In vivo and in vitro models demonstrate a role for caveolin-1 in the pathogenesis of ischaemic acute renal failure

Caveolae and their proteins, the caveolins, transport macromolecules; compartmentalize signalling molecules; and are involved in various repair processes. There is little information regarding their role in the pathogenesis of significant renal syndromes such as acute renal failure (ARF). In this study, an in vivo rat model of 30 min bilateral renal ischaemia followed by reperfusion times from 4 h to 1 week was used to map the temporal and spatial association between caveolin-1 and tubular epithelial damage (desquamation, apoptosis, necrosis). An in vitro model of ischaemic ARF was also studied, where cultured renal tubular epithelial cells or arterial endothelial cells were subjected to injury initiators modelled on ischaemia-reperfusion (hypoxia, serum deprivation, free radical damage or hypoxia-hyperoxia). Expression of caveolin proteins was investigated using immunohistochemistry, immunoelectron microscopy, and immunoblots of whole cell, membrane or cytosol protein extracts. In vivo, healthy kidney had abundant caveolin-1 in vascular endothelial cells and also some expression in membrane surfaces of distal tubular epithelium. In the kidneys of ARF animals, punctate cytoplasmic localization of caveolin-1 was identified, with high intensity expression in injured proximal tubules that were losing basement membrane adhesion or were apoptotic, 24 h to 4 days after ischaemia-reperfusion. Western immunoblots indicated a marked increase in caveolin-1 expression in the cortex where some proximal tubular injury was located. In vitro, the main treatment-induced change in both cell types was translocation of caveolin-1 from the original plasma membrane site into membrane-associated sites in the cytoplasm. Overall, expression levels did not alter for whole cell extracts and the protein remained membrane-bound, as indicated by cell fractionation analyses. Caveolin-1 was also found to localize intensely within apoptotic cells. The results are indicative of a role for caveolin-1 in ARF-induced renal injury. Whether it functions for cell repair or death remains to be elucidated.

Differential expression of VEGF ligands and receptors in prostate cancer

BACKGROUND Prostate cancer disseminates to regional lymph nodes, however the molecular mechanisms responsible for lymph node metastasis are poorly understood. The vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) ligand and receptor family have been implicated in the growth and spread of prostate cancer via activation of the blood vasculature and lymphatic systems. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively examine the expression pattern of VEGF ligands and receptors in the glandular epithelium, stroma, lymphatic vasculature and blood vessels in prostate cancer. METHODS The localization of VEGF-A, VEGF-C, VEGF-D, VEGF receptor (VEGFR)-1, VEGFR-2, and VEGFR-3 was examined in cancerous and adjacent benign prostate tissue from 52 subjects representing various grades of prostate cancer. RESULTS Except for VEGFR-2, extensive staining was observed for all ligands and receptors in the prostate specimens. In epithelial cells, VEGF-A and VEGFR-1 expression was higher in tumor tissue compared to benign tissue. VEGF-D and VEGFR-3 expression was significantly higher in benign tissue compared to tumor in the stroma and the endothelium of lymphatic and blood vessels. In addition, the frequency of lymphatic vessels, but not blood vessels, was lower in tumor tissue compared with benign tissue. CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that activation of VEGFR-1 by VEGF-A within the carcinoma, and activation of lymphatic endothelial cell VEGFR-3 by VEGF-D within the adjacent benign stroma may be important signaling mechanisms involved in the progression and subsequent metastatic spread of prostate cancer. Thus inhibition of these pathways may contribute to therapeutic strategies for the management of prostate cancer.

Observation of solution-induced corneal staining with fluorescein, rose bengal and lissamine green

Ever since sodium fluorescein (‘fluorescein’ [FL]) was first used to investigate the ocular surface over a century ago, the term ‘staining’ has been taken to mean the presence of ocular surface fluorescence [1]. This term has not been necessarily taken to infer any particular mechanism of causation, and indeed, can be attributed to a variety of possible aetiologies [2]. In recent times, there has been considerable interest in a form of ocular surface fluorescence seen in association with the use of certain combinations of soft contact lenses and multipurpose solutions. The first clinical account of this phenomenon was reported by Jones et al. [3], which was followed by a more formal investigation by the same author in 2002 [4]. Jones et al described this appearance as a ‘classic solution-based toxicity reaction’. Subsequently, this appearance has come to be known as ‘solution-induced corneal staining’ or more recently by the acronym ‘SICS’ [5]. The term SICS is potentially problematic in that from a cell biology point of view, there is an inference that ‘staining’ means the entry of a dye into corneal epithelial cells. Morgan and Maldonado-Codina [2] noted there was no foundation of solid scientific literature underpinning our understanding of the true basic causative mechanisms of this phenomenon; since that time, further work has been published in this field [6] and [7] but questions still remain about the precise aetiology of this phenomenon...

High coexpression of both EGFR and IGF1R correlates with poor patient prognosis in resected non-small-cell lung cancer

Background Recent experimental and biomarker evidence indicates that the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and insulin-like growth factor receptor 1 (IGF1R) interact in the pathogenesis of malignant epithelial tumors, including lung cancer. This study examines the expression of both receptors and their prognostic significance in surgically resected non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods EGFR and IGF1R expression were evaluated in 184 patients with NSCLC (83 squamous cell carcinomas [SCCs], 83 adenocarcinomas [ADCs], and 18 other types) using immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis. Expression of both receptors was examined in matched fresh frozen normal and tumor tissues from 40 patients with NSCLC (20 SCCs and 20 ADCs) by Western blot analysis. Results High EGFR expression was detected in 51% of patients, and SCCs had higher EGFR expression than did non-SCCs (57.4% vs. 42.5%; P =.028). High IGF1R expression was observed in 53.8% of patients, with SCC having higher expression than non-SCC (62.6% vs. 37.3%; P =.0004). A significant association was shown between EGFR and IGF1R protein overexpression (P <.005). Patients with high expression of both receptors had a poorer overall survival (OS) (P =.04). Higher EGFR and IGF1R expression was detected in resected tumors relative to matched normal tissues (P =.0004 and P =.0009), with SCC having higher expression levels than ADC. Conclusion Our findings indicate a close interrelationship between EGFR and IGF1R. Coexpression of both receptors correlates with poor survival. This subset of patients may benefit from treatments cotargeting EGFR and IGF1R. © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.