LIFE01200604005 Shri Somnath Ghosh - Homi Bhabha National ...
LIFE01200604005 Shri Somnath Ghosh - Homi Bhabha National ...
LIFE01200604005 Shri Somnath Ghosh - Homi Bhabha National ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.08.006<br />
Int. J. Radiation Oncology Biol. Phys., Vol. 72, No. 5, pp. 1567–1574, 2008<br />
Copyright Ó 2008 Elsevier Inc.<br />
Printed in the USA. All rights reserved<br />
0360-3016/08/$–see front matter<br />
BIOLOGY CONTRIBUTION<br />
ROLE OF iNOS IN BYSTANDER SIGNALING BETWEEN MACROPHAGES AND<br />
LYMPHOMA CELLS<br />
SOMNATH GHOSH, M.SC.,* DHARMENDRA KUMAR MAURYA, PH.D.,* AND MALINI KRISHNA, PH.D.*<br />
*Radiation Biology and Health Science Division, <strong>Bhabha</strong> Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India<br />
Purpose: The present report describes the bystander effects of radiation between similar and dissimilar cells and<br />
the role of iNOS in such communication.<br />
Materials and Methods: EL-4 and RAW 264.7 cells were exposed to 5 Gy g-irradiation. The medium from irradiated<br />
cells was transferred to unirradiated cells.<br />
Results: Irradiated EL-4 cells as well as those cultured in the presence of medium from g-irradiated EL-4 cells<br />
showed an upregulation of NF-kB, iNOS, p53, and p21/waf1 genes. The directly irradiated and the bystander<br />
EL-4 cells showed an increase in DNA damage, apoptosis, and NO production. Bystander signaling was also found<br />
to exist between RAW 264.7 (macrophage) and EL-4 (lymphoma) cells. Unstimulated or irradiated RAW 264.7<br />
cells did not induce bystander effect in unirradiated EL-4 cells, but LPS stimulated and irradiated RAW 264.7 cells<br />
induced an upregulation of NF-kB and iNOS genes and increased the DNA damage in bystander EL-4 cells. Treatment<br />
of EL-4 or RAW 264.7 cells with L-NAME significantly reduced the induction of gene expression and DNA<br />
damage in the bystander EL-4 cells, whereas treatment with cPTIO only partially reduced the induction of gene<br />
expression and DNA damage in the bystander EL-4 cells.<br />
Conclusions: It was concluded that active iNOS in the irradiated cells was essential for bystander response.<br />
Ó 2008 Elsevier Inc.<br />
Radiation, Bystander signaling, Nuclear factor-kB, iNOS, p53 and p21.<br />
INTRODUCTION<br />
It is now apparent that the target for biologic effects of ionizing<br />
radiation is not solely the irradiated cell, but also the surrounding<br />
cells and tissues. Preliminary evidence indicates<br />
that similar signal transduction pathways are activated in directly<br />
irradiated cells and the bystander cells and contribute to<br />
the induction of bystander DNA damage (1). Many genes<br />
have been shown to be activated in bystander cells (2), but<br />
evidence for genes that are involved in the signaling pathways<br />
is lacking.<br />
Several factors involving soluble growth factors (3, 4), oxidative<br />
metabolites (5), and those that pass through gap junction<br />
(5–7) have been implicated. Among the various<br />
compounds that could transmit the signal from irradiated<br />
cells to bystander cells, nitric oxide (NO), by virtue of its diffusible<br />
nature and long life in vivo is a promising candidate<br />
(8–10). The accumulation of inducible nitric oxide synthase<br />
(iNOS) and the increased activity of constitutive NOS have<br />
been known to be an early signaling event induced by radiation.<br />
Gamma irradiation–induced DNA damage is known to<br />
enhance NO production in lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-stimulated<br />
macrophages (11). It is likely that stimulated and unstimulated<br />
macrophage behave differently where bystander<br />
response is concerned.<br />
Although abscopal effects have been deemed responsible<br />
for retarding the growth of a similar tumors located at a distant<br />
site in the mice (12), their contribution in transferring signals<br />
between dissimilar cells have not been extensively examined.<br />
To validate the presence of abscopal effects in vitro, we have<br />
used two dissimilar cell lines viz. EL-4 cells, a lymphoma cell<br />
line and RAW 264.7 cells, a macrophage cell line. Because<br />
there is extensive intercellular communications between dissimilar<br />
cells during immune responses, the leukocytes and<br />
lymphocytes were deemed suitable candidates to study<br />
bystander effects.<br />
The present report looks at the mechanism of bystander response<br />
in similar cells (EL-4 Vs EL-4 cells) and whether the<br />
state of activation of RAW 264.7 cells affects the bystander<br />
response in dissimilar cells (EL-4 Vs RAW 264.7).<br />
METHODS AND MATERIALS<br />
Cell culture, reagents, and irradiation schedule<br />
Mouse lymphoma cell line, EL-4 and mouse macrophage RAW<br />
264.7 cells were grown in RPMI 1640 (Sigma, St. Louis, Mo),<br />
Reprint requests to: Dr. Malini Krishna, Ph.D., <strong>Bhabha</strong> Atomic<br />
Research Centre, Radiation Biology and Health Science Division,<br />
Trombay, Mumbai, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400085, India. Tel:<br />
(+91) 22-25593868; Fax: (+91) 22-2550 5151; E-mail: malini@<br />
barc.gov.in<br />
1567<br />
Conflict of interest: none<br />
Received April 25, 2008, and in revised form July 30, 2008.<br />
Accepted for publication Aug 2, 2008.