Hypothalamic Vitamin D Improves Glucose Homeostasis and Reduces Weight

Despite clear associations between vitamin D deficiency and obesity and/or type 2 diabetes, a causal relationship is not established. Vitamin D receptors (VDRs) are found within multiple tissues, including the brain. Given the importance of the brain in controlling both glucose levels and body weight, we hypothesized that activation of central VDR links vitamin D to the regulation of glucose and energy homeostasis. Indeed, we found that small doses of active vitamin D, 1α,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (1,25D3) (calcitriol), into the third ventricle of the brain improved glucose tolerance and markedly increased hepatic insulin sensitivity, an effect that is dependent upon VDR within the paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus. In addition, chronic central administration of 1,25D3 dramatically decreased body weight by lowering food intake in obese rodents. Our data indicate that 1,25D3-mediated changes in food intake occur through action within the arcuate nucleus. We found that VDR colocalized with and activated key appetite-regulating neurons in the arcuate, namely proopiomelanocortin neurons. Together, these findings define a novel pathway for vitamin D regulation of metabolism with unique and divergent roles for central nervous system VDR signaling. Specifically, our data suggest that vitamin D regulates glucose homeostasis via the paraventricular nuclei and energy homeostasis via the arcuate nuclei

Resistance of uveal melanoma to the interstrand cross-linking agent mitomycin C is associated with reduced expression of CYP450R

background: Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common primary intraocular tumour of adults, frequently metastasising to the liver. Hepatic metastases are difficult to treat and are mainly unresponsive to chemotherapy. To investigate why UM are so chemo-resistant we explored the effect of interstrand cross-linking agents mitomycin C (MMC) and cisplatin in comparison with hydroxyurea (HU). methods: Sensitivity to MMC, cisplatin and HU was tested in established UM cell lines using clonogenic assays. The response of UM to MMC was confirmed in MTT assays using short-term cultures of primary UM. The expression of cytochrome P450 reductase (CYP450R) was analysed by western blotting, and DNA cross-linking was assessed using COMET analysis supported by γ-H2AX foci formation. results: Both established cell lines and primary cultures of UM were resistant to the cross-linking agent MMC (in each case P<0.001 in Student's t-test compared with controls). In two established UM cell lines, DNA cross-link damage was not induced by MMC (in both cases P<0.05 in Students's t-test compared with damage induced in controls). In all, 6 out of 6 UMs tested displayed reduced expression of the metabolising enzyme CYP450R and transient expression of CYP450R increased MMC sensitivity of UM. conclusion: We suggest that reduced expression of CYP450R is responsible for MMC resistance of UM, through a lack of bioactivation, which can be reversed by complementing UM cell lines with CYP450R

Genetic Background of Iris Melanomas and Iris Melanocytic Tumors of Uncertain Malignant Potential

PURPOSE: Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common primary intraocular malignancy in adults. Iris melanoma comprises 4% to 10% of all UMs and has a lower mortality rate. The genetic changes in iris melanoma are not as well characterized as ciliary body or choroidal melanoma. The aim of this study was to gain more insight into the genetic background of iris melanoma and iris nevi. DESIGN: Multicenter, retrospective case series. PARTICIPANTS: Patients diagnosed with iris melanoma or iris nevi who underwent surgical intervention as primary or secondary treatment. METHODS: Next-generation sequencing of GNAQ, GNA11, EIF1AX, SF3B1, BAP1, NRAS, BRAF, PTEN, c-Kit, TP53, and TERT was performed on 30 iris melanomas and 7 iris nevi. Copy number status was detected using single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) included in the next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel, SNP array, or fluorescent in situ hybridization. BAP1 immunohistochemistry was performed on all samples. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mutation and copy number status were analyzed. Results of BAP1 immunohistochemistry were used for survival analysis. RESULTS: In 26 of the 30 iris melanoma and all iris nevi, at least 1 mutation was identified. Multiple mutations were detected in 23 iris melanoma and 5 nevi, as well as mutations in GNAQ and GNA11. Furthermore, 13 of 30 BAP1, 5 of 30 EIF1AX, and 2 of 30 SF3B1 mutations were identified in iris melanoma. No correlation between BAP1 status and disease-free survival was found. The iris nevi showed 1 EIF1AX and 3 BAP1 mutations. Two of the nevi, with a BAP1 mutation, were histologically borderline malignant. Mutations in NRAS, BRAF, PTEN, c-KIT, and TP53 were detected in 6 iris melanomas and 4 iris nevi. CONCLUSIONS: Mutations that are often found in uveal and cutaneous melanoma were identified in this cohort of iris melanomas and iris nevi. Therefore, iris melanomas harbor a molecular profile comparable to both choroidal melanoma and cutaneous melanoma. These findings may offer adjuvant targeted therapies for iris melanoma. There was no prognostic significance of BAP1 expression as seen in choroidal melanoma. Consequently, iris melanoma is a distinct molecular subgroup of UM. Histologic borderline malignant iris nevi can harbor BAP1 mutations and may be designated iris melanocytic tumors of uncertain malignant potential

Activation of the MAPK pathway is a common event in uveal melanomas although it rarely occurs through mutation of BRAF or RAS

In contrast to cutaneous melanoma, there is no evidence that BRAF mutations are involved in the activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway in uveal melanoma, although there is increasing evidence that this pathway is activated frequently in the latter tumours. In this study, we performed mutation analysis of the RAS and BRAF genes in a panel of 11 uveal melanoma cell lines and 19 primary uveal melanoma tumours. In addition, Western blot and immunohistochemical analyses were performed on downstream members of the MAPK pathway in order to assess the contribution of each of these components. No mutations were found in any of the three RAS gene family members and only one cell line carried a BRAF mutation (V599E). Despite this, mitogen-activated protein kinase/extracellular signal-regulated kinase kinase (MEK), ERK and ELK were constitutively activated in all samples. These data suggest that activation of the MAPK pathway is commonly involved in the development of uveal melanoma, but occurs through a mechanism different to that of cutaneous melanoma

Expression of the SST receptor 2 in uveal melanoma is not a prognostic marker

Introduction: Uveal melanoma (UM) cells and neurohormone-producing cells both originate from the neural crest. Somatostatin receptors subtype 2 (SSTR2) are over-expressed in several tumors, often from neuroendocrine origin, and synthetic antagonists like octreotide and octreotate are being used as diagnostic or therapeutic agents. We investigated the SSTR2 expression in UM, and determined whether this expression was related to prognosis of the disease. Materials and methods: UM cell lines and fresh primary UM samples were tested for SSTR2 expression by autoradiography (AR) using 125I-Tyr3-octreotate. Furthermore, UM cell lines were analyzed for SSTR2 mRNA expression with quantitative real-time RT-PCR. Results: Using AR, cell-surface SSTR2 expression was demonstrated in two UM metastatic cell lines, but no expression was detected in three cell lines derived from primary UM. However, all primary and metastatic UM cell lines showed mRNA expression levels for SSTR2 using quantitative real-time RT-PCR. Only three of 14 primary UM demonstrated moderate SSTR2 expression, and this expression was not significantly associated with tumor-free survival or any tested prognostic factor. Conclusions: Based on the rare and low expression of SSTR2 found in primary UM specimens and in UM cell lines, we conclude that SSTR2 is not widely expressed in UM. Furthermore, SSTR2 expression was not associated with tumor-free survival and prognostic factors. Therefore SSTR2 is not suited as prognostic marker or therapeutic target in UM