Stimulation of DNA synthesis and c-fos mRNA expression in primary rat hepatocytes by estrogens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanism(s) of tumour promotion in liver by estrogens is not well understood although growth stimulation is known to be one important element of their action. As a basis for studying mechanisms of growth control by estrogens, effects of both natural and synthetic estrogens on DNA synthesis and protooncogene c-fos mRNA expression were examined in primary cultures of normal rat hepatocytes. 17beta-Estradiol (E(2)) alone was stimulatory and exhibited dramatic synergism with epidermal growth factor (EGF) in stimulating DNA synthesis. All estrogens tested (natural, synthetic, steroidal and non-steroidal) exhibited an ability to stimulate hepatocyte DNA synthesis. This appears to correlate with their ability to induce c-fos mRNA expression. In contrast to a non-estrogenic liver tumour promoter, phenobarbital, insulin is not permissive for the growth-stimulatory action of E(2). Dexamethasone, which is required for stimulation of DNA synthesis by the non-estrogenic tumour promoter alpha-hexachlorocyclohexane and tetradecanoylphorbol acetate, completely blocked E(2)-stimulated DNA synthesis. Such differential requirements for auxiliary factors suggests that estrogen and other non-estrogenic liver tumour promoters act via distinct mechanisms in stimulating hepatocyte DNA synthesis. E(2) alone had no effect, but when in combination with EGF significantly induced c-fos mRNA expression at early times in culture (maximal at 10 h in culture). Such findings, coupled with the observations that (i) E(2) and EGF were synergistic in growth stimulation, (ii) estrogen receptor levels are higher at early times in culture and (iii) the growth-stimulatory ability of E(2) is limited to 4-24 h in culture, support the notion that in hepatocytes E(2) acts via the estrogen receptor to transactivate c-fos expression (an interaction with EGF), which ultimately culminates in enhanced DNA synthesis. Dexamethasone did not block E(2)-induced c-fos gene expression, suggesting that it acts in a pathway(s) distal to activation of fos gene expression. The possible inhibitory mechanisms of action of dexamethasone on E(2)-stimulated DNA synthesis are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".