The G Protein regulators EGL-10 and EAT-16, the Giα GOA-1 and the Gqα EGL-30 modulate the response of the C. elegans ASH polymodal nociceptive sensory neurons to repellents

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Polymodal, nociceptive sensory neurons are key cellular elements of the way animals sense aversive and painful stimuli. In <it>Caenorhabditis elegans</it>, the polymodal nociceptive ASH sensory neurons detect aversive stimuli and release glutamate to generate avoidance responses. They are thus useful models for the nociceptive neurons of mammals. While several molecules affecting signal generation and transduction in ASH have been identified, less is known about transmission of the signal from ASH to downstream neurons and about the molecules involved in its modulation.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We discovered that the regulator of G protein signalling (RGS) protein, EGL-10, is required for appropriate avoidance responses to noxious stimuli sensed by ASH. As it does for other behaviours in which it is also involved, <it>egl-10 </it>interacts genetically with the G_o/iα protein GOA-1, the G_qα protein EGL-30 and the RGS EAT-16. Genetic, behavioural and Ca²⁺imaging analyses of ASH neurons in live animals demonstrate that, within ASH, EGL-10 and GOA-1 act downstream of stimulus-evoked signal transduction and of the main transduction channel OSM-9. EGL-30 instead appears to act upstream by regulating Ca²⁺transients in response to aversive stimuli. Analysis of the delay in the avoidance response, of the frequency of spontaneous inversions and of the genetic interaction with the diacylglycerol kinase gene, <it>dgk-1</it>, indicate that EGL-10 and GOA-1 do not affect signal transduction and neuronal depolarization in response to aversive stimuli but act in ASH to modulate downstream transmission of the signal.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The ASH polymodal nociceptive sensory neurons can be modulated not only in their capacity to detect stimuli but also in the efficiency with which they respond to them. The Gα and RGS molecules studied in this work are conserved in evolution and, for each of them, mammalian orthologs can be identified. The discovery of their role in the modulation of signal transduction and signal transmission of nociceptors may help us to understand how pain is generated and how its control can go astray (such as chronic pain) and may suggest new pain control therapies.</p

Analisi Molecolare del comportamento di evitamento al chinino in Caenorhabditis elegans

Nel presente lavoro di tesi di dottorato l’attività di ricerca è stata rivolta all’analisi molecolare del riflesso di evitamento, esibito dal nematode non parassita Caenorhabditis elegans, in risposta al chinino. Questo progetto s’inserisce negli studi relativi ai sistemi chemiosensoriali, in particolare all’analisi del gusto amaro nell’uomo. Molti composti nocivi e tossici per gli animali, scartati dai mammiferi in saggi a doppia scelta e riconosciuti amari dall’uomo, sono percepiti come repellenti da C. elegans e scatenano una reazione di evitamento, che consiste in una brusca inversione della direzione del movimento. Ne deriva che la risposta di evitamento nei vermi ed il gusto amaro nell’uomo sembrano far parte di una stessa strategia attraverso cui gli animali limitano i danni causati da composti tossici presenti nell’ambiente. Il presente studio quindi, utilizzando C. elegans come modello, si propone l’analisi del meccanismo molecolare che consente alle cellule sensoriali di identificare molecole tossiche, percepite come amare dall’uomo. In particolare l’analisi è incentrata sull’evitamento del chinino, un alcaloide estratto dalla corteccia delle piante di genere Cinchona. Questo composto ha vari effetti farmacologi ed è generalmente tossico per cellule ed organismi. Durante l’evoluzione l’uomo ha imparato a percepirlo come amaro e C. elegans ha imparato ad evitarlo

Worms taste bitter: ASH neurons, QUI-1, GPA-3 and ODR-3 mediate quinine avoidance in Caenorhabditis elegans

An animal's ability to detect and avoid toxic compounds in the environment is crucial for survival. We show that the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans avoids many water-soluble substances that are toxic and that taste bitter to humans. We have used laser ablation and a genetic cell rescue strategy to identify sensory neurons involved in the avoidance of the bitter substance quinine, and found that ASH, a polymodal nociceptive neuron that senses many aversive stimuli, is the principal player in this response. Two G protein α subunits GPA-3 and ODR-3, expressed in ASH and in different, nonoverlapping sets of sensory neurons, are necessary for the response to quinine, although the effect of odr-3 can only be appreciated in the absence of gpa-3. We identified and cloned a new gene, qui-1, necessary for quinine and SDS avoidance. qui-1 codes for a novel protein with WD-40 domains and which is expressed in the avoidance sensory neurons ASH and ADL

Adjuvant anastrozole versus exemestane versus letrozole, upfront or after 2 years of tamoxifen, in endocrine-sensitive breast cancer (FATA-GIM3): a randomised, phase 3 trial

Background: Uncertainty exists about the optimal schedule of adjuvant treatment of breast cancer with aromatase inhibitors and, to our knowledge, no trial has directly compared the three aromatase inhibitors anastrozole, exemestane, and letrozole. We investigated the schedule and type of aromatase inhibitors to be used as adjuvant treatment for hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Methods: FATA-GIM3 is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial of six different treatments in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed invasive hormone receptor-positive breast cancer that had been completely removed by surgery, any pathological tumour size, and axillary nodal status. Key exclusion criteria were hormone replacement therapy, recurrent or metastatic disease, previous treatment with tamoxifen, and another malignancy in the previous 10 years. Patients were randomly assigned in an equal ratio to one of six treatment groups: oral anastrozole (1 mg per day), exemestane (25 mg per day), or letrozole (2·5 mg per day) tablets upfront for 5 years (upfront strategy) or oral tamoxifen (20 mg per day) for 2 years followed by oral administration of one of the three aromatase inhibitors for 3 years (switch strategy). Randomisation was done by a computerised minimisation procedure stratified for oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 status; previous chemotherapy; and pathological nodal status. Neither the patients nor the physicians were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. The minimum cutoff to declare superiority of the upfront strategy over the switch strategy was assumed to be a 2% difference in disease-free survival at 5 years. Primary efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat; safety analyses included all patients for whom at least one safety case report form had been completed. Follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, number 2006-004018-42, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00541086. Findings: Between March 9, 2007, and July 31, 2012, 3697 patients were enrolled into the study. After a median follow-up of 60 months (IQR 46–72), 401 disease-free survival events were reported, including 211 (11%) of 1850 patients allocated to the switch strategy and 190 (10%) of 1847 patients allocated to upfront treatment. 5-year disease-free survival was 88·5% (95% CI 86·7–90·0) with the switch strategy and 89·8% (88·2–91·2) with upfront treatment (hazard ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·73–1·08; p=0·23). 5-year disease-free survival was 90·0% (95% CI 87·9–91·7) with anastrozole (124 events), 88·0% (85·8–89·9) with exemestane (148 events), and 89·4% (87·3 to 91·1) with letrozole (129 events; p=0·24). No unexpected serious adverse reactions or treatment-related deaths occurred. Musculoskeletal side-effects were the most frequent grade 3–4 events, reported in 130 (7%) of 1761 patients who received the switch strategy and 128 (7%) of 1766 patients who received upfront treatment. Grade 1 musculoskeletal events were more frequent with the upfront schedule than with the switch schedule (924 [52%] of 1766 patients vs 745 [42%] of 1761 patients). All other grade 3–4 adverse events occurred in less than 2% of patients in either group. Interpretation: 5 years of treatment with aromatase inhibitors was not superior to 2 years of tamoxifen followed by 3 years of aromatase inhibitors. None of the three aromatase inhibitors was superior to the others in terms of efficacy. Therefore, patient preference, tolerability, and financial constraints should be considered when deciding the optimal treatment approach in this setting. Funding: Italian Drug Agency