4.6 Article

Two mechanisms of genistein inhibition of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator Cl- channels expressed in murine cell line

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LONDON
Volume 524, Issue 2, Pages 317-330

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.t01-1-00317.x

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

1. The isoflavone genistein may either stimulate or inhibit cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CPTR) Cl- channels. To investigate how genistein inhibits CFTR, we studied CFTR, Cl- channels in excised inside-out membrane patches from cells expressing wild-type human CFTR. 2. Addition of genistein (100 mu M) to the intracellular solution caused a small decrease in single-channel current amplitude (i), but a large reduction in open probability (P-o). 3. Single-channel analysis of channel block suggested that genistein (100 mu m) may inhibit CFTR by two mechanisms: first, it may slow the rate of channel opening and second, it may block open channels. 4. Acidification of the intracellular solution relieved channel block, suggesting that the anionic form of genistein may inhibit CFTR. 5. Genistein inhibition of CFTR Cl- currents was weakly voltage dependent and unaffected by changes in the extracellular Cl- concentration. 6. Channel block was relieved by pyrophosphate (5 mM) and ATP (5 mM), two agents that inter act with the nucleotide-binding domains (NBDs) of CFTR to greatly stimulate channel activity. 7. ATP (5 mM) prevented the genistein-induced decrease in P-o, but was without effect on the genistein-induced decrease in i. 8. The genistein-induced decrease in i was voltage dependent, whereas the genistein-induced decrease in P-o was voltage independent. 9. The data suggest that genistein may inhibit CFTR by two mechanisms. First, it may interact with NBD1 to potently inhibit channel opening. Second, it may bind within the CFTR pore to weakly block Cl- permeation.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available