沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院沈阳 110142

Figures(6)

Get Citation

PDF

XML

Article Metrics

Article views (670) PDF downloads(56)

Expression and significance of response gene to complement 32 in liver regeneration after partial hepatectomy in mice

DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2023.10.018

Abstract

References

Relative Articles

Cited by

Periodical cited type(1)

Other cited types(0)

Proportional views

Catalog

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Article Metrics

Proportional views

Related

Expression and significance of response gene to complement 32 in liver regeneration after partial hepatectomy in mice

DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2023.10.018

Abstract

References

Relative Articles

Cited by

Periodical cited type(1)

Other cited types(0)

Proportional views

Catalog

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Article Metrics

Proportional views

Related

About Journal

Submission Guideline

Journal Online

Hepatobiliary College

Guidelines

Export File

Citation

Format

Content