4.6 Article

Up-regulation of circadian clock gene Period 2 in the prostate mesenchymal cells during flutamide-induced apoptosis

期刊

MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 335, 期 1-2, 页码 37-45

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11010-009-0238-7

关键词

Period 2; Per2-dLuc oscillations; Prostate mesenchymal cells; Flutamide; Androgen; Apoptosis

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Sciences (JSPS) [17658131]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [17658131] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Androgen regulates the proper development and physiological function of the prostate. Here, we investigated the modulation of androgen and androgen receptor (AR) antagonist on circadian oscillations of a clock core gene Period 2 (Per2) in rat prostate mesenchymal cells (PMCs). Circadian oscillations were analyzed with the real-time monitoring system of gene expression using transgenic rats introduced with mouse Per2 promoter fused to a destabilized luciferase (Per2-dLuc) reporter gene. Analyses of circadian oscillations, immunofluorescence, and androgen response element (ARE)-luciferase reporter assay revealed that circadian clocks are operative and the AR protein is functional in PMCs in vitro. Androgen such as testosterone (T) and dihydrotestosterone (DHT) did not cause any changes in circadian Per2-dLuc oscillations of confluent cells. Conversely, flutamide (FL) up-regulated the amplitude of circadian Per2-dLuc oscillations in a dose-dependent manner, whereas T antagonized the action of FL. The PER2 protein was markedly accumulated by FL treatment and localized in both the nucleus and cytoplasm during the first peak period of circadian Per2-dLuc oscillations. Simultaneously, FL treatment increased apoptotic cell death. Collectively, the present study demonstrates that a clock gene Per2 is up-regulated in PMCs during FL-induced apoptotic cell death. Thus, circadian oscillations of Per2 gene expression may be closely linked to the cellular states of PMCs such as apoptotic cell death.

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