4.4 Article

Matrix Metalloproteinase 2-Integrin αvβ3 Binding Is Required for Mesenchymal Cell Invasive Activity but Not Epithelial Locomotion: A Computational Time-Lapse Study

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY OF THE CELL
卷 19, 期 12, 页码 5529-5540

出版社

AMER SOC CELL BIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1091/mbc.E07-05-0480

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 HL-68855, R01 HL-57900, HL-78912]
  2. American Heart Association Heartland Affiliate
  3. Hungarian Research [OTKA T047055]
  4. American Heart Association Scientist Development [0535245N R01 HL087136]
  5. G. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Charitable Foundation
  6. National Center for Research Resources [RR-05-002, CO6 RR015455]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cellular invasive behavior through three-dimensional collagen gels was analyzed using computational time-lapse imaging. A subpopulation of endocardial cells, derived from explanted quail cardiac cushions, undergoes an epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and invades the substance of the collagen gels when placed in culture. In contrast, other endocardial cells remain epithelial and move over the gel surface. Here, we show that integrin alpha v beta 3 and matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)2 are present and active in cushion mesenchymal tissue. More importantly, functional assays show that mesenchymal invasive behavior is dependent on MMP2 activity and integrin alpha v beta 3 binding. Inhibitors of MMP enzymatic activity and molecules that prevent integrin alpha v beta 3 binding to MMP2, via its hemopexin domain, result in significantly reduced cellular protrusive activity and invasive behavior. Computational analyses show diminished intensity and persistence time of motility in treated invasive mesenchymal cells, but no reduction in motility of the epithelial-like cells moving over the gel surface. Thus, quantitative time-lapse data show that mesenchymal cell invasive behavior, but not epithelial cell locomotion over the gel surface, is partially regulated by the MMP2-integrin interactions.

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

4.4
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