Open AccessCell kinetic studies in the murine ventral tongue epithelium: the effects of repeated exposure to keratinocyte growth factor
Author(s) -
Potten C. S.,
Booth D.,
Cragg N. J.,
O'Shea J. A.,
Tudor G. L.,
Booth C.
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
cell proliferation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.647
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1365-2184
pISSN - 0960-7722
DOI - 10.1046/j.1365-2184.35.s1.3.x
Subject(s) - keratinocyte growth factor , epithelium , tongue , biology , basal (medicine) , keratinocyte , cell growth , thymidine , andrology , endocrinology , chemistry , medicine , growth factor , pathology , in vitro , biochemistry , receptor , genetics , insulin
. Keratinocyte growth factor (KGF) stimulates proliferation and differentiation in various epithelial systems. Three daily subcutaneous injections of 125 µg of this protein into mice induce dramatic changes in the histology and histometric measurements of the ventral tongue epithelium. The thickness of the epithelium is increased two‐fold and the number of cells beneath a 1‐mm length of the surface is increased 1.6‐fold. KGF also induces a four‐fold increase in the number of S phase cells labelled with tritiated thymidine in the basal layer on the third day after KGF administration. The increase in thickness and cellularity persist for at least 4 days after the end of the KGF injections. However, there is a dramatic fall in the number of S phase cells detected by 3 HTdR pulse labelling 2 days after the end of the KGF treatment. There are indications that by 7 days after the 3‐day regimen of KGF treatment, both thickness and cellularity have fallen back to near control levels. Continued exposure to KGF over a period of 7 days does not result in any further increases in thickness, cellularity or proliferation. In fact, the proliferation decreases on the fifth, sixth and seventh days of KGF injection to control values on day 7. These changes in the epithelium following KGF treatment suggest that the thicker and more cellular epithelium may be more able to cope with an exposure to a cytotoxic agent and hence be protected in comparison with normal or vehicle‐treated epithelium.