4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Vitamin D deficiency enhances the growth of MC-26 colon cancer xenografts in Balb/c mice

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 135, 期 10, 页码 2350-2354

出版社

AMER SOC NUTRITIONAL SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1093/jn/135.10.2350

关键词

vitamin D; colon cancer; 1 alpha-hydroxylase

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Vitamin D deficiency has been associated with increased risk of colon cancer in epidermiologic and prospective clinical studies. In vitro and in vivo studies demonstrated that 1,25-dihydroxycholecalciferol [1,25(OH)(2)D-3] and its analogs inhibit colon cancer cell proliferation. Few studies have evaluated the effect of vitamin D deficiency on the development and growth of colon cancer. To assess the antiproliferative effects of 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] and 1,25(OH)(2)D-3 in vitro, we cultured MC-26 (a colon cancer cell line) in the presence of 25(OH)D-3 and 1,25(OH)(2)D-3 and performed [H-3]thymidine incorporation. The proliferation of MC-26 was significantly inhibited by both 25(OH)D, and 1,25(OH)2D3. To determine the effect of vitamin D deficiency on colon cancer proliferation, Balb/c mice were rendered vitamin D deficient by feeding them a vitamin D-deficient diet for 3 mo. A group of vitamin D-sufficient mice was given the same diet with supplemental vitamin D. The mice were injected with MC-26 colon cancer cells and the tumors were measured daily for 20 d. Vitamin D-sufficient mice had 40% smaller tumors than vitamin D-deficient mice. The tumors were evaluated for mRNA expression of the vitamin D receptor (VDR) and 25-hydroxvitamin D-1 alpha-hydroxylase (1 alpha-OHase) by quantitative RT-PCR. The expression of the mRNA for the VDR and the 1 alpha-OHase was 37- and 6-fold higher, respectively, in the vitamin D-sufficient mice compared with the vitamin D-deficient mice. We conclude that vitamin D deficiency enhances the growth of colon cancer in mice. The tumor expression of VDR and 1 alpha-OHase indicates possible autocrine/paracrine cell growth regulation by vitamin D.

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