Skip to main content
  • American Heart Association
  • Science Volunteer
  • Warning Signs
  • Advanced Search
  • Donate

  • Home
  • About this Journal
    • General Statistics
    • Editorial Board
    • Editors
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Author Reprints
    • Commercial Reprints
    • Customer Service and Ordering Information
  • All Issues
  • Subjects
    • All Subjects
    • Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research
    • Critical Care and Resuscitation
    • Epidemiology, Lifestyle, and Prevention
    • Genetics
    • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Hypertension
    • Imaging and Diagnostic Testing
    • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Quality and Outcomes
    • Stroke
    • Vascular Disease
  • Browse Features
    • AHA Guidelines and Statements
    • Acknowledgment of Reviewers
    • Clinical Implications
    • Clinical-Pathological Conferences
    • Controversies in Hypertension
    • Editors' Picks
    • Guidelines Debate
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Recent Advances in Hypertension
    • SPRINT Trial: the Conversation Continues
  • Resources
    • Instructions to Reviewers
    • Instructions for Authors
    • →Article Types
    • → Submission Guidelines
      • Research Guidelines
        • Minimum Information About Microarray Data Experiments (MIAME)
      • Abstract
      • Acknowledgments
      • Clinical Implications (Only by invitation)
      • Conflict(s) of Interest/Disclosure(s) Statement
      • Figure Legends
      • Figures
      • Novelty and Significance: 1) What Is New, 2) What Is Relevant?
      • References
      • Sources of Funding
      • Tables
      • Text
      • Title Page
      • Online/Data Supplement
    • →Tips for Easier Manuscript Submission
    • → General Instructions for Revised Manuscripts
      • Change of Authorship Form
    • → Costs to Authors
    • → Open Access, Repositories, & Author Rights Q&A
    • Permissions to Reprint Figures and Tables
    • Journal Policies
    • Scientific Councils
    • AHA Journals RSS Feeds
    • International Users
    • AHA Newsroom
  • AHA Journals
    • AHA Journals Home
    • Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology (ATVB)
    • Circulation
    • → Circ: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • → Circ: Genomic and Precision Medicine
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Imaging
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Interventions
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Quality & Outcomes
    • → Circ: Heart Failure
    • Circulation Research
    • Hypertension
    • Stroke
    • Journal of the American Heart Association
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

  • My alerts
  • Sign In
  • Join

  • Advanced search

Header Publisher Menu

  • American Heart Association
  • Science Volunteer
  • Warning Signs
  • Advanced Search
  • Donate

Hypertension

  • My alerts
  • Sign In
  • Join

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • About this Journal
    • General Statistics
    • Editorial Board
    • Editors
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Author Reprints
    • Commercial Reprints
    • Customer Service and Ordering Information
  • All Issues
  • Subjects
    • All Subjects
    • Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research
    • Critical Care and Resuscitation
    • Epidemiology, Lifestyle, and Prevention
    • Genetics
    • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Hypertension
    • Imaging and Diagnostic Testing
    • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Quality and Outcomes
    • Stroke
    • Vascular Disease
  • Browse Features
    • AHA Guidelines and Statements
    • Acknowledgment of Reviewers
    • Clinical Implications
    • Clinical-Pathological Conferences
    • Controversies in Hypertension
    • Editors' Picks
    • Guidelines Debate
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Recent Advances in Hypertension
    • SPRINT Trial: the Conversation Continues
  • Resources
    • Instructions to Reviewers
    • Instructions for Authors
    • →Article Types
    • → Submission Guidelines
    • →Tips for Easier Manuscript Submission
    • → General Instructions for Revised Manuscripts
    • → Costs to Authors
    • → Open Access, Repositories, & Author Rights Q&A
    • Permissions to Reprint Figures and Tables
    • Journal Policies
    • Scientific Councils
    • AHA Journals RSS Feeds
    • International Users
    • AHA Newsroom
  • AHA Journals
    • AHA Journals Home
    • Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology (ATVB)
    • Circulation
    • → Circ: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • → Circ: Genomic and Precision Medicine
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Imaging
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Interventions
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Quality & Outcomes
    • → Circ: Heart Failure
    • Circulation Research
    • Hypertension
    • Stroke
    • Journal of the American Heart Association
Brief Reviews

The Fuzzy Logic of Physiological Cardiac Hypertrophy

Gerald W. Dorn
Download PDF
https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.106.079426
Hypertension. 2007;49:962-970
Originally published April 18, 2007
Gerald W. Dorn
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters

Jump to

  • Article
    • Fuzzy-o-Logical Hypertrophy?
    • The Athlete’s Heart and Cardiac Remodeling
    • Molecular Studies of Exercise-Induced Cardiac Hypertrophy
    • Signaling Pathways in Physiological Hypertrophy
    • Stimulus Specificity of Cardiac Hypertrophy
    • Therapeutic Applications for Physiological Hypertrophy
    • Conclusions
    • Acknowledgments
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
Loading

Cardiac hypertrophy is defined as an abnormal increase in heart muscle mass and is functionally, mechanistically, and histologically distinguished from normal embryonic and postnatal myocardial growth by characteristic changes in cardiac myocyte shape and volume.1 Reactive hypertrophy, that is, hypertrophy that occurs in response to an extrinsic increase in cardiac work,2 is distinguished from genetic familial hypertrophic cardiomyopathy mutations3 in which the stimulus for hypertrophy is intrinsic to the cardiomyocyte. In the prototypical reactive hypertrophic response to pressure overload, decreased wall stress (estimated as the ratio of ventricular radius to wall thickness; Figure 1) resulting from “compensatory” cardiac hypertrophy provides mechanical advantages that help normalize ejection performance in the face of increased workload as originally described by Grossman et al4 (Figure 1). These mechanical benefits accrue whether the stimulus for hypertrophy is intermittent, as with exercise training that produces “physiological hypertrophy,” or sustained, as with hypertension or aortic stenosis that produce “pathological hypertrophy.” With sustained hemodynamic overload, however, progressive systolic dysfunction ultimately occurs that leads to heart failure (Figure 1). The realization that prolonged, continuous hemodynamic stress will ultimately lead to hypertrophy decompensation, together with accumulating information that the hypertrophied myocardium is transcriptionally and biochemically distinct from normal myocardium,5 lead Katz to derive the concept of a “cardiomyopathy of pressure overload,”6 which is a specific contextual application of the notion of pathological hypertrophy.

Figure1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Figure 1. Stimulus-specific hypertrophic responses of the heart and how they affect wall stress (c), which, at equal pressures, is proportional to the ratio of internal ventricular radius at end diastole (r) and ventricular wall thickness (h).

Whether it is compensatory or decompensated, hypertrophy is associated with alterations in cardiac geometry (size and shape) collectively referred to as “ventricular remodeling.7 Importantly, although they are related to each other, cardiac architecture (remodeled or not), function (failing or not), and mass (hypertrophied or not) are independent variables. For example, a concentrically hypertrophied (thick walled) pressure-overloaded ventricle can have normal or enlarged diastolic dimension with either normal or diminished ejection performance. Likewise, whereas eccentrically hypertrophied (normal wall thickness) volume-overloaded hearts are enlarged at end diastole and more spherical in shape, they can exhibit normal, supernormal, or diminished ejection performance.

The standard approaches to categorize hypertrophy have tended to overlap with designations of cardiac architecture and function. For example, hypertrophy can be classified on the basis of chamber morphometrics as concentric or eccentric, on the basis of functional outcome as adaptive or maladaptive, and on the basis of whether it progresses to an outright disease state as physiological or pathological. Although each of these classification schemes has strengths and weaknesses,2 the label of “physiological” versus “pathological” generates confusion in part because the simplicity of the labels belies the complexity of the conditions. Certainly, it is an appealing notion that physiological hypertrophy should be distinguished from pathological forms strictly on the basis of it being a favorable adaptation.8 However, a useful operative definition of “physiological hypertrophy” has been difficult to achieve. As with Justice Potter Stewart’s explanation of obscenity for the 1964 United States Supreme Court (“I know it when I see it”), in a world of black and white, physiological hypertrophy can simply be considered as cardiac hypertrophy that is not pathological, that is, that does not cause or contribute to disease. This probabilistic approach relies on a binary or “crisp” presupposition that nonfailing hypertrophy and decompensated hypertrophy are precise and distinct, such that progression from one to the other can be determined with certainty. However, the distinctions are blurred in reality, where heart failure rarely exists without cardiac enlargement at the organ and cellular level2 and where a hypertrophied, pressure-overloaded heart with normal ejection performance characteristically exhibits abnormal contractile function measured at the cellular or myofibrillar level.9 Furthermore, it has been noted that the hypertrophy of cardiac conditioning may actually reverse heart failure.10,11 Thus, intermediate condition(s) between the ideals of normal and pathologically hypertrophied hearts are predominant and may best be characterized within a range of more or less physiological in nature (Figure 2). Here, an overview is presented to help the interested academic and clinician better understand the factors that contribute to hypertrophy being “more or less” physiological in nature, to recognize the adaptive and potentially maladaptive features of “physiological” hypertrophies, and to better appreciate the possibilities of harnessing various aspects of physiological hypertrophy as therapeutic modalities in heart failure.

Figure2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Figure 2. Fuzzy logical continuum of physiological and pathological hypertrophy.

Fuzzy-o-Logical Hypertrophy?

Is there any condition where hypertrophy is truly physiological? Based on the simple criterion that physiological hypertrophy is cardiac and/or cardiac myocyte enlargement that neither causes nor contributes to heart failure, the answer is “yes.” The most striking example of physiological hypertrophy in nature may be the recently described postprandial cardiac hypertrophy in Burmese pythons.12 These snakes are a dramatic model of physiological extremes in that they are cold blooded and normally inactive in the fasting state but increase their metabolic rate 40-fold while digesting a large meal. Oxygen consumption (metabolic work) in pythons increased 7-fold when measured 48 hours after ingesting a meal equal to 25% of their body mass, which was accompanied by a 40% increase in ventricular mass and an increase in stroke volume half-again greater than that achieved by fasting animals at peak exercise (ie, in maximally stressed nonhypertrophied hearts).13 Cardiac muscle-specific mRNA was increased in postprandial snake hearts, and the ratio of DNA to protein decreased, reflecting increased protein content per myocyte. Most remarkably, ventricular mass returned to normal 28 days after the meal. Thus, postprandial cardiac hypertrophy in pythons exhibits all of the prerequisites of a physiological hypertrophy: it is a functionally adaptive response to increased cardiac load characterized by an abnormal increase in organ and cardiomyocyte protein mass and enhanced cardiac gene expression that is completely reversible and without pathological sequelae. If one accepts this as a reasonable definition of physiological hypertrophy, the next question is, “Does it occur in humans?”

In fact, postprandial cardiac hypertrophy is not know to occur in humans, although occasional reports of postprandial angina pectoris reveal a qualitatively similar, if smaller, increase in cardiac workload during human digestion.14,15 Digestion in mammals does not increase the metabolic rate for as long or proportionally as much as it does in reptiles, and it takes weeks rather than days of sustained hemodynamic overload to develop a full, stable cardiac hypertrophic response in mammals. However, there is an analogous condition in humans in which a prolonged but reversible increase in cardiac workload produces reversible cardiac hypertrophy: pregnancy.

During the second and third trimesters of pregnancy, cardiac output increases to match placental blood flow, resulting in a condition of sustained volume overload. The heart responds by undergoing modest eccentric cardiac hypertrophy.16–18 Each of these changes is fully reversible after delivery, when cardiac load returns to normal. Furthermore, the hallmark pattern of increased fetal gene expression that is prototypical for human and experimental pressure or volume overload (ie, pathological) hypertrophy was not observed in a recent study of pregnancy-induced hypertrophy in mouse hearts.19 Thus, hypertrophy of pregnancy also fulfills the necessary criteria for a physiological hypertrophy, although the hormonal changes of pregnancy and possible consequences on cardiac gene expression19 complicate this classification, and may make it “less-than-completely physiological.” Indeed, for unknown reasons, a very small percentage of patients develop dilated cardiomyopathy after pregnancy, a condition designated “peripartum cardiomyopathy.”20 Some genetically manipulated mice recapitulate this association of pregnancy and heart failure, which mechanistically has been attributed to peripartal cardiomyocyte apoptosis.21,22 However, the cellular and molecular events that cause human peripartum cardiomyopathy remain unknown at this time.

The Athlete’s Heart and Cardiac Remodeling

The traditional view of exercised-induced cardiac adaptations is that they are favorable, or at least benign, and include increased cardiac mass (hypertrophy), enhanced aerobic capacity, and diastolic cardiac enlargement (remodeling), resulting in increased ventricular stroke volume and cardiac output.8,23–25 However, these are largely the consequences of endurance exercise training, such as long distance running or swimming, and are associated with eccentric remodeling of the heart. Physical conditioning that emphasizes strength training, such as weight lifting and wrestling, only modestly increases cardiac output but causes concentric cardiac hypertrophy without chamber dilation and an increase in peripheral vascular resistance. The different patterns of hypertrophy and their associated changes in ventricular architecture reflect differences in the ratio of ventricular internal dimension to wall thickness and recapitulate the geometric changes seen with different stimuli for pathological hypertrophy.26,27 For example, during the early, functionally compensated stage of pure chronic volume overload because of mitral valvular regurgitation, the heart undergoes eccentric hypertrophy where left ventricular chamber dimension and wall thickness increase proportionally. This form of hypertrophy is typically “adaptive” for long periods of time before undergoing functional decompensation and progression to dilated cardiomyopathy.2,4 In contrast, chronic pressure overload, as in aortic valvular stenosis or systemic hypertension, results in concentric hypertrophy with a small, thick-walled left ventricle. This form of hypertrophy is more maladaptive, undergoing predictable and comparatively rapid functional decompensation.2,4

For the physiological stimulus of exercise, endurance training diminishes vascular resistance, producing increased cardiac flow at normal pressures (volume overload) and a form of eccentric hypertrophy that is considered to be generally favorable. On the other hand, strength training increases vascular resistance, producing an intermittent pressure-overload state and concentric hypertrophy that may not have the same benefits as endurance training.28 Indeed, recent experimental studies have shown that it is the nature of the stimulus (physiological exercise versus pathological pressure overload), not whether it is intermittent or sustained, that determines the outcome of hypertrophic remodeling (see below).29 The paradigm that stimulus is the primary determinant of response may also apply to subtypes of exercise-induced hypertrophy. Not only do endurance and strength training produce different cardiac morphologies and metabolic activities,28 but there is accumulating evidence that prolonged exercise conditioning, at least with those activities that include a strength component (ie, cycling and rowing, which combine strength and endurance), can mimic pathological hypertrophy and potentially lead to myocardial disease or sudden cardiac death. Accordingly, there are reports that ventricular dilation does not completely reverse even after 5 years in a substantial number (≈20%) of deconditioned athletes,30 suggesting that permanent myocardial damage can occur as a consequence of prolonged conditioning. This has particular relevance to professional athletes and has propelled efforts to use available clinical diagnostics to differentiate between benign or favorable cardiovascular changes associated with athletic conditioning and potentially pathological conditions that can lead to death or disability. These findings and the diagnostic and therapeutic dilemmas they pose have been reviewed recently.28

Molecular Studies of Exercise-Induced Cardiac Hypertrophy

Recently, there has been an explosion of data exploring the biochemical and molecular differences between physiological and pathological hypertrophy based on comparisons between some form of exercise as a physiological stimulus and some form of pressure overload as a pathological stimulus. The likely biochemical signaling pathways that transduce physiological and pathological hypertrophies are reviewed in detail below, but it is important to note here that neurohormonal signaling pathways mediated through 7 transmembrane spanning receptors, especially those coupled to the Gq heterotrimeric G protein, are largely associated with pathological hypertrophy, whereas peptide growth factors, such as insulin-like growth factor (IGF) and epidermal growth factor, coupled to the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/Akt pathway are more associated with physiological hypertrophy.

Specific alterations in cardiac gene expression observed in pathological hypertrophy are sufficiently characteristic so that they have become important criteria for its detection and diagnosis.2,31 Our laboratory performed one of the first attempts to delineate the molecular signatures of physiological and pathological forms of cardiac hypertrophy using early murine microarrays and 5 different mouse genetic hypertrophy models.32 In these experiments, more physiological hypertrophy was represented by a mouse in which protein kinase C ε was specifically activated through transgenic translocation facilitation.33 Pathological hypertrophy was represented by a mouse overexpressing the α subunit of Gq,34 and pathological hypertrophy in transition to heart failure was represented by a mouse overexpressing calcineurin.35 Although the study was limited by lack of comprehensive representation of the mouse genome on the Incyte microarrays and by use of specific genetic perturbations rather than physiological stress to create a spectrum of hypertrophy, the results are noteworthy in that they revealed nonoverlap of gene expression between the physiological and pathological hypertrophy phenotypes and described an apoptosis gene expression program in pathological hypertrophy. Both of these findings have subsequently been validated and support not only the existence of different transcriptional programs for various forms of hypertrophy, but also relevance of gene expression as a determinant of disease outcome.

Recent microarray studies of murine pressure-overload hypertrophy have revealed increased expression of extracellular matrix genes and downregulation of metabolic genes, especially those involved in fatty acid metabolism.36 Because each of these pathways may contribute to deterioration of hypertrophy to heart failure and would, therefore, not be expected to occur in true physiological hypertrophy, it was useful to perform direct comparisons of the molecular phenotypes for physiological and pathological hypertrophy, thus defining their individual genetic “fingerprints” and delineating any of the hypothetically distinct pathophysiological mechanisms. These types of studies have recently become more practical with the availability and affordability of comprehensive gene microarrays for mice, rats, and humans. However, proper interpretation of these data, especially when comparing different studies, does require careful attention to the specifics of physiological stimuli (voluntary or forced running or forced swimming) and pathological stimuli (typically genetic hypertension, surgical aortic coarctation, or myocardial infarction) used.

One of the first studies to directly compare cardiac gene expression in physiological (swimming rats) and pathological (spontaneous hypertensive rats) hypertrophy described several genes that were upregulated in pathological hypertrophy, but not with exercise, despite similar increases in left ventricular mass. These genes include brain natriuretic peptide, angiotensin-converting enzyme, the endothelin receptor, and the β-adrenergic receptor kinase.37 These pathological genes belong to a group of signaling effectors or regulators for neurohormonal pathways that have been implicated in pathological hypertrophy by translating the mechanical stress stimulus into a hormonal signaling event.38 Interestingly, β-adrenergic receptor mRNA was similarly increased in both physiological and pathological hypertrophy,37 suggesting that there can be molecular overlap between hypertrophies stimulated by exercise and hypertension. Whether these regulated genes represent events that contribute to the hypertrophic response or that are a consequence of hypertrophy, the different expression patterns helped to establish that pathological and physiological hypertrophy could have individual molecular fingerprints.

Recent studies have used microarrays to perform more extensive, unbiased comparisons of regulated genes in physiological and pathological hypertrophy. Kong et al39 used Affymetrix Rat Genome U34A microarrays to compare transcript profiles in control rats (sedentary Dahl salt-sensitive rats on low-salt diet), physiologically hypertrophied rats (daily exercise), and compensated pathological hypertrophy (Dahl salt-sensitive rats on high-salt diet). Prolonged high-salt diet resulted in progression to heart failure, providing a fourth group (decompensated pathological hypertrophy) for analysis. Of ≈3000 known genes represented on the microarrays, 404 were regulated in 1 of the hypertrophies: 91 were regulated in physiological hypertrophy, 159 were regulated in both physiological and pathological hypertrophy, and 154 were regulated in pathological hypertrophy. Genes largely regulated in physiological hypertrophy were represented by functional clusters for metabolism and cellular growth, including members of the IGF/epidermal growth factor signaling pathway. In contrast, genes identified with pathological hypertrophy were largely from inflammation and stress-response clusters. Genes regulated in both conditions tended to be those identified previously with hypertrophy response and likely represented common or nonspecific factors involved in cardiomyocyte cell growth (Figure 3). Of particular interest, the gene expression profile in decompensated hypertrophy/heart failure was an exaggeration of that seen in compensated pathological hypertrophy and included apoptosis factors. This excellent study provides additional support to the hypothesis that physiological hypertrophy is transduced by IGF signaling pathways, whereas pathological hypertrophy shares a molecular phenotype with heart failure.

Figure3
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Figure 3. Venn diagram depicting shared and distinct gene cluster expression profiles of physiological and pathological hypertrophy.

The above findings were confirmed and extended in a study of gene expression in cardiac hypertrophy stimulated by treadmill conditioning in rats.40 Again using Affymetrix Rat Genome U34A microarrays, 267 genes were upregulated and 62 downregulated with exercise. Consistent with the notion that physiological hypertrophy is distinct from pathological hypertrophy, upregulation of hypertrophy-associated fetal cardiac genes,31 atrial natriuretic factor, brain natriuretic peptide, α-skeletal actin, and β-myosin heavy chain was not observed in treadmill-conditioned rat hearts. Increased collagen gene expression was also not observed, which, along with myocardial fibrosis, is classically associated with the development of pathological hypertrophy.41 However, as seen in the study by Kong et al,39 some genes upregulated in pathological hypertrophy were also upregulated in exercised rats, including genes for extracellular matrix and cytoskeletal proteins, ribosomal proteins, and some signaling proteins, that is, genes that are generally required for cardiomyocyte protein synthesis and structural growth. Notably, the gene for G-protein receptor kinase 2, which functionally uncouples β-adrenergic receptors from downstream signaling effectors42 and is increased in pathological hypertrophy,43 was downregulated with exercise, suggesting a possible mechanism for exercise benefits in myocardial disease.

An important result of these studies is the insight that they have provided into distinct metabolic changes that occur with physiological and pathological hypertrophy. It has been appreciated for some time that a variety of metabolically or energetically unfavorable events occur in pathological hypertrophy, including contractile protein isoform shifts,11 a decrease in the ratio of mitochondria to the number of cardiomyocytes,44,45 and a shift away from normal fatty acid use to glucose as the primary myocardial energy substrate.46–49 In contrast, physiological hypertrophy typically is not associated with changes in contractile protein isoforms (see above), and mitochondrial biogenesis is actually induced in athlete’s hearts.50,51 The consequences of physiological conditioning on myocardial metabolism had not been explored in detail, but Strom et al40 found recently that a number of genes involved in fatty acid oxidation were upregulated in physiological hypertrophy, whereas they have been reported to be downregulated in pathological hypertrophy.52,53 Specific antithetically regulated metabolic genes of interest include the uncoupling protein UCP2, which induces mitochondrial heat generation by mitochondrial respiration instead of ATP production.54 This gene is upregulated in pathological hypertrophy55 but was downregulated by chronic treadmill conditioning, possibly determining more efficient energy production in physiological hypertrophy. Interestingly, expression of UCP2 is normalized by 2 pharmacological treatments for heart failure, β-adrenergic receptor blockade and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition.55,56 Another gene of interest is FAT, or fatty acid translocase, which was upregulated in exercise-conditioned hearts but not affected by pathological hypertrophy.40 Insufficiency of this gene, also known as CD36, has been implicated in defective fatty acid metabolism seen with hypertensive and postischemic myocardial disease.57,58 Taken together, these results suggest that different physiological or pathological hypertrophic stimuli may cause distinct forms of hypertrophy that are either beneficial or harmful, based in part on transcriptionally determined alterations in basic metabolic parameters and other factors (see Figure 3). An emerging picture of specific transcriptional mechanisms that can modulate myocardial metabolic genes in pathological cardiac hypertrophy and heart failure has been reviewed recently in detail.59

Signaling Pathways in Physiological Hypertrophy

In understanding physiological hypertrophy and how it might be harnessed as a therapeutic application, it is important to define those targetable biochemical events that determine whether hypertrophy is beneficial or detrimental. Studies of various candidate signaling factors and pathways have generally used pharmacological inhibition or genetic gain and/or loss of function. Because the genetic approach can be targeted to the heart and may be more specific than pharmacological inhibition, this has become the preferred approach.

As noted above, pathological hypertrophy is caused by any of a number of partially redundant neurohormonal pathways that produce activation of parallel hypertrophy signaling effectors.5,38,60 In brief, multiple agonist–receptor pairs, such as those for angiotensin II, endothelin, catecholamines, and others, produce pathological hypertrophy through activation of Gq-coupled signaling pathways (Figure 4). Downstream of Gq, which appears to be a common transducer of most pathological hypertrophy signals,34,61,62 is phospholipase Cβ, which hydrolyzes phosphatidylinositol bisphosphate into diacylglycerol and inositol triphosphate. Inositol triphosphate causes the release of calcium from intracellular stores, which can activate the phosphatase calcineurin, which regulates pathological hypertrophy gene expression by dephosphorylating and causing nuclear translocation of the nuclear factor of activated T cells family transcription factors. Diacylglycerol, with or without calcium, activates the protein kinase C family members, some of which also contribute to hypertrophic gene expression.38

Figure4
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Figure 4. Schematic depiction of shared and distinct signaling events for physiological (left) and pathological (right) hypertrophy. GF indicates growth factor; GFR, growth factor receptor; GSK-3, glycogen synthase kinase-3β; mTOR, mammalian target of rapamycin; NH, neurohormone; GPCR, G-protein coupled receptor; PLCβ, phospholipase Cβ; DAG, diacyglycerol; IP3, 1,4,5-inositol trisphosphate; NFAT, nuclear factor of activated T-cells. Arrows indicate activation; blocked lines indicate inhibition.

In contrast, exercise-induced hypertrophy appears to be mediated by peptide growth factors and signaling though the PI3K/Akt pathway (Figure 4). IGF and growth hormone, which increases IGF production, are the major stimuli for both physiological hypertrophy and normal developmental growth.63,64 Briefly, these and other peptide growth factors bind to their membrane receptor tyrosine kinases causing receptor dimerization, autophosphorylation, and activation of p110α PI3K, which phosphorylates phosphatidylinositol bisphosphate to create phosphatidylinositol triphosphate. Phosphatidylinositol triphosphate causes recruitment of the kinase Akt to the plasma membrane and its activation by phosphorylation. Akt then stimulates cell protein synthetic machinery by activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin and by inhibition of glycogen synthase kinase (GSK).

There is substantial evidence that the PI3K/Akt signaling axis is critical for transducing physiological or adaptive hypertrophy but also that overstimulation of the pathway can result in hypertrophy with pathological features.65 Constitutive PI3K signaling achieved by cardiac-specific transgenic expression of an active mutant resulted in hypertrophy that did not transition into failure, whereas inhibition of PI3K signaling through transgenic expression of a dominant inhibitory mutant inhibited both exercise-induced hypertrophy and normal postnatal cardiac growth. Importantly, inhibition of PI3K did not prevent pathological hypertrophy induced by pressure overloading.66 Thus, PI3K is both necessary and sufficient for physiological hypertrophy but not pathological hypertrophy. Analogous studies of the PI3K effector Akt provide similar results but also suggest that, as with exercise-induced hypertrophy, too much of a stimulus for physiological hypertrophy can be maladaptive. Cardiac-specific overexpression of activated Akt produced physiological hypertrophy (ie, did not transition to failure) in studies with lower expression but hypertrophy with pathological features at higher levels.67–69 In contrast, the gene knockout for Akt1 reduced heart size (and the size of other organs) by ≈20%.70

Figure 4 illustrates not only the separate putative signaling pathways for physiological and pathological hypertrophy but also several nodes where the paths cross-regulate each other. Of note, membrane phosphatidylinositol bisphosphate is a substrate for both physiological hypertrophy, through phosphorylation by PI3K, and for pathological hypertrophy, through hydrolysis by phospholipase C. Thus, events that qualitatively or quantitatively modulate membrane phospholipid content may be expected to impact one or both of the cell growth responses.71 Furthermore, an alternate isoform of PI3K from that activated by growth factor receptors is activated through Gq pathways, possibly explaining how protein synthesis is increased by Gq signaling.38 However, the most striking point of signaling cross-talk between physiological and pathological hypertrophy is at the level of GSK. GSK-3β is a negative regulator of hypertrophy that is regulated by, and that has modulatory effects on, both growth factor and neurohormone signaling pathways. Accordingly, GSK inhibits both normal growth of the heart and isoproterenol- or pressure-overload–induced hypertrophy.72,73 As indicated in Figure 4 and reviewed in detail elsewhere,27,38 GSK exhibits tonic activity in the normal cell, helping to maintain basal protein synthesis for normal turnover, but is inhibited by hypertrophic stimuli. Thus, GSK effects on downstream effectors, including the calcineurin substrate nuclear factor of activated T cells74 and the protein translation initiation factor eIF2B,75 are achieved after disinhibition by either physiological stimuli (via Akt) or pathological stimuli (via protein kinase C).

Stimulus Specificity of Cardiac Hypertrophy

A traditional phenomenological means of characterizing various forms of hypertrophy within the physiological/pathological spectrum has been on the basis of the inciting stimulus, that is, pressure overload, volume overload, genetics, athleticism, and so forth (see Figure 2). Recently, the elucidation of distinct molecular and biochemical signatures for exercise-induced and pressure-overload hypertrophy has provided further support for the idea that hypertrophies are stress-specific responses. A direct examination of this critical hypothesis was lacking until recently, with publication of the findings of Perrino et al.29 In this important study, functional, histological, biochemical, and molecular characteristics of 3 forms of intermittent stress, running, swimming, and intermittent aortic coarctation, were compared. Expressed in fuzzy logic terms, the study objective was to determine where on the physiological/pathological hypertrophy continuum comparable degrees of hypertrophy caused by voluntary exercise, forced exercise, or intermittent pressure overload would fall. In this experiment, sedentary mice represented normal hearts, and chronic pressure overload from continuous aortic banding represented pathological hypertrophy, that is, the two ends of the hypertrophic spectrum depicted in Figure 2.

Intermittent pressure overload produced functionally compensated concentric hypertrophy with little fibrosis, and that was not associated with the typically striking increases in β-myosin heavy chain isoform, ANF, or brain natriuretic factor gene expression. These are functional, histological, and molecular characteristics of a more physiological hypertrophy. However, myocardial capillary density was decreased to similar degrees in intermittent and chronic pressure overload, whereas it remained unchanged in swimming- and running-induced hypertrophy. Furthermore, unloaded cardiomyocyte contractile function was modestly reduced with intermittent pressure overload, and both intermittent and chronic pressure-overloaded cardiac myocytes exhibited diminished contractile responsiveness to a β-adrenergic agonist and decreased levels of the sarcoplasmic reticular calcium pump. Although a more complete and nonbiased transcriptome analysis will be required to determine whether the molecular signature of intermittent pressure overload is truly nonpathological, and additional studies will further determine the possible role of calcium cycling abnormalities in cardiomyocyte contractile dysfunction in this model, these studies lend further credence to the notion that there is little meaning to the concept of pure physiological and pathological hypertrophy and that individual aspects of different forms of hypertrophy can be dissociated based on physiological milieu.

Therapeutic Applications for Physiological Hypertrophy

There is little doubt that exercise conditioning is beneficial in cardiac disease, not only because of its cardiac effects but because of generally favorable changes in metabolic function and vascularization.76–78 Physiological changes caused by exercise and peptide growth hormone treatment have favorable effects on pathological hypertrophy.10,11,63,76–79 However, human patients are not always physically able to perform levels of exercise necessary to achieve the benefits associated with conditioning, and so it might be preferable to have a “magic bullet” to confer physiological hypertrophy, or at least its most beneficial aspects, to heart failure patients. This is a different approach than simply inhibiting the hypertrophic response, which has been proposed based on accumulating data that hypertrophic growth, per se, may not be essential to successful cardiac short-term adaptation to pressure overload.80 Nevertheless, it seems evident that increased muscle mass could help the heart adapt to increased load if that muscle were qualitatively normal. So, what is the best target for a magic bullet?

Based on available data as reviewed herein, it seems that the primary objective should be to increase cardiomyocyte synthesis of normal contractile proteins, metabolic enzymes, and mitochondria. This needs to occur without inducing those features of reactive hypertrophy that seem to be most deleterious, that is, fetal isoform changes in contractile proteins, fibrosis/collagen production, and a shift toward glucose use. Oxygen delivery through neovascularization must also be increased in proportion to the growth of cardiomyocytes81 to avoid the hypothetical hypertrophy-associated oxygen supply/demand mismatch known as a “necrotic core.”82 It is not clear that this can be achieved because distinctions between the molecular and biochemical events that regulate physiological and pathological hypertrophy are fuzzy. It is possible to shift pathological along the continuum toward physiological hypertrophy by stimulating physiological pathways or inhibiting pathological pathways. Thus, the notion that the bioenergetics of hypertrophy can be specifically modified in disease or that specific adjustments to signaling effectors could broadly promote cardiac adaptation is attractive and worth pursuing.

Conclusions

Physiological hypertrophy can be defined as a harmless, completely reversible increase in cardiac muscle mass that occurs in response to workload. It does not occur in humans as the response to hemodynamic stress, for which hypertrophy provides early functional compensation, but is characterized by maladaptive changes in the molecular, biochemical, and metabolic makeup of heart muscle that ultimately lead heart failure. Even apparently qualitatively normal exercise-induced hypertrophy is associated with adverse outcomes in a small number of highly trained athletes. Likewise, the physiological hypertrophy of pregnancy can sometimes, and for unknown reasons, progress to peripartum cardiomyopathy. Thus, most human reactive hypertrophies exhibit both pathological and physiological properties. Pathological hypertrophy can be adaptive if the primary cause is reversed before the development of intrinsic myocardial disease, and physiological hypertrophy can be maladaptive if it is quantitatively excessive and sustained. By identifying those genetic and metabolic aspects of reactive hypertrophy that are most deleterious, it should be possible, through targeted modifications, to shift hypertrophy of many etiologies toward the physiological end of the spectrum.

Acknowledgments

Sources of Funding

This work was supported by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute grants HL59888, HL77101, and HL80008.

Disclosures

None.

  • Received January 11, 2007.
  • Revision received January 31, 2007.
  • Accepted March 1, 2007.

References

  1. ↵
    Bishop SP. The myocardial cell: normal growth, cardiac hypertrophy and response to injury. Toxicol Pathol. 1990; 18: 438–453.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  2. ↵
    Dorn GW, Robbins J, Sugden PH. Phenotyping hypertrophy: eschew obfuscation. Circ Res. 2003; 92: 1171–1175.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    Seidman JG, Seidman C. The genetic basis for cardiomyopathy: from mutation identification to mechanistic paradigms. Cell. 2001; 104: 557–567.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    Grossman W, Jones D, McLaurin LP. Wall stress and patterns of hypertrophy in the human left ventricle. J Clin Invest. 1975; 56: 56–64.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    Molkentin JD, Dorn II GW. Cytoplasmic signaling pathways that regulate cardiac hypertrophy. Annu Rev Physiol. 2001; 63: 391–426.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    Katz AM. The cardiomyopathy of overload: a hypothesis. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1991; 18 (suppl 2): S68–S71.
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    Opie LH, Commerford PJ, Gersh BJ, Pfeffer MA. Controversies in ventricular remodelling. Lancet. 2006; 367: 356–367.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    Buttrick PM, Scheuer J. Physiologic, biochemical, and coronary adaptation to exercise conditioning. Cardiol Clin. 1987; 5: 259–270.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. ↵
    Dorn GW, Robbins J, Ball N, Walsh RA. Myosin heavy chain regulation and myocyte contractile depression after LV hypertrophy in aortic-banded mice. Am J Physiol. 1994; 267: H400–H405.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. ↵
    Penpargkul S, Scheuer J. The effect of physical training upon the mechanical and metabolic performance of the rat heart. J Clin Invest. 1970; 49: 1859–1868.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. ↵
    Scheuer J, Malhotra A, Hirsch C, Capasso J, Schaible TF. Physiologic cardiac hypertrophy corrects contractile protein abnormalities associated with pathologic hypertrophy in rats. J Clin Invest. 1982; 70: 1300–1305.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    Andersen JB, Rourke BC, Caiozzo VJ, Bennett AF, Hicks JW. Physiology: postprandial cardiac hypertrophy in pythons. Nature. 2005; 434: 37–38.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    Secor SM, Hicks JW, Bennett AF. Ventilatory and cardiovascular responses of a python (Python molurus) to exercise and digestion. J Exp Biol. 2000; 203: 2447–2454.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  14. ↵
    Baliga RR, Rosen SD, Camici PG, Kooner JS. Regional myocardial blood flow redistribution as a cause of postprandial angina pectoris. Circulation. 1998; 97: 1144–1149.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    Berlinerblau R, Shani J. Postprandial angina pectoris: clinical and angiographic correlations. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1994; 23: 627–629.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  16. ↵
    Schannwell CM, Zimmermann T, Schneppenheim M, Plehn G, Marx R, Strauer BE. Left ventricular hypertrophy and diastolic dysfunction in healthy pregnant women. Cardiology. 2002; 97: 73–78.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    Duvekot JJ, Peeters LL. Maternal cardiovascular hemodynamic adaptation to pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1994; 49: S1–S14.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    Hunter S, Robson SC. Adaptation of the maternal heart in pregnancy. Br Heart J. 1992; 68: 540–543.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  19. ↵
    Eghbali M, Deva R, Alioua A, Minosyan TY, Ruan H, Wang Y, Toro L, Stefani E. Molecular and functional signature of heart hypertrophy during pregnancy. Circ Res. 2005; 96: 1208–1216.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. ↵
    Ro A, Frishman WH. Peripartum cardiomyopathy. Cardiol Rev. 2006; 14: 35–42.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    Adams JW, Sakata Y, Davis MG, Sah VP, Wang Y, Liggett SB, Chien KR, Brown JH, Dorn GW. Enhanced Galphaq signaling: a common pathway mediates cardiac hypertrophy and apoptotic heart failure. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998; 95: 10140–10145.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    Hayakawa Y, Chandra M, Miao W, Shirani J, Brown JH, Dorn GW, Armstrong RC, Kitsis RN. Inhibition of cardiac myocyte apoptosis improves cardiac function and abolishes mortality in the peripartum cardiomyopathy of Galpha(q) transgenic mice. Circulation. 2003; 108: 3036–3041.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. ↵
    Pelliccia A, Maron BJ, Spataro A, Proschan MA, Spirito P. The upper limit of physiologic cardiac hypertrophy in highly trained elite athletes. N Engl J Med. 1991; 324: 295–301.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    Pelliccia A, Maron BJ, Culasso F, Spataro A, Caselli G. Athlete’s heart in women. Echocardiographic characterization of highly trained elite female athletes. JAMA. 1996; 276: 211–215.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    Pelliccia A, Culasso F, Di Paolo FM, Maron BJ. Physiologic left ventricular cavity dilatation in elite athletes. Ann Intern Med. 1999; 130: 23–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    Carabello BA. Concentric versus eccentric remodeling. J Card Fail. 2002; 8: S258–S263.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    Diwan A, Dorn GW. Decompensation of cardiac hypertrophy: cellular mechanisms and novel therapeutic targets. Physiology. 2007; 22: 56–64.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. ↵
    Maron BJ, Pelliccia A. The heart of trained athletes: cardiac remodeling and the risks of sports, including sudden death. Circulation. 2006; 114: 1633–1644.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  29. ↵
    Perrino C, Prasad SV, Mao L, Noma T, Yan Z, Kim HS, Smithies O, Rockman HA. Intermittent pressure overload triggers hypertrophy-independent cardiac dysfunction and vascular rarefaction. J Clin Invest. 2006; 116: 1547–1560.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    Pelliccia A, Maron BJ, De Luca R, Di Paolo FM, Spataro A, Culasso F. Remodeling of left ventricular hypertrophy in elite athletes after long-term deconditioning. Circulation. 2002; 105: 944–949.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. ↵
    Chien KR, Knowlton KU, Zhu H, Chien S. Regulation of cardiac gene expression during myocardial growth and hypertrophy: molecular studies of an adaptive physiologic response. FASEB J. 1991; 5: 3037–3046.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  32. ↵
    Aronow BJ, Toyokawa T, Canning A, Haghighi K, Delling U, Kranias E, Molkentin JD, Dorn GW. Divergent transcriptional responses to independent genetic causes of cardiac hypertrophy. Physiol Genomics. 2001; 6: 19–28.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. ↵
    Mochly-Rosen D, Wu G, Hahn H, Osinska H, Liron T, Lorenz JN, Yatani A, Robbins J, Dorn GW. Cardiotrophic effects of protein kinase C epsilon: analysis by in vivo modulation of PKCepsilon translocation. Circ Res. 2000; 86: 1173–1179.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. ↵
    D’Angelo DD, Sakata Y, Lorenz JN, Boivin GP, Walsh RA, Liggett SB, Dorn GW. Transgenic Galphaq overexpression induces cardiac contractile failure in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997; 94: 8121–8126.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. ↵
    Molkentin JD, Lu JR, Antos CL, Markham B, Richardson J, Robbins J, Grant SR, Olson EN. A calcineurin-dependent transcriptional pathway for cardiac hypertrophy. Cell. 1998; 93: 215–228.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. ↵
    Mirotsou M, Dzau VJ, Pratt RE, Weinberg EO. Physiological genomics of cardiac disease: quantitative relationships between gene expression and left ventricular hypertrophy. Physiol Genomics. 2006; 27: 86–94.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    Iemitsu M, Miyauchi T, Maeda S, Sakai S, Kobayashi T, Fujii N, Miyazaki H, Matsuda M, Yamaguchi I. Physiological and pathological cardiac hypertrophy induce different molecular phenotypes in the rat. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2001; 281: R2029–R2036.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. ↵
    Dorn GW, Force T. Protein kinase cascades in the regulation of cardiac hypertrophy. J Clin Invest. 2005; 115: 527–537.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. ↵
    Kong SW, Bodyak N, Yue P, Liu Z, Brown J, Izumo S, Kang PM. Genetic expression profiles during physiological and pathological cardiac hypertrophy and heart failure in rats. Physiol Genomics. 2005; 21: 34–42.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. ↵
    Strom CC, Aplin M, Ploug T, Christoffersen TE, Langfort J, Viese M, Galbo H, Haunso S, Sheikh SP. Expression profiling reveals differences in metabolic gene expression between exercise-induced cardiac effects and maladaptive cardiac hypertrophy. FEBS J. 2005; 272: 2684–2695.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    Weber KT. Fibrosis and hypertensive heart disease. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2000; 15: 264–272.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    Matkovich SJ, Diwan A, Klanke JL, Hammer DJ, Marreez Y, Odley AM, Brunskill EW, Koch WJ, Schwartz RJ, Dorn GW. Cardiac-specific ablation of G-protein receptor kinase 2 redefines its roles in heart development and beta-adrenergic signaling. Circ Res. 2006; 99: 996–1003.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. ↵
    Choi DJ, Koch WJ, Hunter JJ, Rockman HA. Mechanism of beta-adrenergic receptor desensitization in cardiac hypertrophy is increased beta-adrenergic receptor kinase. J Biol Chem. 1997; 272: 17223–17229.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. ↵
    Leong HS, Brownsey RW, Kulpa JE, Allard MF. Glycolysis and pyruvate oxidation in cardiac hypertrophy–why so unbalanced? Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol. 2003; 135: 499–513.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. ↵
    Tomanek RJ. Quantitative ultrastructural aspects of cardiac hypertrophy. Tex Rep Biol Med. 1979; 39: 111–122.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  46. ↵
    Allard MF, Schonekess BO, Henning SL, English DR, Lopaschuk GD. Contribution of oxidative metabolism and glycolysis to ATP production in hypertrophied hearts. Am J Physiol. 1994; 267: H742–H750.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  47. ↵
    Bishop SP, Altschuld RA. Increased glycolytic metabolism in cardiac hypertrophy and congestive failure. Am J Physiol. 1970; 218: 153–159.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  48. ↵
    Massie BM, Schaefer S, Garcia J, McKirnan MD, Schwartz GG, Wisneski JA, Weiner MW, White FC. Myocardial high-energy phosphate and substrate metabolism in swine with moderate left ventricular hypertrophy. Circulation. 1995; 91: 1814–1823.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  49. ↵
    Taegtmeyer H, Overturf ML. Effects of moderate hypertension on cardiac function and metabolism in the rabbit. Hypertension. 1988; 11: 416–426.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  50. ↵
    Goffart S, Kleist-Retzow JC, Wiesner RJ. Regulation of mitochondrial proliferation in the heart: power-plant failure contributes to cardiac failure in hypertrophy. Cardiovasc Res. 2004; 64: 198–207.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  51. ↵
    Weber KT, Clark WA, Janicki JS, Shroff SG. Physiologic versus pathologic hypertrophy and the pressure-overloaded myocardium. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1987; 10 (suppl 6): S37–S50.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  52. ↵
    Stanton LW, Garrard LJ, Damm D, Garrick BL, Lam A, Kapoun AM, Zheng Q, Protter AA, Schreiner GF, White RT. Altered patterns of gene expression in response to myocardial infarction. Circ Res. 2000; 86: 939–945.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  53. ↵
    Tan FL, Moravec CS, Li J, Apperson-Hansen C, McCarthy PM, Young JB, Bond M. The gene expression fingerprint of human heart failure. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002; 99: 11387–11392.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  54. ↵
    Nicholls DG, Locke RM. Thermogenic mechanisms in brown fat. Physiol Rev. 1984; 64: 1–64.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  55. ↵
    Gaussin V, Tomlinson JE, Depre C, Engelhardt S, Antos CL, Takagi G, Hein L, Topper JN, Liggett SB, Olson EN, Lohse MJ, Vatner SF, Vatner DE. Common genomic response in different mouse models of beta-adrenergic-induced cardiomyopathy. Circulation. 2003; 108: 2926–2933.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  56. ↵
    Murakami K, Mizushige K, Noma T, Tsuji T, Kimura S, Kohno M. Perindopril effect on uncoupling protein and energy metabolism in failing rat hearts. Hypertension. 2002; 40: 251–255.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  57. ↵
    Aitman TJ, Glazier AM, Wallace CA, Cooper LD, Norsworthy PJ, Wahid FN, Al Majali KM, Trembling PM, Mann CJ, Shoulders CC, Graf D, St Lezin E, Kurtz TW, Kren V, Pravenec M, Ibrahimi A, Abumrad NA, Stanton LW, Scott J. Identification of Cd36 (Fat) as an insulin–resistance gene causing defective fatty acid and glucose metabolism in hypertensive rats. Nat Genet. 1999; 21: 76–83.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  58. ↵
    Irie H, Krukenkamp IB, Brinkmann JF, Gaudette GR, Saltman AE, Jou W, Glatz JF, Abumrad NA, Ibrahimi A. Myocardial recovery from ischemia is impaired in CD36-null mice and restored by myocyte CD36 expression or medium-chain fatty acids. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003; 100: 6819–6824.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  59. ↵
    Huss JM, Kelly DP. Mitochondrial energy metabolism in heart failure: a question of balance. J Clin Invest. 2005; 115: 547–555.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  60. ↵
    Frey N, Olson EN. Cardiac hypertrophy: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Annu Rev Physiol. 2003; 65: 45–79.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  61. ↵
    Dorn GW, Brown JH. Gq signaling in cardiac adaptation and maladaptation. Trends Cardiovasc Med. 1999; 9: 26–34.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  62. ↵
    Wettschureck N, Rutten H, Zywietz A, Gehring D, Wilkie TM, Chen J, Chien KR, Offermanns S. Absence of pressure overload induced myocardial hypertrophy after conditional inactivation of Galphaq/Galpha11 in cardiomyocytes. Nat Med. 2001; 7: 1236–1240.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  63. ↵
    Duerr RL, Huang S, Miraliakbar HR, Clark R, Chien KR, Ross J Jr. Insulin-like growth factor-1 enhances ventricular hypertrophy and function during the onset of experimental cardiac failure. J Clin Invest. 1995; 95: 619–627.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  64. ↵
    Lupu F, Terwilliger JD, Lee K, Segre GV, Efstratiadis A. Roles of growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor 1 in mouse postnatal growth. Dev Biol. 2001; 229: 141–162.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  65. ↵
    O’Neill BT, Abel ED. Akt1 in the cardiovascular system: friend or foe? J Clin Invest. 2005; 115: 2059–2064.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  66. ↵
    McMullen JR, Shioi T, Zhang L, Tarnavski O, Sherwood MC, Kang PM, Izumo S. Phosphoinositide 3-kinase(p110alpha) plays a critical role for the induction of physiological, but not pathological, cardiac hypertrophy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003; 100: 12355–12360.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  67. ↵
    Condorelli G, Drusco A, Stassi G, Bellacosa A, Roncarati R, Iaccarino G, Russo MA, Gu Y, Dalton N, Chung C, Latronico MV, Napoli C, Sadoshima J, Croce CM, Ross J Jr. Akt induces enhanced myocardial contractility and cell size in vivo in transgenic mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002; 99: 12333–12338.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  68. ↵
    Matsui T, Li L, Wu JC, Cook SA, Nagoshi T, Picard MH, Liao R, Rosenzweig A. Phenotypic spectrum caused by transgenic overexpression of activated Akt in the heart. J Biol Chem. 2002; 277: 22896–22901.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  69. ↵
    Shioi T, McMullen JR, Kang PM, Douglas PS, Obata T, Franke TF, Cantley LC, Izumo S. Akt/protein kinase B promotes organ growth in transgenic mice. Mol Cell Biol. 2002; 22: 2799–2809.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  70. ↵
    Cho H, Thorvaldsen JL, Chu Q, Feng F, Birnbaum MJ. Akt1/PKBalpha is required for normal growth but dispensable for maintenance of glucose homeostasis in mice. J Biol Chem. 2001; 276: 38349–38352.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  71. ↵
    Howes AL, Arthur JF, Zhang T, Miyamoto S, Adams JW, Dorn II GW, Woodcock EA, Brown JH. Akt-mediated cardiomyocyte survival pathways are compromised by G alpha q-induced phosphoinositide 4,5-bisphosphate depletion. J Biol Chem. 2003; 278: 40343–40351.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  72. ↵
    Antos CL, McKinsey TA, Frey N, Kutschke W, McAnally J, Shelton JM, Richardson JA, Hill JA, Olson EN. Activated glycogen synthase-3 beta suppresses cardiac hypertrophy in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002; 99: 907–912.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  73. ↵
    Michael A, Haq S, Chen X, Hsich E, Cui L, Walters B, Shao Z, Bhattacharya K, Kilter H, Huggins G, Andreucci M, Periasamy M, Solomon RN, Liao R, Patten R, Molkentin JD, Force T. Glycogen synthase kinase-3beta regulates growth, calcium homeostasis, and diastolic function in the heart. J Biol Chem. 2004; 279: 21383–21393.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  74. ↵
    Haq S, Choukroun G, Kang ZB, Ranu H, Matsui T, Rosenzweig A, Molkentin JD, Alessandrini A, Woodgett J, Hajjar R, Michael A, Force T. Glycogen synthase kinase-3beta is a negative regulator of cardiomyocyte hypertrophy. J Cell Biol. 2000; 151: 117–130.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  75. ↵
    Proud CG. Ras, PI3-kinase and mTOR signaling in cardiac hypertrophy. Cardiovasc Res. 2004; 63: 403–413.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  76. ↵
    Holloszy JO, Coyle EF. Adaptations of skeletal muscle to endurance exercise and their metabolic consequences. J Appl Physiol. 1984; 56: 831–838.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  77. ↵
    Lambert MI, Noakes TD. Spontaneous running increases VO2max and running performance in rats. J Appl Physiol. 1990; 68: 400–403.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  78. ↵
    Sexton WL. Vascular adaptations in rat hindlimb skeletal muscle after voluntary running–wheel exercise. J Appl Physiol. 1995; 79: 287–296.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  79. ↵
    Konhilas JP, Watson PA, Maass A, Boucek DM, Horn T, Stauffer BL, Luckey SW, Rosenberg P, Leinwand LA. Exercise can prevent and reverse the severity of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Circ Res. 2006; 98: 540–548.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  80. ↵
    Sano M, Schneider MD. Still stressed out but doing fine: normalization of wall stress is superfluous to maintaining cardiac function in chronic pressure overload. Circulation. 2002; 105: 8–10.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  81. ↵
    Hudlicka O, Brown M, Egginton S. Angiogenesis in skeletal and cardiac muscle. Physiol Rev. 1992; 72: 369–417.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  82. ↵
    Vatner SF. Reduced subendocardial myocardial perfusion as one mechanism for congestive heart failure. Am J Cardiol. 1988; 62: 94E–98E.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
View Abstract
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

This Issue

Hypertension
May 2007, Volume 49, Issue 5
  • Table of Contents
Previous ArticleNext Article

Jump to

  • Article
    • Fuzzy-o-Logical Hypertrophy?
    • The Athlete’s Heart and Cardiac Remodeling
    • Molecular Studies of Exercise-Induced Cardiac Hypertrophy
    • Signaling Pathways in Physiological Hypertrophy
    • Stimulus Specificity of Cardiac Hypertrophy
    • Therapeutic Applications for Physiological Hypertrophy
    • Conclusions
    • Acknowledgments
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters

Article Tools

  • Print
  • Citation Tools
    The Fuzzy Logic of Physiological Cardiac Hypertrophy
    Gerald W. Dorn
    Hypertension. 2007;49:962-970, originally published April 18, 2007
    https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.106.079426

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
  •  Download Powerpoint
  • Article Alerts
    Log in to Email Alerts with your email address.
  • Save to my folders

Share this Article

  • Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Hypertension.

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    The Fuzzy Logic of Physiological Cardiac Hypertrophy
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from Hypertension
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the Hypertension web site.
  • Share on Social Media
    The Fuzzy Logic of Physiological Cardiac Hypertrophy
    Gerald W. Dorn
    Hypertension. 2007;49:962-970, originally published April 18, 2007
    https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.106.079426
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo

Related Articles

Cited By...

Subjects

  • Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research
    • Myocardial Biology
    • Metabolism
  • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Congenital Heart Disease

Hypertension

  • About Hypertension
  • Instructions for Authors
  • AHA CME
  • Guidelines and Statements
  • Permissions
  • Journal Policies
  • Email Alerts
  • Open Access Information
  • AHA Journals RSS
  • AHA Newsroom

Editorial Office Address:
7272 Greenville Ave.
Dallas, TX 75231
email: hypertension@heart.org

Information for:
  • Advertisers
  • Subscribers
  • Subscriber Help
  • Institutions / Librarians
  • Institutional Subscriptions FAQ
  • International Users
American Heart Association Learn and Live
National Center
7272 Greenville Ave.
Dallas, TX 75231

Customer Service

  • 1-800-AHA-USA-1
  • 1-800-242-8721
  • Local Info
  • Contact Us

About Us

Our mission is to build healthier lives, free of cardiovascular diseases and stroke. That single purpose drives all we do. The need for our work is beyond question. Find Out More about the American Heart Association

  • Careers
  • SHOP
  • Latest Heart and Stroke News
  • AHA/ASA Media Newsroom

Our Sites

  • American Heart Association
  • American Stroke Association
  • For Professionals
  • More Sites

Take Action

  • Advocate
  • Donate
  • Planned Giving
  • Volunteer

Online Communities

  • AFib Support
  • Garden Community
  • Patient Support Network
  • Professional Online Network

Follow Us:

  • Follow Circulation on Twitter
  • Visit Circulation on Facebook
  • Follow Circulation on Google Plus
  • Follow Circulation on Instagram
  • Follow Circulation on Pinterest
  • Follow Circulation on YouTube
  • Rss Feeds
  • Privacy Policy
  • Copyright
  • Ethics Policy
  • Conflict of Interest Policy
  • Linking Policy
  • Diversity
  • Careers

©2018 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. The American Heart Association is a qualified 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization.
*Red Dress™ DHHS, Go Red™ AHA; National Wear Red Day ® is a registered trademark.

  • PUTTING PATIENTS FIRST National Health Council Standards of Excellence Certification Program
  • BBB Accredited Charity
  • Comodo Secured