4.3 Article

Experimental testing of a mathematical model relevant to the extrinsic pathway of apoptosis

期刊

CELL STRESS & CHAPERONES
卷 15, 期 1, 页码 13-23

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12192-009-0118-9

关键词

Apoptosis; Mathematical model; Caspase-3 activation; Caspase-8 activation; BAR regulation

资金

  1. EU [QLRT-2001-00128, QOL-2001-3]
  2. Fondo Sociale Europeo

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Apoptosis is a programmed cell death process, whose complexity led researchers to build mathematical models that could help to identify its crucial steps. In previous works, we theoretically analyzed and numerically simulated a model that describes a pathway from an external stimulus to caspase-3 activation. Here, the results of experiments performed on populations of synchronized cells treated with the inducer Apo2L/TRAIL are reported and are compared with model predictions. In particular, we have compared in vitro and in silico results relevant to the time evolutions of caspase-3 and caspase-8 activities, as well as of the dead cells fractions. In addition, the effect of the BAR gene silencing was evaluated. Caspase-3 activation and cell death is faster in silenced than in nonsilenced cells, thus confirming previous simulation results. Interestingly, Apo2L/TRAIL treatment in itself reduces the BAR gene expression. The qualitative agreement between model predictions and cell cultures behavior suggests that the model captures the essential features of the biological process and could be a tool in further studies of caspases activation. In this manuscript, we report the results of in vitro experiments aimed at revealing the dynamics of caspase activation in a cell population. A qualitative agreement between these results and a mathematical model describing a pathway from an external stimulus to caspase-3 activation was obtained, thus showing that the model captures the essential features of the biological process and may be a reliable tool in further studies of caspase activation.

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

4.3
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