Role of receptor complexes in resistance or sensitivity to growth inhibition by TGFβ in intestinal epithelial cell clones

Kathleen M. Mulder, Patricia R. Segarini, Sheila L. Morris, Jill M. Ziman, Ho Gene Choi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Untransformed rat intestinal epithelial cells (IEC‐18) were chemically mutagenized, selected in the presence of TGFβ1, and cloned by limiting dilution. Two clones (4–5, 4–6) were resistant to growth inhibition by both TGFβ1 and TGFβ2. Another clone (4–1) was more sensitive to both TGFβ isoforms (relative to parental IEC‐18 cells). IC50 values for TGFβ1 and 2 in the 4–1 cells were at least 1/9 those of the parental cells; growth rates were reduced by 49% for TGFβ1 and by 26% for TGFβ2 in this clone. This increased sensitivity to TGFβ was explained by the 5‐ to 10‐fold increase, relative to parental cells, in binding of TGFβ1 and TGFβ2 to both the type I and II receptors. In contrast, the resistance to growth inhibition by TGFβ in the 4–5 and 4–6 cells could not be explained by a decrease in either TGFβ binding affinities or in total number of receptors expressed, by the presence of serum binding components, or by occupation of receptor binding sites with autocrine TGF‐β1. However, in comparison to TGFβ‐sensitive cells (IEC‐18, 4–1), the resistant cells displayed a higher ratio of type II relative to type I receptor binding by TGF‐β1. Thus, a critical ratio of binding to receptor subtypes correlated with growth inhibition by TGF‐β1. Resistance to TGF‐β2 in the same clones did not appear to be receptor related. Thus different mechanisms for resistance to TGF‐β1 and TGF‐β2 were observed within a given clone. © 1993 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)162-174
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Cellular Physiology
Volume154
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1993

Fingerprint

Clone Cells
Epithelial Cells
Growth
Dilution
Rats
Protein Isoforms
Binding Sites
Occupations
Inhibitory Concentration 50
Serum

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Physiology
  • Clinical Biochemistry
  • Cell Biology

Cite this

Mulder, Kathleen M. ; Segarini, Patricia R. ; Morris, Sheila L. ; Ziman, Jill M. ; Choi, Ho Gene. / Role of receptor complexes in resistance or sensitivity to growth inhibition by TGFβ in intestinal epithelial cell clones. In: Journal of Cellular Physiology. 1993 ; Vol. 154, No. 1. pp. 162-174.
@article{7dd94090bcf34dd3a93503d649296471,
title = "Role of receptor complexes in resistance or sensitivity to growth inhibition by TGFβ in intestinal epithelial cell clones",
abstract = "Untransformed rat intestinal epithelial cells (IEC‐18) were chemically mutagenized, selected in the presence of TGFβ1, and cloned by limiting dilution. Two clones (4–5, 4–6) were resistant to growth inhibition by both TGFβ1 and TGFβ2. Another clone (4–1) was more sensitive to both TGFβ isoforms (relative to parental IEC‐18 cells). IC50 values for TGFβ1 and 2 in the 4–1 cells were at least 1/9 those of the parental cells; growth rates were reduced by 49{\%} for TGFβ1 and by 26{\%} for TGFβ2 in this clone. This increased sensitivity to TGFβ was explained by the 5‐ to 10‐fold increase, relative to parental cells, in binding of TGFβ1 and TGFβ2 to both the type I and II receptors. In contrast, the resistance to growth inhibition by TGFβ in the 4–5 and 4–6 cells could not be explained by a decrease in either TGFβ binding affinities or in total number of receptors expressed, by the presence of serum binding components, or by occupation of receptor binding sites with autocrine TGF‐β1. However, in comparison to TGFβ‐sensitive cells (IEC‐18, 4–1), the resistant cells displayed a higher ratio of type II relative to type I receptor binding by TGF‐β1. Thus, a critical ratio of binding to receptor subtypes correlated with growth inhibition by TGF‐β1. Resistance to TGF‐β2 in the same clones did not appear to be receptor related. Thus different mechanisms for resistance to TGF‐β1 and TGF‐β2 were observed within a given clone. {\circledC} 1993 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.",
author = "Mulder, {Kathleen M.} and Segarini, {Patricia R.} and Morris, {Sheila L.} and Ziman, {Jill M.} and Choi, {Ho Gene}",
year = "1993",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1002/jcp.1041540120",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "154",
pages = "162--174",
journal = "Journal of Cellular Physiology",
issn = "0021-9541",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "1",

}

Role of receptor complexes in resistance or sensitivity to growth inhibition by TGFβ in intestinal epithelial cell clones. / Mulder, Kathleen M.; Segarini, Patricia R.; Morris, Sheila L.; Ziman, Jill M.; Choi, Ho Gene.

In: Journal of Cellular Physiology, Vol. 154, No. 1, 01.1993, p. 162-174.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Role of receptor complexes in resistance or sensitivity to growth inhibition by TGFβ in intestinal epithelial cell clones

AU - Mulder, Kathleen M.

AU - Segarini, Patricia R.

AU - Morris, Sheila L.

AU - Ziman, Jill M.

AU - Choi, Ho Gene

PY - 1993/1

Y1 - 1993/1

N2 - Untransformed rat intestinal epithelial cells (IEC‐18) were chemically mutagenized, selected in the presence of TGFβ1, and cloned by limiting dilution. Two clones (4–5, 4–6) were resistant to growth inhibition by both TGFβ1 and TGFβ2. Another clone (4–1) was more sensitive to both TGFβ isoforms (relative to parental IEC‐18 cells). IC50 values for TGFβ1 and 2 in the 4–1 cells were at least 1/9 those of the parental cells; growth rates were reduced by 49% for TGFβ1 and by 26% for TGFβ2 in this clone. This increased sensitivity to TGFβ was explained by the 5‐ to 10‐fold increase, relative to parental cells, in binding of TGFβ1 and TGFβ2 to both the type I and II receptors. In contrast, the resistance to growth inhibition by TGFβ in the 4–5 and 4–6 cells could not be explained by a decrease in either TGFβ binding affinities or in total number of receptors expressed, by the presence of serum binding components, or by occupation of receptor binding sites with autocrine TGF‐β1. However, in comparison to TGFβ‐sensitive cells (IEC‐18, 4–1), the resistant cells displayed a higher ratio of type II relative to type I receptor binding by TGF‐β1. Thus, a critical ratio of binding to receptor subtypes correlated with growth inhibition by TGF‐β1. Resistance to TGF‐β2 in the same clones did not appear to be receptor related. Thus different mechanisms for resistance to TGF‐β1 and TGF‐β2 were observed within a given clone. © 1993 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

AB - Untransformed rat intestinal epithelial cells (IEC‐18) were chemically mutagenized, selected in the presence of TGFβ1, and cloned by limiting dilution. Two clones (4–5, 4–6) were resistant to growth inhibition by both TGFβ1 and TGFβ2. Another clone (4–1) was more sensitive to both TGFβ isoforms (relative to parental IEC‐18 cells). IC50 values for TGFβ1 and 2 in the 4–1 cells were at least 1/9 those of the parental cells; growth rates were reduced by 49% for TGFβ1 and by 26% for TGFβ2 in this clone. This increased sensitivity to TGFβ was explained by the 5‐ to 10‐fold increase, relative to parental cells, in binding of TGFβ1 and TGFβ2 to both the type I and II receptors. In contrast, the resistance to growth inhibition by TGFβ in the 4–5 and 4–6 cells could not be explained by a decrease in either TGFβ binding affinities or in total number of receptors expressed, by the presence of serum binding components, or by occupation of receptor binding sites with autocrine TGF‐β1. However, in comparison to TGFβ‐sensitive cells (IEC‐18, 4–1), the resistant cells displayed a higher ratio of type II relative to type I receptor binding by TGF‐β1. Thus, a critical ratio of binding to receptor subtypes correlated with growth inhibition by TGF‐β1. Resistance to TGF‐β2 in the same clones did not appear to be receptor related. Thus different mechanisms for resistance to TGF‐β1 and TGF‐β2 were observed within a given clone. © 1993 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027389796&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027389796&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/jcp.1041540120

DO - 10.1002/jcp.1041540120

M3 - Article

C2 - 8380421

AN - SCOPUS:0027389796

VL - 154

SP - 162

EP - 174

JO - Journal of Cellular Physiology

JF - Journal of Cellular Physiology

SN - 0021-9541

IS - 1

ER -