4.8 Article

Cyclophosphamide Triggers Follicle Activation and Burnout; AS101 Prevents Follicle Loss and Preserves Fertility

期刊

SCIENCE TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE
卷 5, 期 185, 页码 -

出版社

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3005402

关键词

-

资金

  1. Kahn Foundation
  2. Israel Cancer Association
  3. Israel Ministry of Health
  4. Dave and Florence Muskovitz Chair in Cancer Research
  5. Jaime Lusinchi Research Institute in Applied Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Premature ovarian failure and infertility are major side effects of chemotherapy treatments in young cancer patients. A more thorough understanding of the mechanism behind chemotherapy-induced follicle loss is necessary to develop new methods to preserve fertility in these patients. We show that the alkylating agent cyclophosphamide (Cy) activates the growth of the quiescent primordial follicle population in mice, resulting in loss of ovarian reserve. Despite the initial massive apoptosis observed in growing, though not in resting, follicles of Cy-treated mice, differential follicle counts demonstrated both a decrease in primordial follicles and an increase in early growing follicles. Immunohistochemistry showed that granulosa cells were undergoing proliferation. Analysis of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase signaling pathway demonstrated that Cy increased phosphorylation of proteins that stimulate follicle activation in the oocytes and granulosa cells. Coadministration of an immunomodulator, AS101, reduced follicle activation, thereby increasing follicle reserve and rescuing fertility after Cy, and also increased the efficacy of Cy against breast cancer cell lines. These findings suggest that the mechanism in Cy-induced loss of ovarian reserve is accelerated primordial follicle activation, which results in a burnout effect and follicle depletion. By preventing this activation, AS101 shows potential as an ovarian-protective agent, which may be able to preserve fertility in female cancer patients.

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

4.8
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