4.5 Article

Cyclooxygenase in normal human tissues - is COX-1 really a constitutive isoform, and COX-2 an inducible isoform?

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELLULAR AND MOLECULAR MEDICINE
卷 13, 期 9B, 页码 3753-3763

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1582-4934.2008.00430.x

关键词

cyclooxygenase; isoforms; constitutive; inducible; normal tissue; distribution

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cyclooxygenase (COX) is a key enzyme in prostanoid synthesis. It exists in two isoforms, COX-1 and COX-2. COX-1 is referred to as a 'constitutive isoform', and is considered to be expressed in most tissues under basal conditions. In contrast, COX-2 is referred to as an 'inducible isoform', which is believed to be undetectable in most normal tissues, but can be up-regulated during various conditions, many of them pathological. Even though the role of COX in homeostasis and disease in now well appreciated, controversial information is available concerning the distribution of COX isoforms in normal human tissues. There is mounting evidence that it is much more complex than generally believed. Our aim was therefore to analyse the expression and distribution of COX isoforms in normal human tissues, using immunohistochemistry, Western blotting and real-time RT-PCR. Autopsy samples from 20 healthy trauma victims and samples from 48 biopsy surgical specimens were included. COX-1 was found in blood vessels, interstitial cells, smooth muscle cells, platelets and mesothelial cells. In contrast, COX-2 was found predominantly in the parenchymal cells of many tissues, with few exceptions, for example the heart. Our results confirm the hypothesis that the distribution of COX isoforms in healthy tissues is much more complex than generally believed. This and previous studies indicate that both isoforms, not only COX-1, are present in many normal human tissues, and that both isoforms, not only COX-2, are up-regulated in various pathological conditions. We may have to revise the concept of 'constitutive' and 'inducible' COX isoforms.

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

4.5
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