4.2 Article

Cholecystokinin (CCK) and CCK receptor expression by human gliomas: Evidence for an autocrine/paracrine stimulatory loop

期刊

NEUROPEPTIDES
卷 42, 期 3, 页码 255-265

出版社

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.npep.2008.02.005

关键词

amocrine; CCK antagonists; CCK receptors; cholecystokinin; gliomas; paracrine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cholecystokinin (CCK) is a gut-brain peptide has been described to be able to induce mitosis according to recent studies. Additionally, conflicting data has been published on whether tumours of the central and peripheral nervous system in general, and gliomas in particular, express CCK receptors. In the present in vitro study we employed reverse transcription followed by the polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to investigate whether mRNA for CCK-A and CCK-B receptors as well as CCK peptide itself is present in primary human gliomas and the U-87 MG GBM cell line. The data show that 14/14 (100%) of the primary gliomas exhibited mRNA expression for the CCK peptide gene and the B receptor including the U-87 MG cells, whereas, only 2/14 (14%) showed presence of the CCK-A receptor. The presence of CCK receptors together with CCK peptide expression itself suggests presence of an autocrine loop controlling glioma cell growth. In support of this conclusion, a neutralizing antibody against the CCK peptide exhibited a dose dependent inhibition of cell growth whereas, antagonists to CCK caused a dose depend inhibition of exogenous stimulated glioma cell growth in vitro, via the CCK-B receptor which is PKC activated. Assessment of apoptosis and proteasome activity were undertaken and we report that treatment with CCK antagonists decreased proteasome and increased caspase-3 activity. These data indicate that CCK peptide and CCK-B are abundant in human gliomas and they act to stimulate cell growth in an autocrine manner, primarily via the high affinity CCK-B receptor, which was blocked by antagonists to CCK, perhaps via apoptosis. (c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.2
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