14 research outputs found

    Coxiella burnetii Phagocytosis Is Regulated by GTPases of the Rho Family and the RhoA Effectors mDia1 and ROCK

    Get PDF
    The GTPases belonging to the Rho family control the actin cytoskeleton rearrangements needed for particle internalization during phagocytosis. ROCK and mDia1 are downstream effectors of RhoA, a GTPase involved in that process. Coxiella burnetii, the etiologic agent of Q fever, is internalized by the host´s cells in an actin-dependent manner. Nevertheless, the molecular mechanism involved in this process has been poorly characterized. This work analyzes the role of different GTPases of the Rho family and some downstream effectors in the internalization of C. burnetii by phagocytic and non-phagocytic cells. The internalization of C. burnetii into HeLa and RAW cells was significantly inhibited when the cells were treated with Clostridium difficile Toxin B which irreversibly inactivates members of the Rho family. In addition, the internalization was reduced in HeLa cells that overexpressed the dominant negative mutants of RhoA, Rac1 or Cdc42 or that were knocked down for the Rho GTPases. The pharmacological inhibition or the knocking down of ROCK diminished bacterium internalization. Moreover, C. burnetii was less efficiently internalized in HeLa cells overexpressing mDia1-N1, a dominant negative mutant of mDia1, while the overexpression of the constitutively active mutant mDia1-ΔN3 increased bacteria uptake. Interestingly, when HeLa and RAW cells were infected, RhoA, Rac1 and mDia1 were recruited to membrane cell fractions. Our results suggest that the GTPases of the Rho family play an important role in C. burnetii phagocytosis in both HeLa and RAW cells. Additionally, we present evidence that ROCK and mDia1, which are downstream effectors of RhoA, are involved in that processFil: Salinas Ojeda, Romina Paola. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Facultad de Cienicas Médicas. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos; ArgentinaFil: Ortiz Flores, Rodolfo Matias. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Facultad de Cienicas Médicas. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos; ArgentinaFil: Distel, Jesús Sebastián. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Facultad de Cienicas Médicas. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos; ArgentinaFil: Aguilera, Milton Osmar. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Facultad de Cienicas Médicas. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos; ArgentinaFil: Colombo, Maria Isabel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Facultad de Cienicas Médicas. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos; ArgentinaFil: Beron, Walter. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Facultad de Cienicas Médicas. Instituto de Histología y Embriología de Mendoza Dr. Mario H. Burgos; Argentin

    Gene signature of the metastatic potential of cutaneous melanoma: too much for too little?

    No full text
    It was expected that with the advent of genomics, oncology may defeat the deadliest forms of cancer including malignant melanoma, but the past years have indicated that this is not the case. Despite the stunning success of genomics in defining markers or gene signatures for breast cancer prognosis and predicting therapies, there is virtually no progression in malignant melanoma. This is happening when experimental oncology or metastasis research is using several rodent and human melanoma models, when our knowledge on the metastatic cascade is actually derived from these models. Our critical analysis of these studies revealed several factors which might be responsible for this failure. First, it is evident, that these studies must be based on rigorous sample collection and basic pathological considerations, where divergent histological types of melanoma cannot be analysed universally. Secondly, without following basic consideration of metastasis biology, the majority of these studies were rarely based on primary tumors but frequently on various types of regional metastases. Third, successful expression profiling studies on other tumors such as breast cancer, provided evidences that the homogeneity of the patient cohort at least by clinicopathological stage is a critical element when defining prognostic signatures. Four studies attempted to define the prognostic signature of skin melanoma but only one based the study on the primary tumor resulting in heterogenous signatures with a minimal overlap (MCM3 and NFKBIZ). Four study attempted to define the invasiveness-signature in the primary tumor based on thickness or growth pattern discrimination identifying a 9-gene overlap which proved to be different from the prognostic signatures. On the other hand, seven studies analyzed various types of metastatic tissues (rarely visceral-, mostly cutaneous or lymphatic metastases) to define the metastasis-signatures, again with minimal overlap (AQP3, LGALS7 and SFN). Using seven GEO-based melanoma datasets we have performed a meta-analysis of the metastasis-gene signatures using normalization protocols. This analysis identified a 350-gene signature, the core of which was a 17-gene signature characterizing locoregional metastases where the individual components occurred in 3 studies: several members of this signature were extensively studied before in context of melanoma metastasis including WNT5A, EGFR, BCL2A1 and OPN. These data suggest that only efficient inter-disciplinary collaboration throughout genomic analysis of human skin melanoma could lead to major advances in defining relevant gene-sets appropriate for clinical prognostication or revealing basic molecular pathways of melanoma progression. © 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V
    corecore