4.6 Article

Sex Hormone-Dependent Regulation of Cilia Beat Frequency in Airway Epithelium

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1165/rcmb.2011-0107OC

关键词

cilia; progesterone receptor; cilia beat frequency; sex disparity; lung disease

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [KL2 RR024994/UL1RR024992, R01 HL56244]
  2. American Thoracic Society
  3. Children's Discovery Institute at St. Louis Children's Hospital
  4. Washington University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previous studies have demonstrated a female disadvantage in airway diseases, such as asthma and bronchiectasis. The basis for this sex disparity is unknown. We hypothesized that the female sex hormone, progesterone (P4), inhibits functions of the normal airway mucociliary apparatus. P4 receptor (PR) expression was evaluated in human lung and cultured primary human airway epithelial cells isolated from male and female lung transplant donors. PR expression was restricted to the proximal region of the cilia of airway epithelia, and was similar in men and women. Expression of isoform PR-B was more abundant than PR-A in cells from both sexes. Airway epithelial cell exposure to P4 decreased cilia beat frequency (CBF) by 42.3% (+/- 7.2). Inhibition of CBF was prevented by coadministration of P4 with the active form of estrogen, 17 beta-estradiol, or the PR antagonist, mifepristone. P4 inhibition was time and dose dependent, with a significant decrease by 8 hours and maximal effect at 24 hours, accompanied by translocation of PR from the cilia to the nucleus. Inhibition of cilia beat was also prevented by treatment of cells with actinomycin D, suggesting that CBF inhibition is a transcriptionally mediated event. Together, these findings indicate that sex hormones influence the function of a key component of the mucociliary apparatus. These mechanisms may contribute to the sex disparity present in airway diseases and provide therapeutic targets for the treatment of these debilitating airway diseases.

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