4.6 Article

Expression of T-type calcium channel splice variants in human glioma

期刊

GLIA
卷 48, 期 2, 页码 112-119

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/glia.20063

关键词

glioma; ion channels; T-type; splice variants; calcium signaling; RT-PCR; immunostaining; electrophysiology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In humans, three isoforms of the T-type (Ca(v)3.1) calcium-channel alpha(1), subunit have been reported as a result of alternate splicing of exons 25 and 26 in the III-IV linker region (Ca(v)3.1a, Ca(v)3.1b or Ca(v)3.1bc). In the present study, we report that human glioma express Cav3.1 channels in situ, that splicing of these exons is uniquely regulated and that there is expression of a glioma-specific novel T-type variant (Ca(v)3.1ac). Seven human glioma samples were collected at surgery, RNA was extracted, and cDNA was produced for RT-PCR analysis. In addition, three glioma cell lines, (U87, U563, and U251N), primary cultures of human fetal astrocytes, as well as adult and fetal human brain cDNA were used. Previously described Ca(v)3.1 splice variants were present in glioma samples, cultured cells and whole brain. Consistent with the literature, our results reveal that in the normal adult brain, Ca(v)3.1a transcripts predominate, while Ca(v)3.1b is mostly fetal-specific. RT-PCR results on glioma and glioma cell lines showed that Cav3.1 expression in tumor cells resemble fetal brain expression pattern as Ca(v)3.1bc is predominantly expressed. In addition, we identified a novel splice variant, Ca(v)3.1ac, expressed in three glioma biopsies and one glioma cell line, but not in normal brain or fetal astrocytes. Transient expression of this variant demonstrates, that Ca(v)3.1ac displays similar current-voltage and steady-state inactivation properties compared with Ca(v)3.1b, but a slower recovery from inactivation. Taken together, our data suggest glioma-specific Ca(v)3.1 gene regulation, which could possibly contribute to tumor pathogenesis. (C) 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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