4.6 Article

Upregulation of telomerase activity by X-irradiation in mouse leukaemia cells is independent of Tert, Terc, Tnks and Myc transcription

期刊

CARCINOGENESIS
卷 21, 期 4, 页码 573-578

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/carcin/21.4.573

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

X-irradiation of two mouse myeloid leukaemia cell lines was found to lead to increased telomerase activities. Maximal increases in activity at 24 h post-irradiation were approximately three times control unirradiated cell levels. These maxima mere reached at between 3-5 Gy depending upon cell line, Peak activity was reached at 8 h, remained elevated to 24 h and returned to control levels by 48 h, In contrast, X-irradiation did not activate telomerase in a telomerase-negative human fibroblast line, while in cultured normal mouse bone marrow cells irradiation appeared to reduce activities. No simple relationship between radiation-induced increases in telomerase activity in the myeloid leukaemia lines and the proportions of cells in the S or M phases of the cell cycle was apparent, Radiation-induced increases in activity were significantly reduced by inhibitors of transcription (actinomycin D, alpha-amanatin) and protein synthesis (cycloheximide). These data are consistent with two possibilities: (i) X-irradiation leads to increased transcription and/or translation of a component of telomerase, thus increasing activities; or (ii) X-irradiation induces the transcription of a positive regulator of telomerase activity: Northern blot analysis did not indicate that transcription of mTert, the catalytic subunit of telomerase, or mTerc, the RNA component, was elevated after irradiation. Similarly, no significant changes in the expression of Myc or Tnks, the tankyrase gene, two suspected telomerase regulators, were detected. These data are therefore consistent with the induction by X-irradiation of a positive regulator of telomerase activity other than Tab or Myc or the core protein and RNA components of the enzyme.

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