4.6 Article

Epigenetic Modulation of the Retinoid X Receptor α by Green Tea in the Azoxymethane-ApcMin/+ Mouse Model of Intestinal Cancer

期刊

MOLECULAR CARCINOGENESIS
卷 48, 期 10, 页码 920-933

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mc.20542

关键词

green tea; colon cancer; azoxymethane (AOM); Apc(Min/+) mouse model; beta-catenin; cyclin D1; RXR alpha; methylation

资金

  1. NIH [CA 96994]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated the possible mechanisms of inhibition of colorectal carcinogenesis by green tea (GT) in azoxymethane-treated (AOM) Apc(Min/+) mice. Mice received water or a 0.6% (w/v) solution of GT as the only source of beverage. GT treatment commenced at the 8th week of age and lasted for 8 wk. The treatment caused a statistically significant reduction in the number of newly formed tumors (28%, P < 0.05). Immunohistochemical analysis showed that GT decreased the levels of beta-catenin and its downstream target cyclin D1. To probe a mechanism, we further investigated the expression of retinoic X receptor alpha (RXR alpha) in AOM/Apc(Min/+) tumors. Our results show that RXR alpha is selectively downregulated in AOM/Apc(Min/+) mouse intestinal tumors. In contrast, other retinoic receptors including retinoic acid receptor alpha (RAR alpha), RAR beta, RXR beta, and RXR gamma were all expressed in Apc(Min/+) adenomas. Furthermore, our results show that RXR alpha downregulation is an early event in colorectal carcinogenesis and is independent of beta-catenin expression. GT significantly increased the protein levels of RXR alpha. In addition, RT-PCR analysis showed that GT induced a similar increase in the levels of RXR alpha mRNA. Genomic bisulfite treatment of colonic DNA followed by pyrosequencing of 24 CpG sites in the promoter region of RXRa gene showed a significant decrease in CpG methylation with GT treatment. The results suggest that a low concentration of GT is sufficient to desilence RXR alpha and inhibit intestinal tumorigenesis in the Apc(Min/+) mouse. (C) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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