Endothelial-derived FABP4 constitutes the majority of basal circulating hormone and regulates lipolysis-driven insulin secretion.

Fatty acid binding protein 4 (FABP4) is a lipid chaperone secreted from adipocytes upon stimulation of lipolysis. Circulating FABP4 levels strongly correlate with obesity and metabolic pathologies in experimental models and humans. While adipocytes have been presumed to be the major source of hormonal FABP4, this question has not been addressed definitively in vivo. We generated mice with Fabp4 deletion in cells known to express the gene - adipocytes (Adipo-KO), endothelial cells (Endo-KO), myeloid cells (Myeloid-KO), and the whole body (Total-KO) - to examine the contribution of these cell types to basal and stimulated plasma FABP4 levels. Unexpectedly, baseline plasma FABP4 was not significantly reduced in Adipo-KO mice, whereas Endo-KO mice showed ~87% reduction versus WT controls. In contrast, Adipo-KO mice exhibited ~62% decreased induction of FABP4 responses to lipolysis, while Endo-KO mice showed only mildly decreased induction, indicating that adipocytes are the main source of increases in FABP4 during lipolysis. We did not detect any myeloid contribution to circulating FABP4. Surprisingly, despite the nearly intact induction of FABP4, Endo-KO mice showed blunted lipolysis-induced insulin secretion, identical to Total-KO mice. We conclude that the endothelium is the major source of baseline hormonal FABP4 and is required for the insulin response to lipolysis.

Personalized Radiation Attenuating Materials for Gastrointestinal Mucosal Protection.

Cancer patients undergoing therapeutic radiation routinely develop injury of the adjacent gastrointestinal (GI) tract mucosa due to treatment. To reduce radiation dose to critical GI structures including the rectum and oral mucosa, 3D-printed GI radioprotective devices composed of high-Z materials are generated from patient CT scans. In a radiation proctitis rat model, a significant reduction in crypt injury is demonstrated with the device compared to without (p < 0.0087). Optimal device placement for radiation attenuation is further confirmed in a swine model. Dosimetric modeling in oral cavity cancer patients demonstrates a 30% radiation dose reduction to the normal buccal mucosa and a 15.2% dose reduction in the rectum for prostate cancer patients with the radioprotectant material in place compared to without. Finally, it is found that the rectal radioprotectant device is more cost-effective compared to a hydrogel rectal spacer. Taken together, these data suggest that personalized radioprotectant devices may be used to reduce GI tissue injury in cancer patients undergoing therapeutic radiation.