Cited by 44Retinal Diseases and TreatmentsRetinal Development and DisordersAutophagy in Disease and Therapy

Correlation between autofluorescent debris accumulation and the presence of partially processed forms of cathepsin D in cultured retinal pigment epithelial cells challenged with rod outer segments

RAKOCZY, PIROSKA E., BAINES, MICHAEL, KENNEDY, CHRISTOPHER J., CONSTABLE, IAN J.·1996·Experimental Eye Research

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the accumulation of rod outer segment (ROS)-derived debris in cultured human retinal pigment epithelial cells (RPE). The RPE cell layer is responsible for the phagocytosis and digestion of photoreceptor outer segments. Due to the immense volume of photoreceptor-derived material processed by the RPE cells, even minor changes in the efficiency of ROS processing may cause the accumulation of lipofuscin and photoreceptor derived debris. In this work, 17 RPE cultures were established from the globes of eye bank donors whose ages ranged from 18 to 79 years. Third passage cultures were challenged with bovine ROS and the accumulation of an autofluorescent debris was quantified using a flow cytometer. It was demonstrated that ROS challenge greatly increased the rate of autofluorescent debris accumulation. The accumulation of autofluorescent debris varied significantly from culture to culture. This variation was independent of the phagocytosing capacity of individual cultures and was not age dependent. To further investigate the factors which may be responsible for these differences, the presence of cathepsin D, an aspartic protease responsible for 80% of proteolysis of rhodopsin, was analysed by Western blot. Although the 34 kDa active form of cathepsin D was found in all cultures, in 41% of the cultures higher-molecular-weight forms of cathepsin D were additionally present, thus providing a multimer form of cathepsin D in these cultures. The rate of autofluorescent debris accumulation in cultures possessing a multimer form of cathepsin D was significantly greater (mean 42.3, S.D. +/- 19.8) than those in cultures having a singlet active form (mean 18.8, S.D. +/- 5.5) at 34 kDa (Student's t-test, DF = 15, t = 6.834, P < 0.001). The former cultures included one from a donor with age related macular degeneration, the latter cultures included one from a donor with diabetic retinopathy. This study demonstrates that the rate of autofluorescent debris accumulation in cultured RPE cells is not age dependent, but is an intrinsic property of the donor RPE cells that is possibly related to the presence of a multimer form of the lysosomal enzyme cathepsin D.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/exer.1996.0104

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In primary human RPE cultures, the presence of cathepsin D multimers (46-60 kDa minimally active enzyme forms) correlates with accumulation of autofluorescent debris derived from prolonged OS feeding.

    “The presence of cathepsin D multimers, i.e., 46–60 kDa minimally active enzyme forms, in primary human RPE cultures correlate with the accumulation of autofluorescent debris derived from prolonged OS feeding (Rakoczy et al., 1996), suggesting a reduction in the degradative capacity of the culture.”

    From The cell biology of the retinal pigment epithelium (2020) · cites this paper as Rakoczy et al., 1996

  • The correlation between cathepsin D multimers and autofluorescent debris in primary human RPE cultures suggests a reduction in the degradative capacity of the culture.

    “The presence of cathepsin D multimers, i.e., 46–60 kDa minimally active enzyme forms, in primary human RPE cultures correlate with the accumulation of autofluorescent debris derived from prolonged OS feeding (Rakoczy et al., 1996), suggesting a reduction in the degradative capacity of the culture.”

    From The cell biology of the retinal pigment epithelium (2020) · cites this paper as Rakoczy et al., 1996

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
RAKOCZY, P. E., BAINES, M., KENNEDY, C. J., & CONSTABLE, I. J.
Affiliations
The University of Western Australia (AU)
Venue
Experimental Eye Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1996-08
Volume
63
Issue
2
Pages
159-167
ISSN
0014-4835 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2088852187
Cited by
43
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 5
FWCI
5.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Experimental Eye Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (University of Western Australia) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate
  • Ulverscroft Foundation
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
  • National Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Retinal Development and Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Autophagy in Disease and Therapy
Keywords
retinal pigment epithelial cells, rod outer segments, cathepsin D, lysosomal proteolysis, photoreceptor outer segment phagocytosis, lipofuscin, age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, donor variability, lysosomal storage disease
MeSH terms
Animals, Cathepsin D, Cattle, Cells, Cultured, Humans, Lipofuscin, Microscopy, Fluorescence, Molecular Weight, Phagocytosis, Pigment Epithelium of Eye, Rod Cell Outer Segment, Blotting, Western

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review