4.6 Article

Transforming growth factor-β stimulates intestinal epithelial focal adhesion kinase synthesis via Smad- and p38-dependent mechanisms

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY
卷 173, 期 2, 页码 385-399

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.2353/ajpath.2008.070729

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK067257, R01DK067257] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Focal adhesion kinase (FAK) regulates cell migration, proliferation, and apoptosis. FAK protein is reduced at the edge of migrating gut epithelial sheets in vitro, but it has not been characterized in restitutive gut mucosa in vivo. Here we show that FAK and activated phospho-FAK (FAK(397)) immunoreactivity was lower in epithelial cells immediately adjacent to human gastric and colonic ulcers in vivo, but dramatically increased in epithelia near the ulcers, possibly reflecting stimulation by growth factors absent in vitro. Transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta, but not fibroblast growth factor, platelet-derived growth factor, or vascular endothelial growth factor, increased FAK levels in Caco-2 and IEC-6 cells. Epithelial immunoreactivity to TGF-beta and phospho-Smad3 was also higher near the ulcers, varying in parallel with FAK. The TGF-beta receptor antagonist SB431542 completely blocked TGF-beta-induced Smad2/3 and p38 activation in IEC-6 cells. SB431542, the p38 antagonist SB203580, and siRNA-mediated reduction of Smad2 and p38 alpha prevented TGF-beta stimulation of both FAK transcription and translation (as measured via a FAK promoter-luciferase construct). FAK(397). levels were directly related to total FAK protein expression. Although gut epithelial motility is associated with direct inhibition of FAK protein adjacent to mucosal wounds, TGF-beta may increase FAK protein near but not bordering mucosal ulcers via Smad2/3 and P38 signals. Our results show that regulation of FAK expression may be as important as FAK phosphorylation in critically influencing gut epithelial cell migration after mucosal injury.

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