Expression of components of the urothelial cholinergic system in bladder and cultivated primary urothelial cells of the pig.
Acetylcholine
German landrace pig
Göttingen Minipig
Muscarinic receptor
Transporter
Urinary bladder
Urothelium
Journal
BMC urology
ISSN: 1471-2490
Titre abrégé: BMC Urol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968571
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 Jul 2019
09 Jul 2019
Historique:
received:
15
02
2018
accepted:
04
07
2019
entrez:
11
7
2019
pubmed:
11
7
2019
medline:
16
1
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Porcine urinary bladders are widely used for uro-pharmacological examinations due to their resemblance to the human organ. However, characterisations of the porcine urothelium at the molecular level are scarce up to now. As it has become clear over the last years that this tissue plays an important role in the signaling-pathways of the bladder, we examined whether the transporter and receptor pattern (with focus on the transmitter acetylcholine) is comparable to the human urothelium. With regard to in vitro studies, we also investigated if there is a difference between the native tissue and cultivated primary urothelial cells in culture. Urothelium from German Landrace and Göttingen Minipig bladders was collected. One part of the German Landrace tissue was used for cultivation, and different passages of the urothelial cells were collected. The actual mRNA expression of different transporters and receptors was examined via quantitative real-time PCR. These included the vesicular acetylcholine transporter (VAChT), the choline acetyl transferase (ChAT), organic cation transporters 1-3 (OCT1-3), organic anion transporting polypeptide 1A2 (OATP1A2), P-glycoprotein (ABCB1), the carnitine acetyl-transferase (CarAT), as well as the muscarinic receptors 1-5 (M1-5). There is a strong qualitative resemblance between the human and the porcine urothelium with regard to the investigated cholinergic receptors, enzymes and transporters. CarAT, OCT1-3, OATP1A2 and ABCB1 could be detected in the urothelium of both pig races. Moreover, all 5 M-receptors were prominent with an emphasis on M2 and M3. VAChT and ChAT could not be detected at all. Cultures of the derived urothelial cells showed decreased expression of all targets apart from ABCB1 and CarAT. Based on the expression pattern of receptors, transporters and enzymes of the cholinergic system, the porcine urinary bladder can be regarded as a good model for pharmacological studies. However, cultivation of primary urothelial cells resulted in a significant drop in mRNA expression of the targets. Therefore, it can be concluded that the intact porcine urothelium, or the whole pig bladder, may be appropriate models for studies with anticholinergic drugs, whereas cultivated urothelial cells have some limitation due to significant changes in the expression levels of relevant targets.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Porcine urinary bladders are widely used for uro-pharmacological examinations due to their resemblance to the human organ. However, characterisations of the porcine urothelium at the molecular level are scarce up to now. As it has become clear over the last years that this tissue plays an important role in the signaling-pathways of the bladder, we examined whether the transporter and receptor pattern (with focus on the transmitter acetylcholine) is comparable to the human urothelium. With regard to in vitro studies, we also investigated if there is a difference between the native tissue and cultivated primary urothelial cells in culture.
METHODS
METHODS
Urothelium from German Landrace and Göttingen Minipig bladders was collected. One part of the German Landrace tissue was used for cultivation, and different passages of the urothelial cells were collected. The actual mRNA expression of different transporters and receptors was examined via quantitative real-time PCR. These included the vesicular acetylcholine transporter (VAChT), the choline acetyl transferase (ChAT), organic cation transporters 1-3 (OCT1-3), organic anion transporting polypeptide 1A2 (OATP1A2), P-glycoprotein (ABCB1), the carnitine acetyl-transferase (CarAT), as well as the muscarinic receptors 1-5 (M1-5).
RESULTS
RESULTS
There is a strong qualitative resemblance between the human and the porcine urothelium with regard to the investigated cholinergic receptors, enzymes and transporters. CarAT, OCT1-3, OATP1A2 and ABCB1 could be detected in the urothelium of both pig races. Moreover, all 5 M-receptors were prominent with an emphasis on M2 and M3. VAChT and ChAT could not be detected at all. Cultures of the derived urothelial cells showed decreased expression of all targets apart from ABCB1 and CarAT.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the expression pattern of receptors, transporters and enzymes of the cholinergic system, the porcine urinary bladder can be regarded as a good model for pharmacological studies. However, cultivation of primary urothelial cells resulted in a significant drop in mRNA expression of the targets. Therefore, it can be concluded that the intact porcine urothelium, or the whole pig bladder, may be appropriate models for studies with anticholinergic drugs, whereas cultivated urothelial cells have some limitation due to significant changes in the expression levels of relevant targets.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31288793
doi: 10.1186/s12894-019-0495-z
pii: 10.1186/s12894-019-0495-z
pmc: PMC6617688
doi:
Substances chimiques
Organic Anion Transporters
0
Receptors, Muscarinic
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
62Références
Br J Pharmacol. 2000 Dec;131(7):1482-8
pubmed: 11090124
J Auton Pharmacol. 2000 Jun;20(3):171-6
pubmed: 11193006
J Urol. 2002 Feb;167(2 Pt 1):742-5
pubmed: 11792964
Eur Urol. 2003 Jan;43(1):1-5
pubmed: 12507537
Traffic. 2004 Mar;5(3):117-28
pubmed: 15086788
Br J Pharmacol. 2005 Apr;144(8):1089-99
pubmed: 15723094
Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2005 Sep;289(3):F489-95
pubmed: 16093424
Br J Pharmacol. 2006 Jul;148(5):565-78
pubmed: 16751797
J Urol. 2006 Jul;176(1):367-73
pubmed: 16753445
BJU Int. 2006 Sep;98(3):503-7
pubmed: 16925744
J Urol. 2006 Oct;176(4 Pt 1):1673-8
pubmed: 16952712
Eur Urol. 2007 Apr;51(4):1042-53
pubmed: 17084519
Life Sci. 2007 May 30;80(24-25):2303-7
pubmed: 17335853
Life Sci. 2007 May 30;80(24-25):2308-13
pubmed: 17337281
Life Sci. 2007 May 30;80(24-25):2298-302
pubmed: 17363007
BJU Int. 2007 Nov;100(5):987-1006
pubmed: 17922784
Xenobiotica. 2007 Oct-Nov;37(10-11):1171-95
pubmed: 17968742
Neurourol Urodyn. 2009;28(8):1022-7
pubmed: 19283864
Pharmacogenomics. 2009 Mar;10(3):339-44
pubmed: 19290786
Drug Metab Dispos. 2009 Jul;37(7):1371-4
pubmed: 19389858
Urology. 2010 Apr;75(4):862-7
pubmed: 20156651
J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods. 2010 Nov-Dec;62(3):196-220
pubmed: 20685310
Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2011 Feb;383(2):203-8
pubmed: 21212936
Front Pharmacol. 2012 Mar 30;3:52
pubmed: 22479248
Neuroscience. 2013 Jan 15;229:27-35
pubmed: 23131712
PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e58611
pubmed: 23516515
Mol Pharm. 2015 Jan 5;12(1):171-8
pubmed: 25466967
Lab Anim. 2015 Oct;49(4):336-44
pubmed: 25660835
J Pharm Sci. 2015 Jul;104(7):2233-40
pubmed: 25989054
J Biomater Appl. 2016 Feb;30(7):961-73
pubmed: 26475852
Carcinogenesis. 1996 Mar;17(3):601-4
pubmed: 8631151
Pharmacol Toxicol. 1997;80 Suppl 2:3-4
pubmed: 9249853
Urol Res. 1998;26(2):149-54
pubmed: 9631949