4.4 Article

Gender-specific modulation of tumorigenesis by folic acid supply in the Apc+/Min mouse during early neonatal life

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 99, 期 3, 页码 550-558

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0007114507819131

关键词

folate; intestinal tumours; gender; in utero

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Epidemiological studies suggest an inverse association between folic acid intake and colorectal cancer risk. Conversely, conventional treatment of existing tumours includes the use of folate antagonists. This suggests that the level of exposure to folate and its timing in relation to stage of tumorigenesis may be critical in determining outcomes. We hypothesised that folic acid depletion in utero and during early neonatal life may affect tumorigenesis in offspring. To investigate this hypothesis, female C57B16/J mice were randomised to a folic acid adequate (2mg folic acid/kg diet) or folic acid depleted diet (0.4 mg folic acid/kg) from mating with Apc(+/Min) sires and throughout pregnancy and lactation. At weaning the Apc(+/Min) offspring were randomised to a folic acid adequate (2 mg folic acid/kg diet) or depleted (0-26 mg folic acid/kg diet) diet, creating four in utero/post-weaning dietary regimens. At 10 weeks post-weaning, mice were killed and the intestinal turnout number and size were recorded. Folic acid depletion during pregnancy and post-weaning reduced erythrocyte folate concentrations in offspring significantly. Folic acid depletion during pregnancy and lactation did not affect tumour multiplicity or size. However, female mice fed normal folic acid diets post-weaning had more, and larger, tumours when compared with depleted females and both depleted and adequate folic acid fed males. These data suggest that folate depletion post-weaning was protective against neoplasia in female Apc(+/Min) mice and highlights the need for further investigation of the optimal timing and dose of folic acid supplementation with regard to colorectal cancer risk.

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