METHODS: The hESCs were differentiated into neural stem cells (NSCs), and NSC-DECM was extracted from confluent monolayers of NSCs through treatment with deionized water. DFSCs seeded on NSC-DECM, Geltrex, and tissue culture polystyrene (TCPS) were subjected to neural induction during a period of 21 days. Expression of early/intermediate (Musashi1, PAX6, NSE, and βIII-tubulin) and mature/late (NGN2, NeuN, NFM, and MASH1) neural markers by DFSCs was analyzed at the 7-, 14-, and 21-day time points with quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. Immunocytochemistry for detection of βIII-tubulin, PAX6, and NGN2 expression by DFSCs on day 7 of neural induction was also carried out.
RESULTS: Quantitative RT-PCR showed that expression of PAX6, Musashi1, βIII-tubulin, NSE, NGN2, and NFM by DFSCs was enhanced on NSC-DECM versus either the Geltrex or TCPS groups. Immunocytochemistry showed that DFSCs in the NSC-DECM group displayed more intense staining for βIII-tubulin, PAX6, and NGN2 expression, together with more neurite outgrowths and elongated morphology, as compared with either Geltrex or TCPS.
CONCLUSIONS: DECM derived from neurogenesis of hESCs can enhance the neurogenic potential of DFSCs.
METHODS: A total of 236 breast cancer patients from China completed the Chinese Version of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptom Scale (PSS), the Chinese version of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), the Chinese version of the General Anxiety Symptoms Scale (GAD-7). In addition, caregivers of these breast cancer patients were surveyed by the Caregiver Self-Assessment Questionnaire (CSAQ).
RESULTS: Structural equation model showed that our model fitted well [χ2 /df = 1.966, TLI = 0.959, CFI = 0.994, RMSEA (90% CI) = 0.065 (0-0.12)] and revealed that anxiety, but not depression, mediated the relationship between PTSS in breast cancer patients and caregiver burden.
CONCLUSION: The level of PTSS was positively correlated with anxiety and depression in breast cancer patients, and the level of anxiety and depression was positively related to caregiver burden. The PTSS of patients positively predicted caregiver burden and this relationship appears to be mediated by the patient's anxiety.
AIM OF THE STUDY: To investigate the anti-angiogenic mechanism of EC and its anti-tumor effect by suppressing angiogenesis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The in vitro anti-angiogenic effect was evaluated using HUVECs model induced by VEGF and zebrafish model in vivo. The influence of the EC on phosphorylation of VEGFR2 and its downstream signaling pathways were evaluated by western blotting assay. Molecule docking technology was conducted to explore the interaction between EC and VEGFR2. SPR assay was used for detecting the binding affinity between EC and VEGFR2. To further investigate the molecular mechanism of EC on anti-angiogenesis, VEGFR2 knockdown in HUVECs and examined the influence of the EC. Anti-tumor activity of EC was evaluated using colony formation assay and apoptosis assay. The inhibitory effect of EC on tumor growth was explored using HT29 colon cancer xenograft model.
RESULTS: EC obviously inhibited proliferation, migration, invasion and tube formation of VEGF-induced HUVECs. EC also induced apoptosis of HUVECs. Moreover, it inhibited the development of vessel formation in zebrafish. Further investigations demonstrated that EC could suppress the phosphorylation of VEGFR2, and its downstream signaling pathways were altered in VEGF-induced HUVECs. EC formed a hydrogen bond to bind with the ATP binding site of the VEGFR2, and EC-VEGFR2 interaction was shown in SPR assay. The suppressive effect of EC on angiogenesis was abrogated after VEGFR2 knockdown in HUVECs. EC inhibited the colon cancer cells colony formation and induced apoptosis. In addition, EC suppressed tumor growth in colon cancer xenograft model, and no detectable hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity. In addition, it inhibited the phosphorylation of VEGFR2, and its downstream signal pathways in tumor.
CONCLUSIONS: EC could inhibit tumor growth in colon cancer by suppressing angiogenesis via VEGFR2 signaling pathway, and suggested EC as a promising candidate for colon cancer treatment.
METHODS: Mice received 3.5% DSS for 7 days to establish IBD models. Intraperitoneal STV-Na was given 2 days before DSS and lasted for 9 days. Commercially available drugs used in treating IBDs (5-aminosalicylic acid, dexamethasone, and infliximab) were used as positive controls. Samples were collected 7 days after colitis induction. Histopathological score, biochemical parameters, molecular biology methods, and metabolomics were used for evaluating the therapeutic effect of STV-Na.
RESULTS: Our data revealed that STV-Na could significantly alleviate colon inflammation in mice with colitis. Specifically, STV-Na treatment improved body weight loss, increased colon length, decreased histology scores, and restored the hematological parameters of mice with colitis. The untargeted metabolomics analysis revealed that metabolic profiles were restored by STV-Na treatment. Furthermore, STV-Na therapy suppressed the number of CD68 macrophages and F4/80 cell infiltration. And STV-Na suppressed M1 and M2 macrophage numbers along with the mRNA expressions of proinflammatory cytokines. Moreover, STV-Na administration increased the number of regulatory T (Treg) cells while decreasing Th1/Th2/Th17 cell counts in the spleen. Additionally, STV-Na treatment restored intestinal barrier disruption in DSS-triggered colitis tissues by ameliorating the TJ proteins, increasing goblet cell proportions, and mucin protein production, and decreasing the permeability to FITC-dextran, which was accompanied by decreased plasma LPS and DAO contents.
CONCLUSION: These results indicate that STV-Na can ameliorate colitis by modulating immune responses along with metabolic reprogramming, and could therefore be a promising therapeutic strategy for IBDs.