4.6 Article

ORAI and store-operated calcium influx in human airway smooth muscle cells

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1165/rcmb.2007-0395OC

关键词

airway smooth muscle; ORAI; store-operated calcium entry; ion channels

资金

  1. Medical Research Council [G0701390] Funding Source: researchfish
  2. MRC [G0701390] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Medical Research Council [G0701390] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The initial bronchoconstrictor response of the asthmatic airway depends on airway smooth muscle (ASM) contraction. Intracellular calcium is a key signaling molecule, mediating a number of responses, including proliferation, gene expression, and contraction of ASM. Call influx through receptor-operated calcium (ROC) or store-operated calcium (SOC) channels is believed to mediate longer term signals. The mechanisms of SOC activation in ASM remain to be elucidated. Recent literature has identified the STIM and ORAI proteins as key signaling players in the activation of the SOC subtype; calcium release-activated channel current (I-CRAC) in a number of inflammatory cell types. However, the role for these proteins in activation of SOC in smooth muscle is unclear. We have previously demonstrated a role for STIM1 in SOC channel activation in human ASM. The aim of this study was to investigate the expression and define the potential roles of the ORAI proteins in SOC-associated Call influx in human ASM cells. Here we show that knockdown of ORAI1 by siRNA resulted in reduced thapsigargin- or cyclopiazonic acid (CPA)-induced Ca2+ influx, without affecting Ca2+ release from stores or basal levels. CPA-induced inward currents were also reduced in the ORAI1 knockdown cells. We propose that ORAI1 together with STIM1 are important contributors to SOC entry in ASM cells. These data extend the major tissue types in which these proteins appear to be major determinants of SOC influx, and suggest that modulation of these pathways may prove useful in the treatment of bronchoconstriction.

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