3.9 Article

Flow cytometric detection of progastrin interaction with gastrointestinal cells

Journal

REGULATORY PEPTIDES
Volume 151, Issue 1-3, Pages 106-114

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.regpep.2008.07.001

Keywords

Biotin; Gastrin-related peptides; FASC assay; Glycosaminoglycans; Mouse; Colonic mucosa

Funding

  1. NIH [5 R01 DK052778]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The unprocessed gastrin precursor, progastrin (PG), is often overexpressed in colon cancer and other malignancies where it appears to stimulate colonic growth. Overexpression of progastrin also stimulates proliferation of normal colonic mucosa, but the receptors mediating these effects have not been identified. Here we report the development of a non-radioactive assay for assessment of PG binding to normal and transformed cells. Progastrin was labeled using biotinylation, and binding of biotinylated PG to cells was assessed using flow cytometry. Using this approach, we show strong and specific binding of PG to some cell lines (IEC-6. IEC-18, HT-29, COLO320) and minimal binding to others (HeLa, DC2.4, Jurkat). We also found PG binding to several non-gut epithelial lines, such as CHO-K1, COS-6 and HEK293 cells. The specificity of binding was confirmed by competition with cold. unlabeled PG but not with glycine-extended gastrin or amidated gastrin-17. Binding was not influenced by the presence of the classical CCK-2 receptor, but was partially dependent on the charged glycosarninoglycans (GAG). The analysis of primary colonic tissues isolated from wild type C57BL/6 mouse, revealed a small epithelial subpopulation of non-hematopoietic (CD45-negative) cells that strongly interacted with PG. Surprisingly. this population was greatly expanded in gastrin knockout mice. This non-radioactive, FACS-based assay should prove useful for further characterization of cells expressing the progastrin receptor. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available