Effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields on high-glucose-induced proliferation inhibition of HUVECs and the underlying mechanisms
-
摘要:
目的 探讨脉冲电磁场（PEMF）对高糖诱导的人脐静脉内皮细胞（HUVEC）增殖抑制的影响及其机制。 方法 该研究为成组设计及析因设计实验研究。将HUVEC分为常规培养的对照组,接受频率15 Hz、强度0.5 mT、时长0.5 h/d、连续2 d的PEMF刺激的PEMF组,加入终物质的量浓度30 mmol/L葡萄糖培养（下称高糖培养）的高糖组,在行高糖培养的同时接受前述参数PEMF刺激的高糖+PEMF组,采用细胞计数试剂盒8（CCK-8）检测培养0（即刻）、12、24、48 h后细胞增殖水平。筛选出PEMF最佳刺激时长1.0 h/d后,同前取HUVEC分组,除PEMF刺激时长为1.0 h/d外,其余处理同前,采用蛋白质印迹法检测培养48 h后各组细胞中Wnt-3a、β-连环蛋白的蛋白表达水平,对高糖组与高糖+PEMF组培养48 h后的细胞行转录组测序以筛选差异表达显著的差异表达基因（DEG）,采用蛋白质印迹法检测培养48 h后各组细胞中腺瘤性结肠息肉病（APC）的蛋白表达水平。将HUVEC分为高糖组、高糖+PEMF组及APC过表达组,高糖组细胞行高糖培养；高糖+PEMF组细胞在行高糖培养的同时接受频率15 Hz、强度0.5 mT、时长1.0 h/d、连续2 d的PEMF刺激；将APC过表达组细胞采用质粒转染法构建为过表达APC基因的细胞后,同高糖+PEMF组处理。采用CCK-8法检测培养0（即刻）、12、24、48 h后细胞增殖水平,采用蛋白质印迹法检测培养48 h后APC、β-连环蛋白、Wnt-3a的蛋白表达水平。实验样本数均为3。 结果 培养24、36、48 h后,高糖组细胞增殖水平均较对照组显著下降（P<0.05）；培养36、48 h后,高糖+PEMF组细胞增殖水平均较高糖组显著升高（P<0.05）。培养48 h后,高糖组细胞中Wnt-3a、β-连环蛋白的蛋白表达水平均显著低于对照组和高糖+PEMF组（P<0.05）。转录组测序显示,培养48 h后,与高糖组比较,高糖+PEMF组细胞中有573个差异表达显著的DEG,其中Wnt通路的关键调节蛋白APC的基因表达显著下调。培养48 h后,高糖组细胞中APC蛋白表达水平显著高于对照组和高糖+PEMF组（P值均<0.05）。培养36、48 h后,高糖+PEMF组细胞增殖水平分别为0.479±0.016、0.552±0.029,显著高于高糖组的0.363±0.019、0.437±0.010和APC过表达组的0.358±0.005、0.439±0.020（P值均<0.05）。培养48 h后,高糖+PEMF组细胞中APC蛋白表达水平显著低于高糖组与APC过表达组（P值均<0.05）,高糖+PEMF组细胞中Wnt-3a、β-连环蛋白的蛋白表达水平均显著高于高糖组与APC过表达组（P<0.05）。 结论 采用频率15 Hz、强度0.5 mT、时长1.0 h/d、连续2 d的PEMF刺激,可减轻高糖对HUVEC增殖的抑制作用,其机制与PEMF降低细胞中APC蛋白表达,进而减弱其对Wnt/β-连环蛋白通路的抑制,调节Wnt-3a和β-连环蛋白的表达有关。 -
关键词:
- 糖尿病 /
- 人脐静脉内皮细胞 /
- 细胞增殖 /
- 脉冲电磁场 /
- 腺瘤性结肠息肉病蛋白 /
- Wnt/β-连环蛋白通路
Abstract:Objective To investigate the effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs) on high-glucose (HG)-induced proliferation inhibition of human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) and the underlying mechanisms. Methods This study was an experimental research involving grouping design and factorial design. HUVECs were divided into control group with conventional culture, PEMF group exposed to PEMF stimulation with frequency of 15 Hz, intensity of 0.5 mT, and duration of 0.5 h/d for 2 consecutive days, HG group cultured with final molarity of 30 mmol/L glucose (hereinafter referred to as HG culture), and HG+PEMF group received the aforementioned PEMF stimulation while under HG culture. The cell proliferation levels were detected using cell counting kit-8 (CCK-8) at 0 (immediately), 12, 24, and 48 h after culture. After the optimal PEMF stimulation duration 1.0 h/d was screened, HUVECs were collected and grouped as before. Except for the PEMF stimulation duration of 1.0 h/d, all other treatments remained the same. Western blotting was employed to detect the protein expression levels of Wnt-3a and β-catenin of cells in each group at 48 h after culture, transcriptomic sequencing was performed on cells in HG and HG+PEMF groups at 48 h after culture to screen for differentially expressed genes (DEGs) with significant differential expression, and Western blotting was used to detect the protein expression level of adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) of cells in each group at 48 h after culture. HUVECs were divided into HG group, HG+PEMF group, and APC overexpression group. The HG group cells received HG culture; the HG+PEMF group cells received PEMF stimulation with frequency of 15 Hz, intensity of 0.5 mT, and duration of 1.0 h/d for 2 consecutive days while under HG culture; the APC overexpression group cells were constructed into APC gene overexpression cells using plasmid transfection, followed by the same treatment as in HG+PEMF group. Cell proliferation levels were detected by CCK-8 at 0(immediately), 12, 24, and 48 h after culture, and protein expression levels of APC, β-catenin, and Wnt-3a were detected by Western blotting at 48 h after culture. The sample size for the experiments was three. Results At 24, 36, and 48 h after culture, the cell proliferation levels in HG group were significantly lower than those in control group (P<0.05). At 36 and 48 h after culture, the cell proliferation levels in HG+PEMF group were significantly increased compared with those in HG group (P<0.05). At 48 h after culture, the protein expression levels of Wnt-3a and β-catenin in HG group were significantly lower than those in control group and HG+PEMF group (P<0.05). Transcriptomic sequencing showed that compared with those in HG group, there were 573 DEGs with significant differential expression in HG+PEMF group of cells, among which the gene expression of the key regulatory protein of the Wnt pathway, APC, was significantly downregulated. At 48 h after culture, the protein expression level of APC in HG group of cells was significantly higher than that in control group and HG+PEMF group (with P values both <0.05). At 36 and 48 h after culture, the proliferation levels of cells in HG+PEMF group were 0.479±0.016 and 0.552±0.029, respectively, which were significantly higher than 0.363±0.019 and 0.437±0.010 in HG group and 0.358±0.005 and 0.439±0.020 in APC overexpression group (with P values all <0.05). At 48 h after culture, the protein expression level of APC in HG+PEMF group of cells was significantly lower than that in HG group and APC overexpression group (with P values both <0.05), and the protein expression levels of Wnt-3a and β-catenin were significantly higher than those in HG group and APC overexpression group (P<0.05). Conclusions PEMF stimulation with frequency of 15 Hz, intensity of 0.5 mT, and duration of 1.0 h/d for 2 consecutive days alleviates the inhibitory effect of HG on HUVEC proliferation. The mechanism involves the downregulation of APC protein expression by PEMF, which alleviates the suppression of the Wnt/β-catenin pathway and subsequently modulates Wnt-3a and β-catenin expressions. -
参考文献
(37) [1] DuncanBB,MaglianoDJ,BoykoEJ.IDF Diabetes Atlas 11th edition 2025: global prevalence and projections for 2050[J].Nephrol Dial Transplant,2025,41(1):7-9.DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfaf177. [2] ChenY,WangG,HouZ,et al.Comparative diabetes mellitus burden trends across global, Chinese, US, and Indian populations using GBD 2021 database[J].Sci Rep,2025,15(1):11955.DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-96175-4. [3] ArmstrongNS,ArmstrongAA,MillsJL,et al.Three-year recurrence in people with diabetic foot ulcers and chronic limb threatening ischemia is comparable to cancer[J].Int Wound J,2025,22(8):e70724.DOI: 10.1111/iwj.70724. [4] WerneckeJ,WerneckeM,EbenauO,et al.Epidemiology and the medical burden of diabetic foot ulcers especially in patients with infection-a population-based analysis from Germany[J].Int Wound J,2025,22(4):e70157.DOI: 10.1111/iwj.70157. [5] ArmstrongDG,TanTW,BoultonAJM,et al.Diabetic foot ulcers: a review[J].JAMA,2023,330(1):62-75.DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.10578. [6] McDermottK,FangM,BoultonAJM,et al.Etiology, epidemiology, and disparities in the burden of diabetic foot ulcers[J].Diabetes Care,2023,46(1):209-221.DOI: 10.2337/dci22-0043. [7] MohsinF,JavaidS,TariqM,et al.Molecular immunological mechanisms of impaired wound healing in diabetic foot ulcers (DFU), current therapeutic strategies and future directions[J].Int Immunopharmacol,2024,139:112713.DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2024.112713. [8] JeffcoateW,BoykoEJ,GameF,et al.Causes, prevention, and management of diabetes-related foot ulcers[J].Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol,2024,12(7):472-482.DOI: 10.1016/S2213-8587(24)00110-4. [9] FlatscherJ,Pavez LorièE,MittermayrR,et al.Pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMF)-physiological response and its potential in trauma treatment[J].Int J Mol Sci,2023,24(14):11239.DOI: 10.3390/ijms241411239. [10] MayerY,ShibliJA,SaadaHA,et al.Pulsed electromagnetic therapy: literature review and current update[J].Braz Dent J,2024,35:e246109.DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440202406109. [11] PengL,FuC,WangL,et al.The effect of pulsed electromagnetic fields on angiogenesis[J].Bioelectromagnetics,2021,42(3):250-258.DOI: 10.1002/bem.22330. [12] HaoCN,HuangJJ,ShiYQ,et al.Pulsed electromagnetic field improves cardiac function in response to myocardial infarction[J].Am J Transl Res,2014,6(3):281-290. [13] PengL,FuC,LiangZ,et al.Pulsed electromagnetic fields increase angiogenesis and improve cardiac function after myocardial ischemia in mice[J].Circ J,2020,84(2):186-193.DOI: 10.1253/circj.CJ-19-0758. [14] LeeJW,KimJY,LeeNR,et al.Effect of pulsed electromagnetic fields stimulation on ischemic skin model[J].Electromagn Biol Med,2022,41(1):15-24.DOI: 10.1080/15368378.2021.1963763. [15] LiRL,HuangJJ,ShiYQ,et al.Pulsed electromagnetic field improves postnatal neovascularization in response to hindlimb ischemia[J].Am J Transl Res,2015,7(3):430-444. [16] ZhangH,YangY,YangE,et al.Pulsed electromagnetic fields protect against brain ischemia by modulating the astrocytic cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathway[J].Cell Mol Neurobiol,2023,43(3):1301-1317.DOI: 10.1007/s10571-022-01251-2. [17] PanY,DongY,HouW,et al.Effects of PEMF on microcirculation and angiogenesis in a model of acute hindlimb ischemia in diabetic rats[J].Bioelectromagnetics,2013,34(3):180-188.DOI: 10.1002/bem.21755. [18] KwanRL,WongWC,YipSL,et al.Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy promotes healing and microcirculation of chronic diabetic foot ulcers: a pilot study[J].Adv Skin Wound Care,2015,28(5):212-219.DOI: 10.1097/01.ASW.0000462012.58911.53. [19] JingD,ZhaiM,TongS,et al.Pulsed electromagnetic fields promote osteogenesis and osseointegration of porous titanium implants in bone defect repair through a Wnt/β-catenin signaling-associated mechanism[J].Sci Rep,2016,6:32045.DOI: 10.1038/srep32045. [20] 中国老年医学学会烧创伤分会,中华医学会烧伤外科学分会,中国医师协会创面修复专业委员会.糖尿病足溃疡合并下肢血管病变的外科诊疗全国专家共识(2024版)[J].中华烧伤与创面修复杂志,2024,40(3):206-220.DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501225-20231122-00202. [21] 陶克,曹涛,郝彤.糖尿病足溃疡血管形成障碍的机制及干预策略[J].中华烧伤与创面修复杂志,2025,41(2):120-126.DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501225-20241204-00474. [22] RossCL,ZhouY,McCallCE,et al.The use of pulsed electromagnetic field to modulate inflammation and improve tissue regeneration: a review[J].Bioelectricity,2019,1(4):247-259.DOI: 10.1089/bioe.2019.0026. [23] VinhasA,AlmeidaAF,RodriguesMT,et al.Prospects of magnetically based approaches addressing inflammation in tendon tissues[J].Adv Drug Deliv Rev,2023,196:114815.DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2023.114815. [24] YangC,XuL,LiaoF,et al.Pulsed electromagnetic fields regulate metabolic reprogramming and mitochondrial fission in endothelial cells for angiogenesis[J].Sci Rep,2024,14(1):19027.DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-69862-x. [25] ChengH,ZhangQ,ZhongW,et al.Pulsed electromagnetic fields inhibit atherosclerosis by regulating pyroptosis through membrane tension-mediated mechanosensitive channels[J].Signal Transduct Target Ther,2025,10(1):388.DOI: 10.1038/s41392-025-02479-2. [26] ChengY,QuZ,FuX,et al.Hydroxytyrosol contributes to cell proliferation and inhibits apoptosis in pulsed electromagnetic fields treated human umbilical vein endothelial cells in vitro[J].Mol Med Rep,2017,16(6):8826-8832.DOI: 10.3892/mmr.2017.7701. [27] WangQ,ZhouJ,WangX,et al.Coupling induction of osteogenesis and type H vessels by pulsed electromagnetic fields in ovariectomy-induced osteoporosis in mice[J].Bone,2022,154:116211.DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2021.116211. [28] ParateD,Franco-ObregónA,FröhlichJ,et al.Enhancement of mesenchymal stem cell chondrogenesis with short-term low intensity pulsed electromagnetic fields[J].Sci Rep,2017,7(1):9421.DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-09892-w. [29] Granja-DomínguezA,HochsprungA,Luque-MorenoC,et al.Effects of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy on fatigue, walking performance, depression, and quality of life in adults with multiple sclerosis: a randomized placebo-controlled trial[J].Braz J Phys Ther,2022,26(5):100449.DOI: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2022.100449. [30] LiXM,LiuDG,YangG,et al.Metabolic osteoimmune biodegradable Zn-Mn alloys: high strength-ductility and in situ vascular-osteogenic coupling[J].Adv Mater,2026,38(9):e22486.DOI: 10.1002/adma.202522486. [31] MassariL,BenazzoF,FalezF,et al.Biophysical stimulation of bone and cartilage: state of the art and future perspectives[J].Int Orthop,2019,43(3):539-551.DOI: 10.1007/s00264-018-4274-3. [32] WangS,PeiG,ShenJ,et al.Pulsed electromagnetic fields treatment ameliorates cardiac function after myocardial infarction in mice and pigs[J].J Adv Res,2026,80:1139-1153.DOI: 10.1016/j.jare.2025.04.019. [33] PandeyS,AnshuT,MaharanaKC,et al.Molecular insights into diabetic wound healing: focus on Wnt/β-catenin and MAPK/ERK signaling pathways[J].Cytokine,2025,191:156957.DOI: 10.1016/j.cyto.2025.156957. [34] ValléeA,GuillevinR,ValléeJN.Vasculogenesis and angiogenesis initiation under normoxic conditions through Wnt/β-catenin pathway in gliomas[J].Rev Neurosci,2018,29(1):71-91.DOI: 10.1515/revneuro-2017-0032. [35] Erazo-OliverasA,Muñoz-VegaM,MlihM,et al.Mutant APC reshapes Wnt signaling plasma membrane nanodomains by altering cholesterol levels via oncogenic β-catenin[J].Nat Commun,2023,14(1):4342.DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-39640-w. [36] ZhangC,LiuXQ,SunHN,et al.Octreotide attenuates hepatic fibrosis and hepatic stellate cells proliferation and activation by inhibiting Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway, c-Myc and cyclin D1[J].Int Immunopharmacol,2018,63:183-190.DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2018.08.005. [37] ChenY,BraunBJ,MengerMM,et al.Intermittent exposure to a 16 Hz extremely low frequency pulsed electromagnetic field promotes osteogenesis in vitro through activating Piezo 1-induced Ca2+ influx in osteoprogenitor cells[J].J Funct Biomater,2023,14(3):165.DOI: 10.3390/jfb14030165. -
图 1 4组人脐静脉内皮细胞培养各时间点后增殖水平比较（样本数为3,
注：对照组细胞行常规培养,脉冲电磁场（PEMF）组细胞接受频率15 Hz、强度0.5 mT、时长0.5 h/d、连续2 d的PEMF刺激,高糖组细胞加入终物质的量浓度30 mmol/L葡萄糖培养（即高糖培养）,高糖+PEMF组细胞在高糖培养的同时接受前述参数PEMF刺激；分组因素主效应,F=532.40,P<0.001；时间因素主效应,F=11 171.00,P<0.001；两者交互效应,F=162.40,P<0.001；培养0（即刻）、12、24、36、48 h后,4组间总体比较,F值分别为0.73、10.01、5.34、383.80、445.70,P值分别为0.562、0.004、0.026、<0.001、<0.001；与高糖组相比,aP<0.05
图 2 5组人脐静脉内皮细胞培养各时间点后增殖水平比较（样本数为3,
注：高糖组细胞加入终物质的量浓度30 mmol/L葡萄糖培养（即高糖培养）；脉冲电磁场（PEMF）刺激0.5 h组、PEMF刺激1.0 h组、PEMF刺激1.5 h组、PEMF刺激2.0 h组细胞均接受频率15 Hz、强度0.5 mT、连续2 d的PEMF刺激,每天刺激时长分别为0.5、1.0、1.5、2.0 h；分组因素主效应,F=91.72,P<0.001；时间因素主效应,F=5 980.00,P<0.001；两者交互效应,F=30.97,P<0.001；培养0（即刻）、12、24、36、48 h后,5组间总体比较,F值分别为0.42、0.88、4.86、51.17、107.50,P值分别为0.789、0.511、0.680、<0.001、<0.001；与PEMF刺激0.5 h组比较,aP<0.05；与PEMF刺激1.0 h组比较,bP<0.05；与PEMF刺激1.5 h组比较,cP<0.05；与PEMF刺激2.0 h组比较,dP<0.05
图 3 蛋白质印迹法检测的4组人脐静脉内皮细胞培养48 h后β-连环蛋白和Wnt-3a的蛋白表达水平。3A.条带图；3B、3C.分别为β-连环蛋白、Wnt-3a的条图（样本数为3,
注：条带图上方和条图横坐标中1、2、3、4均分别指示细胞行常规培养的对照组,细胞加入终物质的量浓度30 mmol/L葡萄糖培养（即高糖培养）的高糖组,细胞接受频率15 Hz、强度0.5 mT、时长1.0 h/d、连续2 d的脉冲电磁场（PEMF）刺激的PEMF组,在行高糖培养的同时接受前述参数PEMF刺激的高糖+PEMF组；Wnt-3a、β-连环蛋白的高糖因素主效应,F值分别为660.30、1 162.00,P<0.001；PEMF刺激因素主效应,F值分别为84.58、534.90,P<0.001；两者交互效应,F值分别为94.30、534.90,P<0.001；与对照组相比,aP<0.05,与高糖组相比,bP<0.05
图 4 转录组测序得出的高糖+PEMF组人脐静脉内皮细胞培养48 h后相较于高糖组显著下调的前50个差异表达基因热图
注：1~3为细胞加入终物质的量浓度30 mmol/L葡萄糖培养（即高糖培养）的高糖组,4~6为细胞在行高糖培养的同时接受频率15 Hz、强度0.5 mT、时长1.0 h/d、连续2 d的脉冲电磁场（PEMF）刺激的高糖+PEMF组；基因由左至右依次为长链非编码RNA：AL139300、AC138696、转录本TMEM189-UBE2V1、二氢叶酸还原酶假基因1、未表征转录本AC009812、REL原癌基因、细胞分裂控制蛋白中心体蛋白55、苏氨酸和酪氨酸激酶、类解旋酶转录因子、包含卷曲螺旋/锚蛋白重复和普列克底物蛋白同源结构域的腺苷二磷酸-核糖基化因子鸟苷三磷酸（GTP）酶激活蛋白2、腺瘤性结肠息肉病、液泡蛋白分选13同源物A、驱动蛋白家族成员15、动质素1、甲硫氨酸腺苷转移酶2A、包含杆状病毒凋亡抑制蛋白重复序列的蛋白6、溶质载体家族38成员2、DEK原癌基因、DNA拓扑异构酶Ⅱα、染色体结构维持蛋白3、结合GTP的Ras同源蛋白酶激活蛋白29、阿片生长因子受体样蛋白1、无义介导的mRNA降解相关磷脂酰肌醇3-激酶相关激酶1、长链限制性非编码RNA 00942、乙醛脱氢酶1家族成员A1、CXC基序趋化因子配体8、周期蛋白依赖性激酶6、热休克蛋白家族D成员1、锌金属肽酶、输入蛋白5、G蛋白亚基γ12、包含冷休克结构域的E1、小亚基加工体组分20同源物、组蛋白乙酰转移酶1、着丝粒蛋白E、DEAD盒解旋酶18、热休克蛋白家族A成员9、热休克蛋白90 α家族A类成员1、白细胞介素6信号转导物、二氢硫辛酰胺脱氢酶、γ-微管蛋白环状复合物靶向因子、易位相关膜蛋白1、磷酸化酶激酶调节亚基β、雷帕霉素不敏感的哺乳动物雷帕霉素靶蛋白伴侣蛋白、甘露糖苷酶α2A类成员1、突触结合蛋白结合细胞质RNA相互作用蛋白、蛋白转运蛋白Sec 23同源物A、视黄酸诱导蛋白14、包含跨膜和四三肽重复的蛋白3、基质抗原2
图 5 蛋白质印迹法检测的4组人脐静脉内皮细胞培养48 h后APC蛋白表达水平。5A.条带图；5B.条图（样本数为3,
注：APC为腺瘤性结肠息肉病；条带图上方和条图横坐标中1、2、3、4均分别指示细胞行常规培养的对照组,细胞加入终物质的量浓度30 mmol/L葡萄糖培养（即高糖培养）的高糖组,细胞接受频率15 Hz、强度0.5 mT、时长1.0 h/d、连续2 d的脉冲电磁场（PEMF）刺激的PEMF组,细胞在行高糖培养的同时接受前述参数PEMF刺激的高糖+PEMF组；高糖因素主效应,F=987.50,P<0.001；PEMF刺激因素主效应,F=20.97,P=0.002；两者交互效应,F=17.30,P=0.003；与对照组相比,aP<0.05；与高糖组相比,bP<0.05
图 6 3组人脐静脉内皮细胞培养各时间点后增殖水平比较（样本数为3,
注：高糖组细胞加入终物质的量浓度30 mmol/L葡萄糖培养（即高糖培养）；高糖+脉冲电磁场（PEMF）组细胞在行高糖培养的同时接受频率15 Hz、强度0.5 mT、时长1.0 h/d、连续2 d的PEMF刺激；腺瘤性结肠息肉病（APC）过表达组细胞先构建为过表达APC基因的细胞后,在行高糖培养的同时接受前述参数PEMF刺激；分组因素主效应,F=57.36,P<0.001；时间因素主效应,F=999.70,P<0.001；两者交互效应,F=22.20,P<0.001；培养0（即刻）、12、24、36、48 h后,4组间总体比较,F值分别为0.24、0.10、2.77、63.87、29.02,P值分别为0.796、0.903、0.141、<0.001、<0.001；与高糖组相比,aP<0.05；与APC过表达组相比,bP<0.05
图 7 蛋白质印迹法检测的3组人脐静脉内皮细胞培养48 h后APC和Wnt-3a与β-连环蛋白的蛋白表达水平。7A.条带图；7B、7C、7D.分别为APC、Wnt-3a、β-连环蛋白的条图（样本数为3,
注：条带图上方和条图横坐标中1、2、3均分别指示细胞加入终物质的量浓度30 mmol/L葡萄糖培养（即高糖培养）的高糖组,细胞在行高糖培养的同时接受频率15 Hz、强度0.5 mT、时长1.0 h/d、连续2 d的脉冲电磁场（PEMF）刺激的高糖+PEMF组,细胞先构建为过表达腺瘤性结肠息肉病（APC）基因的细胞后在高糖培养的同时接受前述参数PEMF刺激的APC过表达组；3组细胞中APC、Wnt-3a、β-连环蛋白的蛋白表达水平总体比较,F值分别为1 922.00、131.80、253.30,P值均<0.001；与高糖组相比,aP<0.05；与高糖+PEMF组相比,bP<0.05
-
下载:
计量
- 文章访问数: 1
- HTML全文浏览量: 0
- PDF下载量: 0
- 被引次数: 0
