Cancer Research  Translational Medicine Conference in Israel
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online

[Cancer Research 43, 1980-1983, May 1, 1983]
© 1983 American Association for Cancer Research

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mokashi, S.
Right arrow Articles by Orr, F. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mokashi, S.
Right arrow Articles by Orr, F. W.

Relationships between Chemotaxis, Chemotactic Modulators, and Cyclic Nucleotide Levels in Tumor Cells1

Shalini Mokashi2, S. James Delikatny and F. William Orr3

Department of Pathology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3E 0W3

Like many freely moving cells, Walker 256 carcinosarcoma cells respond to chemotactic stimuli. Since cyclic nucleotides are involved in the chemotaxis of other cells, we have examined the action of several nucleosides and nucleotides as chemoattractants and as modulators of tumor cell movement. We have also studied the effect of chemoattractants and prostaglandins on intracellular cyclic nucleotide levels and the effect of prostaglandins as modulators of chemotaxis. Of the agents studied, only the cyclic nucleotides and prostaglandins were found to modulate cellular motility. Neither cyclic adenosine 3':5'-monophosphate (cAMP) nor cyclic guanosine 3':5'-monophosphate (cGMP) was a chemoattractant, but cGMP and N6,O2'-dibutyryl cyclic guanosine 3':5'-monophosphate at low concentrations (~10-10 M to 10-8 M) enhanced chemotaxis by 80 ± 15%, and both cAMP and N6,O2'-dibutyryl cyclic adenosine 3':5'-monophosphate had an inhibitory effect at concentrations >10-6 M. Chemotaxis was suppressed by 21 to 100% in media depleted of Ca2+ and/or Mg2+, but in the presence of 10-8 M cGMP, there was partial recovery of the chemotactic response. In response to chemotactic stimulation, there was a 28 to 60% rise in intracellular cAMP within 30 sec. This returned to basal levels within 2 min. Intracellular cGMP levels became elevated ~3- to 3.5-fold after this time. Incubation of cells with prostaglandins A1 and F2{alpha} stimulated chemotaxis at lower concentrations (10-7 and 10-9 M, respectively) and resulted in elevation of cGMP, while incubation with prostaglandin E2 resulted in inhibition of chemotaxis and a rise in cAMP levels.

1 This work was supported by a grant from the National Cancer Institute of Canada.

2 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed.

3 Clinical Research Associate of the National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Received 4/29/82. Accepted 1/26/83.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
Copyright © 1983 by the American Association for Cancer Research.