4.7 Article

Selective activation of somatostatin receptor subtypes differentially modulates secretion and viability in human medullary thyroid carcinoma primary cultures: Potential clinical perspectives

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
卷 91, 期 6, 页码 2218-2224

出版社

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/jc.2006-0334

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Context: Medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC) is a rare tumor originating from thyroid parafollicular C cells. We previously demonstrated that somatostatin (SRIH) reduces cell growth in the human MTC cell line, TT, which expresses all SRIH receptor (SSTR) subtypes and responds differently to selective SSTR agonists. Objective: To clarify the possible effects of SRIH analogs on hormone secretion and proliferation in MTC primary cultures, we evaluated SSTR expression and assessed the in vitro effects on calcitonin (CT) and chromogranin A secretion as well as cell viability of SRIH analogs interacting with SSTR1, SSTR2, and SSTR5. Design: Thirty-five patients affected by MTC were recruited from 2003 to 2005. After total thyroidectomy, the samples were examined for CT, chromogranin A, and SSTR expression by RT-PCR. Primary cultures were developed and tested with SRIH analogs interacting with SSTR1, SSTR2, and SSTR5. Results: We selected 18 MTC tumor samples, expressing SSTR1, SSTR2, and SSTR5. Two different groups were identified according to CT secretion inhibition by the clinically available SRIH analog, lanreotide. In the responder group, CT secretion was reduced by compounds interacting with SSTR1, SSTR2, and SSTR5, whereas cell viability was not affected. On the other hand, in the nonresponder group, CT secretion was reduced by the SSTR1 selective agonist, whereas cell viability was inhibited by SSTR2 selective agonists. Conclusions: Our data suggest that SRIH analogs might be useful in medical therapy of MTC because they could have antiproliferative effects despite the lack of antisecretory activity and vice versa.

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

4.7
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