Contribution of pericyte paracrine regulation of the endothelium to angiogenesis.

During physiological development and after a stressor event, vascular cells communicate with each other to evoke new vessel formation-a process known as angiogenesis. This communication occurs via direct contact and via paracrine release of proteins and nucleic acids, both in a free form or encapsulated into micro-vesicles. In diseases with an altered angiogenic response, such as cancer and diabetic vascular complications, it becomes of paramount importance to tune the cell communication process. Endothelial cell growth and migration are essential processes for new vessel formation, and pericytes, together with some classes of circulating monocytes, are important endothelial regulators. The interaction between pericytes and the endothelium is facilitated by their anatomical apposition, which involves endothelial cells and pericytes sharing the same basement membrane. However, the role of pericytes is not fully understood. The characteristics and the function of tissue-specific pericytesis are the focus of this review. Factors involved in the cross-talk between these cell types and the opportunities afforded by micro-RNA and micro-vesicle techniques are discussed. Targeting these mechanisms in pathological conditions, in which the vessel response is altered, is considered in relation to identification of new therapies for restoring the blood flow.

RAS genes influence exercise-induced left ventricular hypertrophy: an elite athletes study.

PURPOSE: The association of ACE I/D polymorphism with changes in LV mass in response to physical training has been observed, but no association has been found with AT1R A1166C polymorphism. We investigated the ACE I/D, AT1R A1166C, and AT1R CA microsatellite polymorphisms genotype distribution in elite athletes and whether the presence of AT1R C1166 variant, in addition to ACE D allele affects the training-induced LV mass alterations in elite trained athletes. METHODS: The study population comprised 28 healthy players recruited from an Italian elite male soccer team and 155 healthy male subjects. LV mass, LV mass adjusted for body surface area, septal thickness, posterior wall, end-diastolic and end-systolic ventricular dimension, and ejection fraction were determined by echocardiography in pretrained period, at rest and 7 months later during the training. All subjects were genotyped for ACE I/D, AT1R A1166C, and CA microsatellite polymorphisms. RESULTS: Training induced an LV mass increase in all but six athletes. The percentage of athletes in whom an increase of LV mass was found after training was statistically different in relation to the ACE D allele: no increase was observed in three of 24 D allele carriers and in three of four II genotype players (Fisher's exact test, P = 0.02). As AT1R is concerned, no increase was observed in 4 of 15 C allele carriers and in 2 of 13 AA genotype athletes (Fisher's exact test, P > 0.05). The contemporary presence of ACE D and AT1R C allele did not affect the changes after training. No difference has been observed in the CA microsatellite marker allele frequencies between athletes and controls (P = 0.46). CONCLUSION: In this study, we provide the evidence that soccer play does not select athletes on genotype basis. Training-induced LV mass changes in male elite athletes are significantly associated with the presence of ACE D allele, but not of AT1R C allele.