The Role of Oxidative Stress Following Antenatal Synthetic Glucocorticoid Therapy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Role Of Oxidative Stress Following Antenatal Synthetic Glucocorticoid Therapy by Susmita Sarkar A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Department of Physiology University of Toronto © Copyright by Susmita Sarkar (2018) The Role Of Oxidative Stress Following Antenatal Synthetic Glucocorticoid Therapy Susmita Sarkar Master of Science Department of Physiology University of Toronto 2018 Abstract We investigated the role of oxidative stress following sGC treatment in a guinea pig model of gestation through measures including: expression of antioxidant enzyme genes, protein carbonylation, and the glutathione ratio in the hippocampus, placenta, and liver of female and male fetuses treated with two courses of betamethasone in utero. Results indicated no significant differences in hippocampal or placental gene expression. Peroxiredoxin-6 expression was significantly downregulated in the male liver following sGC, but there were no differences in the female liver. There were no differences in protein carbonylation or glutathione ratio in the fetal placenta or liver. To investigate long-term outcomes of sGC exposure in utero, we used gene set enrichment analysis of post-natal day 40 female hippocampi, and found significant downregulation of a gene set for oxidative phosphorylation. These finding suggest that while the fetus is acutely protected from oxidative stress following sGC, there might be long-term programming of mitochondrial functions. ii Acknowledgments These past two years have collectively been the most fulfilling experience of my education thus far. I would like to thank the following people for their significant role in shaping my time in graduate school. First and foremost, I would like to thank my research supervisor, Dr. Stephen Matthews for this opportunity. His support, guidance, and patience were all instrumental to my growth as a scientist. He welcomed my ideas, encouraged my independence, and challenged me to think critically. He taught me to never be afraid of the unknown, inspired me to not be discouraged by unexpected results, and educated me on proper scientific rhetoric. For all of this and more, I thank you. Secondly, I would like to thank the members of my research supervisory committee, Dr. Beverly Orser and Dr. Patrick McGowan for their expert feedback. They both were instrumental to the development and progression of my project. Additionally, I would like to thank the members of my defense committee, Dr. Martin Post, Dr. Robert Levitan, and Dr. Andrea Jurisicova for their thoughtful questions of my research. Third, I would like to thank Alice Kostaki, the lab manager for the Matthews Lab. Her vast knowledge and experience was an invaluable resource; I could always rely on Alice to help me brainstorm, troubleshoot, and answer questions that I had asked her ten times over. Her unique sense of humor and unmistakable laugh always lifted the mood and made for some unforgettable lunchtime conversations. And of course, thank you for all of the candy. Fourth, I would like to thank the members of the Matthews lab with whom I shared my time in the lab with. Alex Mouratidis introduced me to the lab and performed the animal work for this study; I cherish his mentorship, and more importantly, his friendship. I was fortunate enough to be desk mates with Liz Eng; I could always turn to her for her encouragement and advice, be that for science, fitness, or skincare. Andrada Naghi and I began our graduate studies together but I ended up learning so much from her; she taught me to care about what really matters, to appreciate the outdoors, and most importantly, how to be myself. I would also like to thank Tam Lye, Dr. Hiro Hamada, Dr. Guinever Imperio, Dr. Aya Sasaki, Abigail Lee, and Bona Kim for their feedback, support, and friendship during my time at the lab. Fifth, I would like to thank recent alumni of the Matthews lab: Dr. Vasilis Moisiadis, Dr. Andrea Costantinof, Mohsen Javam, and Maria Sqapi for their help and friendship. Sixth, I would like to thank the members of GASP council of 2016/2017 and 2017/2018. While there are too many of you to name, some of my most cherished memories of graduate school are from my time on GASP, and I know I have made friendships that will last for a lifetime. Seventh, I would like to thank Anna Roy and Anita Yen. Thank you for picking me back up when I was down; your friendship means the world to me. Eighth, I would like to thank the Department of Physiology, members of administration, and the Faculty of Medicine at UofT. My time in graduate school was facilitated by how well organized the department and program was. iii Finally, I would like to thank my parents, Chandan and Mithu Sarkar. As a child, you instilled in me the value of learning, and made such great sacrifices to provide me with opportunities to further my education. This past year was the most difficult year of my life and without your support, trust, and continuous encouragement, this accomplishment would not have been possible. When I could not walk, you carried me. When I could not eat, you fed me. And when I could not keep going, you made me. This thesis is dedicated to you and I hope to continue to make you proud. iv Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................................................... III TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................................. V 1.0.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF SGC TREATMENT IN FETUS ..................................................................... 1 1.1.1 MATERNAL CORTISOL PHYSIOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1.2 SYNTHETIC GLUCOCORTICOIDS (SGC) : MECHANISMS, USES, AND EFFICACY ................................................ 4 1.2.0 OXIDATIVE DAMAGE – CELLULAR PERSPECTIVE ................................................................................. 6 1.2.1 ROS – PHYSIOLOGICAL ROLE ..................................................................................................................... 6 1.2.2 ANTIOXIDANT ENZYMES ............................................................................................................................ 7 1.2.3 OXIDATIVE DAMAGE (MARKERS) ............................................................................................................... 8 1.2.4 OXIDATIVE STRESS PROGRESSION............................................................................................................... 9 1.3.0 CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF OXIDATIVE DAMAGE IN UTERO .......................................................10 1.3.1 NORMAL PREGNANCY - BASELINE ROS .................................................................................................... 10 1.3.2 ROS LEADING TO PREGNANCY COMPLICATIONS......................................................................................... 11 1.3.3 LONG-TERM OUTCOMES LATER IN THE LIFE OF THE CHILD .......................................................................... 13 1.4.0 ESTABLISHING MECHANISM BETWEEN GC AND OXIDATIVE STRESS – IN VITRO .................16 1.5.0 EFFECTS OF GC ON OXIDATIVE STRESS, IN VIVO .................................................................................18 1.6.0 EFFECTS OF PRENATAL GC ON OXIDATIVE STRESS IN FETUS/ LATER OUTCOMES IN LIFE ..............................................................................................................................................................................................20 FIGURE 1.1 CELLULAR OXIDATIVE STRESS .....................................................................................................23 2.0.0 OBJECTIVES, RATIONALE, AND HYPOTHESIS 2.1 OBJECTIVE: ..............................................................................................................................................................24 2.2 RATIONALE: .............................................................................................................................................................24 2.2.1 BRAIN – HIPPOCAMPUS ............................................................................................................................ 24 2.2.2 PLACENTA ............................................................................................................................................... 25 2.2.3 FETAL LIVER ............................................................................................................................................ 26 2.3 HYPOTHESIS .............................................................................................................................................................27 3.0.0 METHODS 3.1 ANIMAL PROTOCOL ..............................................................................................................................................28 3.2 QUANTITATIVE REAL-TIME PCR (QRT-PCR) ..............................................................................................29 3.2.1 PRIMER DESIGN, STANDARDS, EFFICIENCY ................................................................................................. 29 3.2.2 TISSUE PREPARATION, RNA EXTRACTION AND CDNA CONVERSION ........................................................... 30 3.2.3 PCR, HOUSEKEEPING GENES,