4.7 Article

Sphingosine-1-phosphate induces VEGF-C expression through a MMP-2/FGF-1/FGFR1-dependent pathway in endothelial cells in vitro

Journal

ACTA PHARMACOLOGICA SINICA
Volume 34, Issue 3, Pages 360-366

Publisher

ACTA PHARMACOLOGICA SINICA
DOI: 10.1038/aps.2012.186

Keywords

sphingosine-1-phosphate; VEGF-C; matrix metalloproteinase-2; fibroblast growth factor-1; fibroblast growth factor receptor-1; GM6001; SU5402; transactivation; human umbilical vein endothelial cells; RNA interference

Funding

  1. National Science Council [NSC100-2325-B-002-045-]
  2. National Health Research Institutes of Taiwan, China [NHRI-EX101-10130BI]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: To investigate whether sphingosine-1-phosphate (SIP), a potent angiogenic factor, induced vascular endothelial growth factor-C (VEGF-C) expression in endothelial cells in vitro and to examine its underlying mechanisms. Methods: Human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) were examined. VEGF-C mRNA expression in the cells was assessed using real-time PCR. VEGF-C protein and FGFR-I phosphorylation in the cells were measured with ELISA. RNA interference was used to downregulate the expression of matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2), fibroblast growth factor-1 (FGF-1) and FGF receptor-1 (FGFR-1). Results: Incubation of HUVECs with SIP (1, 5, and 10 mu mol/L) significantly increased VEGF-C expression. The effect was blocked by pretreatment with the MMP inhibitor GM6001 or the FGFR inhibitor SU5402, but not the EGFR inhibitor AGI478. The effect was also blocked in HUVECs that were transfected with FGFR-1 or MMP-2 siRNA. Furthermore, incubation of HUVECs with SIP (5 mu mol/L) significantly increased FGFR-I phosphorylation, which was blocked by GM6001. Moreover, knockdown of FGF-1, not FGF-2, in HUVECs with siRNAs, blocked SIP-induced VEGF-C expression. Conclusion: SIP induces VEGF-C expression through a MMP-2/ FGF-1/FGFR-1-dependent pathway in HUVECs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available