1990
DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9258(18)86944-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differential transport properties of two mdr gene products are distinguished by progesterone.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

3
8
0

Year Published

1992
1992
2001
2001

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 92 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
3
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the other hand, introduction of Thr at that site had very different effects on the activity of the three modulators. The effect of these mutations on the efficacy of these compounds was also dependent on the protein background onto which they were constructed (Table 1, mdrl vs mdr3), in agreement with previous results by Yang et al (1990), who observed preferential activity of PRG against mouse mdrl [mdrlb) over mdr3 (mdrla) encoded proteins.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…On the other hand, introduction of Thr at that site had very different effects on the activity of the three modulators. The effect of these mutations on the efficacy of these compounds was also dependent on the protein background onto which they were constructed (Table 1, mdrl vs mdr3), in agreement with previous results by Yang et al (1990), who observed preferential activity of PRG against mouse mdrl [mdrlb) over mdr3 (mdrla) encoded proteins.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…The capacity of verapamil (VRP) and progesterone (PRG) to modulate the activity of wild-type and TM 11 mutant P-gps was tested. VRP and PRG treatments of P-gp expressing cells reverses their multidrug resistance phenotype by increasing intracellular drug accumulation (Tsuruo et al, 1981;Yang et al, 1989), possibly by competing for drug binding sites on P-gp (Cornwell et al, 1986;Yang et al, 1990;Safa, 1988;Qian & Beck, 1990;Naitoet al, 1989). The effect of VRP and PRG on theDsos of drug-sensitive control cells and cell clones expressing wildtype and mutant P-gps was determined in drug cytotoxicity assays and was expressed as a reversal factor (fold) calculated by comparison to the D$0 value in the absence of modulator (Tables II and III).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since potential modulators evaluated in these assays would be used ultimately to revert MDR in human tumors positive for human MDR1 expression, it seemed appropriate to determine if functional differences with respect to interaction with modulators could be detected between the human and mouse isoforms. In addition, since we (Raymond et al, 1990) and others (Lothstein et al, 1989) have previously shown that the emergence of MDR in mouse cells (LTA, J774A, P388) can be asociated with the independent or simultaneous expression of mdrl and/or mdr3, it also seemed important to ask the same question for the two mouse isoforms in view of the previously reported differences in the modulating activity of progesterone (Yang et al, 1990) and other agents (Kajiji et al, 1993(Kajiji et al, , 1994a against the two mouse proteins.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Mouse mdr2 is expressed almost exclusively in liver bile canaliculi (Cordon-Cardo et al, 1990;van der Valk et al, 1990;Buschman et al, 1992), and the analysis of mutant mice carrying null alleles at this locus has suggested that although this P-gp does not transport MDR dmgs, it may transport phosphatidylcholine (Smit et al, 1993), working as a lipid translocase (Ruetz & Gros, 1994). In addition, P-gps encoded by mouse mdrl and mdr3 confer different degrees of resistance to structurally distinct MDR drugs (Kajiji et al, 1993) and seem to show different sensitivity to the reversal effect of structurally distinct inhibitors (Yang et al, 1990; Kajiji et al, 1994a). A similar comparison of functional similarities and differences between the mouse and human P-gps has been very difficult to carry out.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%