Skip Navigation

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 Email this article to a friend
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Strickland, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Yuspa, S. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Strickland, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Yuspa, S. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1984 Oxford University Press

other

Interaction of epidermal growth factor with basal and differentiating epidermal cells of mice resistant and sensitive to carcinogenesis

James E. Strickland 1, Anton M. Jetten 2, Hideki Kawamura and Stuart H. Yuspa

Laboratory of Cellular Carcinogenesis and Tumor Promotion, National Cancer Institute Bethesda, MD 20205, USA

1To whom reprint requests should be addressed at Room 3A23, Bldg. 37, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20205, USA

Epidermal growth factor (EGF) interactions with primary epidermal cells in culture were examined in BALB/c and SENCAR mice, strains resistant and sensitive, respectively, to carcinogenesis by initiation-promotion. Using low (<0.1 mM) calcium growth conditions, which select for basal cells, and calcium-induced terminal differentiation, we determined the effects of retinoids, the tumor promoter 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate (TPA), and cell density on binding of 125I-labeled EGF. Over the range tested, EGF binding increased with increasing cell density similarly in basal cells of both strains, which at similar densities bound similar amounts of EGF. Increasingly differentiated epidermal cells of both strains bound less EGF. Responses of basal and differentiating cells were dissimilar in several respects. Most notably, differentiating cells bound but failed to metabolize EGF. TPA treatment of basal cells from either strain led to a rapid, pronounced reduction in EGF binding, while treatment with retinoic add, an antipromoter in vivo, increased binding. In contrast, EGF binding by differentiating cells was much less affected by TPA treatment, and retinoic acid had no effect or was slightly inhibitory, while combined treatment was more inhibitory than either alone. Given an adequate plating density, inclusion of 1 ng EGF per ml of media significantly enhanced growth of basal cells. Because of the similarities in binding patterns between the two strains, it seems unlikely that differential responses of BALB/c and SENCAR epidermal cells to EGF and to modulators of EGF binding are involved in the differences in susceptibility of these strains to carcinogenesis.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.