Open Access


Read more
image01

Online Manuscript Submission


Read more
image01

Submitted Manuscript Trail


Read more
image01

Online Payment


Read more
image01

Online Subscription


Read more
image01

Email Alert



Read more
image01

Original Research Article | OPEN ACCESS

Assessment of the Developmental Toxicity of Epidermal Growth Factor using Embryonic Stem Cell Test

Fen Chen1, Fenfang Cao1, Zhijian Su2, Linyan Li1, Aibo Huang1, Hua Xu1

1College of Pharmacy; 2Department of Biopharmaceutical Research and Development Centre, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, Guangdong, People’s Republic of China.

For correspondence:-  Hua Xu   Email: huaxmail@163.com   Tel:+8602038375022

Received: 8 February 2014        Accepted: 22 April 2014        Published: 23 May 2014

Citation: Chen F, Cao F, Su Z, Li L, Huang A, Xu H. Assessment of the Developmental Toxicity of Epidermal Growth Factor using Embryonic Stem Cell Test. Trop J Pharm Res 2014; 13(5):689-696 doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v13i5.6

© 2014 The authors.
This is an Open Access article that uses a funding model which does not charge readers or their institutions for access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read), which permit unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited..

Abstract

Purpose: To determine whether epidermal growth factor (EGF) is involved in reproductive developmental toxicity, using the embryonic stem cell test (EST), as well as ascertain how EGF influences embryonic development.
Methods: To predict developmental toxicity on the basis of reducing cell viability and inhibition of differentiation of embryonic stem cells, EST was used to assess changes in different blastodermic genes and expression of proteins including ectodermal-specific genes Pax6, NF-H and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), mesodermal-specific genes BMP4, GATA4, and MyoD, and endodermal-specific genes, viz, α-fetoprotein, transthyretin (TTR), and albumin, as well as undifferentiated genes, Nanog and Oct4.
Results: The results indicate that EGF was weakly embryotoxic with IC50ESC (i.e., the concentration that reduced ESC viability by 50 %), IC503T3 (the concentration that reduced 3T3 cell viability by 50 %), and ID50ESC (the concentration that inhibited differentiation of ESC by 50 %) of 6.773, 10.531, and 1.793 μg/mL, respectively. The expression levels of tissue-specific genes of the three germ layers were mainly promoted by 0.01 - 1 μg/mL EGF. Distinctively, relatively high concentrations of EGF caused a discordant effect on the three germ layers. High concentrations of EGF promoted differentiation of the ectoderm and mesoderm, and either inhibited or had mostly no impact on the endoderm.
Conclusion: The imbalance of the three layer-specific genes and expression of proteins, as a result of EGF, might be responsible for its weak level of developmental toxicity. The sensitivity of TTR means that further investigation is required to determine whether it can be used as an embryotoxicity biomarker for growth factors.

Keywords: Embryonic stem cell test, Epidermal growth factor, Developmental toxicity, Germ layers, Blastodermic genes, Protein expression

Impact Factor
Thompson Reuters (ISI): 0.523 (2021)
H-5 index (Google Scholar): 39 (2021)

Article Tools

Share this article with



Article status: Free
Fulltext in PDF
Similar articles in Google
Similar article in this Journal:

Archives

2024; 23: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2023; 22: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2022; 21: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2021; 20: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2020; 19: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2019; 18: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2018; 17: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2017; 16: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2016; 15: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2015; 14: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2014; 13: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2013; 12: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2012; 11: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2011; 10: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2010; 9: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2009; 8: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2008; 7: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2007; 6: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2006; 5: 
1,   2
2005; 4: 
1,   2
2004; 3: 
1
2003; 2: 
1,   2
2002; 1: 
1,   2

News Updates