4.6 Article

Insulin- like Growth Factor- II ( IGF- II) and IGF- II Analogs with Enhanced Insulin Receptor- a Binding Affinity Promote Neural Stem Cell Expansion*

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 289, 期 8, 页码 4626-4633

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M113.537597

关键词

Cell Proliferation; Insulin; Neurodevelopment; Receptor Tyrosine Kinase; Stem Cells; Central Nervous System; Insulin Receptor; Self-renewal

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R21 NS076874, F31 NS065607]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: IGF-II promotes neural stem cell (NSC) proliferation and self-renewal. Results: IGF-II analogs are useful for elucidating the receptors responsible for NSC expansion. Conclusion: F19A expands NSCs via IR-A. Significance: IGF-II promotes stemness of NSCs via the IR-A and not through activation of either the IGF-1R or the IGF-2R. The objective of this study was to employ genetically engineered IGF-II analogs to establish which receptor(s) mediate the stemness promoting actions of IGF-II on mouse subventricular zone neural precursors. Neural precursors from the subventricular zone were propagated in vitro in culture medium supplemented with IGF-II analogs. Cell growth and identity were analyzed using sphere generation and further analyzed by flow cytometry. F19A, an analog of IGF-II that does not bind the IGF-2R, stimulated an increase in the proportion of neural stem cells (NSCs) while decreasing the proportion of the later stage progenitors at a lower concentration than IGF-II. V43M, which binds to the IGF-2R with high affinity but which has low binding affinity to the IGF-1R and to the A isoform of the insulin receptor (IR-A) failed to promote NSC growth. The positive effects of F19A on NSC growth were unaltered by the addition of a functional blocking antibody to the IGF-1R. Altogether, these data lead to the conclusion that IGF-II promotes stemness of NSCs via the IR-A and not through activation of either the IGF-1R or the IGF-2R.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据