4.6 Article

Cytokeratin 8/18 as a new marker of mouse liver preneoplastic lesions

期刊

TOXICOLOGY AND APPLIED PHARMACOLOGY
卷 242, 期 1, 页码 47-55

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.taap.2009.09.013

关键词

Marker; Hepatocarcinogenesis; Proteomics; CK8/18-positive foci

资金

  1. Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of Japan
  2. Japan Science and Technology Corporation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To search for a reliable biomarker of preneoplastic lesions arising early in mouse hepatocarcinogenesis the proteomes of microdissected basophilic foci, hepatocellular adenomas (HCAs), carcinomas (HCCs) and normal-appearing liver of B6C3F1 mice initiated with diethylnitrosamine (DEN) were analysed on anionic (Q10) surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (SELDI-TOF-MS) ProteinChip arrays. Significant overexpression of cytokeratin 8 (CK8; m/z 54, 565), cytokeratin 18 (CK18; m/z 47,538) proteins was found in basophilic foci as well as in HCAs and HCCs. Furthermore, immunohistochemistry demonstrated profound overexpression of CK8 and CK18 proteins (CK8/18) in all basophilic foci, mixed cell type foci, HCAs and HCCs in B6CF1 and C57BL/6J mice initiated with DEN. A strong correlation between CK8/18-positive foci development and multiplicity of liver tumors in 1360171 and C57Bl/6J mice was further observed. Moreover, formation of CK8 and CK18 complexes due to CK8 phosphorylation at Ser73 and Ser431 was found to be strongly associated with neoplastic transformation of mice liver basophilic foci. Elevation of CK8/18 was strongly correlated with induction of cell proliferation in basophilic foci and tumors. In conclusion, our data imply that CK8/18 is a novel reliable marker of preneoplastic lesions arising during mouse hepatocarcinogenesis which might be used for prediction of tumor development and evaluation of environmental agents as well as drugs and food additives using mouse liver tests. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.6
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