NHE isoform switching and KChIP2 upregulation in aging porcine atria

KV Channel-Interacting Proteins in the Neurological and Cardiovascular Systems: An Updated Review

K_V channel-interacting proteins (KChIP1-4) belong to a family of Ca²⁺-binding EF-hand proteins that are able to bind to the N-terminus of the K_V4 channel α-subunits. KChIPs are predominantly expressed in the brain and heart, where they contribute to the maintenance of the excitability of neurons and cardiomyocytes by modulating the fast inactivating-K_V4 currents. As the auxiliary subunit, KChIPs are critically involved in regulating the surface protein expression and gating properties of K_V4 channels. Mechanistically, KChIP1, KChIP2, and KChIP3 promote the translocation of K_V4 channels to the cell membrane, accelerate voltage-dependent activation, and slow the recovery rate of inactivation, which increases K_V4 currents. By contrast, KChIP4 suppresses K_V4 trafficking and eliminates the fast inactivation of K_V4 currents. In the heart, I_Ks, I_Ca,L, and I_Na can also be regulated by KChIPs. I_Ca,L and I_Na are positively regulated by KChIP2, whereas I_Ks is negatively regulated by KChIP2. Interestingly, KChIP3 is also known as downstream regulatory element antagonist modulator (DREAM) because it can bind directly to the downstream regulatory element (DRE) on the promoters of target genes that are implicated in the regulation of pain, memory, endocrine, immune, and inflammatory reactions. In addition, all the KChIPs can act as transcription factors to repress the expression of genes involved in circadian regulation. Altered expression of KChIPs has been implicated in the pathogenesis of several neurological and cardiovascular diseases. For example, KChIP2 is decreased in failing hearts, while loss of KChIP2 leads to increased susceptibility to arrhythmias. KChIP3 is increased in Alzheimer's disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, but decreased in epilepsy and Huntington's disease. In the present review, we summarize the progress of recent studies regarding the structural properties, physiological functions, and pathological roles of KChIPs in both health and disease. We also summarize the small-molecule compounds that regulate the function of KChIPs. This review will provide an overview and update of the regulatory mechanism of the KChIP family and the progress of targeted drug research as a reference for researchers in related fields.

Could Sodium/Glucose Co-Transporter-2 Inhibitors Have Antiarrhythmic Potential in Atrial Fibrillation? Literature Review and Future Considerations

The global burden of atrial fibrillation (AF) is constantly increasing, necessitating novel and effective therapeutic options. Sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been introduced in clinical practice as glucose-lowering medications. However, they have recently gained prominence for their potential to exert substantial cardiorenal protection and are being evaluated in large clinical trials including patients with type 2 diabetes and normoglycemic adults. In this review we present up-to-date available evidence in a pathophysiology-directed manner from cell to bedside. Preclinical and clinical data regarding a conceivable antiarrhythmic effect of SGLT2 inhibitors are beginning to accumulate. Herein we comprehensively present data that explore the potential pathophysiological link between SGLT2 inhibitors and AF. With regard to clinical data, no randomized controlled trials evaluating SGLT2 inhibitors effects on AF as a pre-specified endpoint are available. However, data from randomized controlled trial post-hoc analysis as well as observational studies point to a possible beneficial effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on AF. Meta-analyses addressing this question report inconsistent results and the real magnitude of AF prevention by SGLT2 inhibition remains unclear. Still, while (i) pathophysiologic mechanisms involved in AF might be favorably affected by SGLT2 inhibitors and (ii) emerging, yet inconsistent, clinical data imply that SGLT2 inhibitor-mediated cardiorenal protection could also exert antiarrhythmic effects, the argument of whether these novel drugs will reduce AF burden is unsettled and mandates appropriately designed and adequately sized randomized controlled studies.