Blood online
Home About Blood Authors Subscriptions Permission Advertising Public Access contact us
 

 
Advanced
Current Issue
First Edition
Future Articles
Archives
Submit to Blood
Search
American Society of Hematology
Meeting Abstracts
Email Alerts
Blood, 1 August 2008, Vol. 112, No. 3, pp. 913.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Right arrow Rights and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pendurthi, U. R.
Right arrow Articles by Rao, L. V. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Pendurthi, U. R.
Right arrow Articles by Rao, L. V. M.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Articles in Blood Online
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

arrow to previous article Previous Article  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Article next article arrow

CORRESPONDENCE

Response: Tissue factor de-encryption: the cell model system

In their correspondence, Liang and Hogg have suggested that MDA-MB231 cells, one of the 3 cell systems we used in our study of tissue factor (TF) de-encryption,1 were not suitable for the study because they believe that TF is constitutively active in these cells. They base this conclusion on their observation that they were unable to find an increase in TF activity in these cells in response to HgCl2 (100 µM for 30 seconds). We chose MDA-MB231 cells as a model system because we wanted to study the involvement of TF de-encryption in regulating the procoagulant as well as cell signaling activities of TF. We do not agree with Liang and Hogg in that all TF on MDA-MB231 cells is constitutively active. There are no specific assays that can quantify cryptic and active TF. However based on other parameters (ie, the discordance between the amount of FVIIa bound to TF and TF-FVIIa procoagulant activity, and many fold differences between TF activity on intact cells and lysed cells), a majority of TF on MDA-MB231 cells is encrypted. However, it is possible that the amount of active TF in MDA-MB231 cells might be higher than in monocytic cells. Liang and Hogg assert that the 4- to 7-fold increase in TF activity we observed with MDA-MB231 cells after the HgCl2 treatment1 is a relatively modest increase; we disagree with this assertion. More to the point, it is unclear to us why Liang and Hogg failed to observe any increase in TF activity in MDA-MB231 after treatment with HgCl2. Perhaps the treatment conditions might explain this anomaly. In our experiments, we treated MDA-MB231 cells with various concentrations of HgCl2 (1 to 100 µM) and chose a 15-minute treatment period because low concentrations of HgCl2 may require a longer treatment period to show their effect. However, using 25 µM HgCl2, we observed a 3-fold increase in TF activity after only a 1-minute treatment and a 5-fold increase after a 5-minute treatment (data not shown). It is unclear whether Liang and Hogg tested longer time periods of treatment of MDA-MB231 cells with HgCl2 than 30 seconds. It is also conceivable that the source of MDA-MB231 cells, the culture conditions, and other experimental differences might be responsible for the discrepancy between our data and theirs.

Liang and Hogg also suggest that the increased TF activity we have observed with reduced glutathione (GSH) and dithiothreitol (DTT) in MDA-MB231, endothelial cells, and fibroblasts could be due to the cytotoxicity of these compounds. Indeed, not only GSH and DTT but also HgCl2, when used in high concentrations for prolonged time periods, were cytotoxic and/or detach cells from the culture dish. However, this could be minimized by choosing the appropriate culture and experimental conditions (eg, low-passage cultures, 1- or 2-day-old cultures, removing the experimental compound promptly after the treatment period, and washing the cells gently, etc). We routinely observed the cells under microscope before, during, and after the experiment to monitor potential cytotoxic effects of the test compounds, and perform cytotoxic assays if warranted. Thus, it was unlikely that 30% to 35% of the cells were killed in our experiments in GSH and DTT treatments. Here it is important to point out that Liang and Hogg committed a mistake in stating that we treated MDA-MB231, endothelial, and fibroblast cells for 15 minutes with GSH and DTT. Endothelial cells and fibroblasts were treated only for 5 minutes with GSH and DTT (see Figure 2 legend in Pendurthi et al1), and the report had no data on treating MDA-MB231 cells with DTT.

Finally our reservation on the validity of the disulfide bond switching in regulation of TF activity is not solely based upon the experiments discussed above but on a number of other facts as well.1 In our view none of the recent publications on TF de-encryption by Cys186-Cys209 disulfide bond formation24 are unequivocally convincing that the TF activation is independent of phosphatidylserine (PS). Although it had been concluded that TF de-encryption on HL60 could not be explained by exposure of PS on the plasma membrane,2 we reached the opposite conclusion based on the same set of primary data (see Figure 2 of Chen et al2). Readers can examine these data for themselves and may reach their own conclusion. To provide convincing evidence that the disulfide bond formation plays a critical and important role in TF de-encryption, future studies should include a careful scrutiny of the data to rule out the possibility that previously proposed mechanisms (see Rao and Pendurthi5 and Bach6), particularly increased PS exposure, are not contributing to the observed effect. We are open and ready to change our opinion when such data become available.


    Authorship
 Top
 Authorship
 References
 
Conflict-of-interest disclosure: The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Correspondence: L. Vijaya Mohan Rao, Biomedical Research, The University of Texas Health Science Center, Tyler, TX; e-mail: vijay.rao{at}uthct.edu.

Usha R. Pendurthi, and L. Vijaya Mohan Rao


    References
 Top
 Authorship
 References
 

  1. Pendurthi UR, Ghosh S, Mandal SK, Rao LV. Tissue factor activation: is disulfide bond switching a regulatory mechanism? Blood. 2007;110:3900–3908.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

  2. Chen VM, Ahamed J, Versteeg HH, et al. Evidence for activation of tissue factor by an allosteric disulfide bond. Biochemistry. 2006;45:12020–12028.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

  3. Ahamed J, Versteeg HH, Kerver M, et al. Disulfide isomerization switches tissue factor from coagulation to cell signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006;103:13932–13937.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

  4. Reinhardt C, von Bruhl ML, Manukyan D, et al. Protein disulfide isomerase acts as an injury response signal that enhances fibrin generation via tissue factor activation. J Clin Invest. 2008;118:1110–1122.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

  5. Rao LVM, Pendurthi UR. Tissue factor on cells. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis. 1998;9:S27–S35.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

  6. Bach RR. Tissue factor encryption. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2006;26:456–461.[Abstract/Free Full Text]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

Related Articles in Blood Online:

Critical importance of the cell system when studying tissue factor de-encryption
Hai Po Helena Liang and Philip J. Hogg
Blood 2008 112: 912-913. [Full Text] [PDF]

Encryption remains cryptic
James H. Morrissey
Blood 2007 110: 3822-3823. [Full Text] [PDF]

Tissue factor activation: is disulfide bond switching a regulatory mechanism?
Usha R. Pendurthi, Samit Ghosh, Samir K. Mandal, and L. Vijaya Mohan Rao
Blood 2007 110: 3900-3908. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Bio.Home page
S. Butenas, T. Orfeo, and K. G. Mann
Tissue Factor in Coagulation: Which? Where? When?
Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol, December 1, 2009; 29(12): 1989 - 1996.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Right arrow Rights and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pendurthi, U. R.
Right arrow Articles by Rao, L. V. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Pendurthi, U. R.
Right arrow Articles by Rao, L. V. M.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Articles in Blood Online
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

 click for free articles
home about blood authors subscriptions permissions advertising public access contact us
  Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Hematology         Online ISSN: 1528-0020