J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 45, 32145-32152, November 5, 1999
SPARC Regulates the Expression of Collagen Type I and
Transforming Growth Factor-
1 in Mesangial Cells*
Aleksandar
Francki
§,
Amy D.
Bradshaw
§,
James A.
Bassuk¶,
Chin C.
Howe
,
William G.
Couser**, and
E.
Helene
Sage
§
From the
Department of Biological Structure,
University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195-7420, the
¶ Department of Urology, University of Washington,
Seattle, Washington 98195, the
Wistar Institute,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, and the ** Division of Nephrology,
University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195
 |
ABSTRACT |
The matricellular protein SPARC is expressed at
high levels in cells that participate in tissue remodeling and is
thought to regulate mesangial cell proliferation and extracellular
matrix production in the kidney glomerulus in a rat model of
glomerulonephritis (Pichler, R. H., Bassuk, J. A., Hugo, C.,
Reed, M. J., Eng, E., Gordon, K. L., Pippin, J., Alpers,
C. E., Couser, W. G., Sage, E. H., and Johnson, R. J. (1997) Am. J. Pathol. 148, 1153-1167). A potential
mechanism by which SPARC controls both cell cycle and matrix production
has been attributed to its regulation of a pleiotropic growth factor.
In this study we used primary mesangial cell cultures from wild-type
mice and from mice with a targeted disruption of the SPARC
gene. SPARC-null cells displayed diminished expression of collagen type
I mRNA and protein, relative to wild-type cells, by the criteria of
immunocytochemistry, immunoblotting, and the reverse
transcription-polymerase chain reaction. The SPARC-null cells also
showed significantly decreased steady-state levels of transforming
growth factor-
1 (TGF-
1) mRNA and secreted TGF-
1 protein.
Addition of recombinant SPARC to SPARC-null cells restored the
expression of collagen type I mRNA to 70% and TGF-
1 mRNA to
100% of wild-type levels. We conclude that SPARC regulates the
expression of collagen type I and TGF-
1 in kidney mesangial cells. Since increased mitosis and matrix deposition by mesangial cells
are characteristics of glomerulopathies, we propose that SPARC is one
of the factors that maintains the balance between cell proliferation
and matrix production in the glomerulus.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
SPARC (secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine), a
matricellular glycoprotein also known as BM-40, osteonectin, or 43-kDa protein, modulates the interaction of cells with the extracellular matrix through its regulation of cell adhesion and binding of growth
factors (1, 2). It has been shown to inhibit proliferation, disrupt
focal adhesions, and prevent cell spreading in vitro (3). In
addition, SPARC is known to bind to certain growth factors, for example
platelet-derived growth factor
(PDGF)1 (4), and to bind
extracellular matrix proteins such as collagen type I (5). SPARC
regulates the expression of a number of secreted proteins (6) as well
as matrix metalloproteinases (7) in certain cell types and is thought
to modulate the interactions between cells and the surrounding
extracellular matrix at least partially through this activity. In
vivo, it is expressed during development (8) and is produced at
sites of wound repair (9) and tissue remodeling (10). Furthermore, the
production of SPARC mRNA is increased in certain types of carcinoma
(11), in scleroderma (12), atherosclerotic lesions (4), passive Heymann
nephritis (13), and mesangioproliferative glomerulonephritis (14). For example, SPARC has been shown to be involved in the resolution of
mesangioproliferative glomerulonephritis in the Thy 1.1 model in the
rat and to inhibit PDGF-induced proliferation of mesangial cells
in vitro (14).
Transforming growth factor-
1 (TGF-
1) is also produced by
mesangial cells during mesangioproliferative glomerulonephritis (15). A
multifunctional growth factor that belongs to a family of proteins,
TGF-
1 functions in various physiological processes such as growth,
differentiation, proliferation, tissue remodeling, and wound healing
(16). Although specific receptors have been found on nearly all
mammalian cells, the effects of TGF-
1 differ according to cell type,
growth conditions, and concentration of growth factor (17). TGF-
1
has been implicated in development and in the remodeling of tissues
that takes place during adult life (18), although its effects on
proliferation and differentiation can be stimulatory or inhibitory
(19). TGF-
1 mediates the formation of extracellular matrix via its
stimulation of the synthesis of components such as collagen type I. Moreover, it inhibits the degradation of extracellular matrix by
suppression of matrix metalloproteinases and induction of tissue
inhibitors of these enzymes (20). A number of publications have
identified TGF-
1 as a critical factor in kidney diseases such as
glomerulosclerosis (21) and mesangioproliferative glomerulonephritis
(22). Furthermore, it has been shown that TGF-
1 augments the
accumulation of glomerular matrix through its induction of collagen
type I (23).
The most abundant fibrillar collagen expressed by a variety of cell
types, collagen type I maintains the structural integrity of tissues
such as bone, skin, organ capsules, and blood vessels (24). A number of
factors modulate expression of the collagen genes during development
(24), wound healing (25), inflammation (26), cancer (27), and
glomerulonephritis (20). Numerous studies have shown that collagen
synthesis and deposition are regulated by TGF-
1 (28) and by
alterations in cell-extracellular matrix interactions that are
accompanied by reorganization of the cytoskeletal network (29). Under
pathological conditions, changes in regulatory pathways occur that can
lead to the elevated expression of collagen type I (30), with eventual
fibrosis or sclerosis and impaired organ function. Thus, it is critical
to understand the different factors involved in the regulation of this
predominant collagen.
To investigate the function of SPARC in the regulation of collagen type
I and TGF-
1, we chose a model in which we could study interactions
among SPARC, collagen type I, and TGF-
1 in primary mesangial cell
cultures from wild-type and SPARC-null mice. We present evidence that
SPARC regulates the expression of both collagen type I and TGF-
1 in
mouse mesangial cells. SPARC-null cells exhibited a significantly
diminished expression of collagen type I and TGF-
1. After treatment
of these cells with recombinant human (rh) SPARC, the levels of
collagen type I and TGF-
1 were restored to 70% and 100%,
respectively, of those produced by wild-type cells. Furthermore, we
show that SPARC exhibits some of its effects on collagen type I
expression via a TGF-
1-dependent pathway. Since TGF-
1
can induce the expression of SPARC under certain conditions (26), it is
likely that SPARC and TGF-
1 participate in a reciprocal, positive
autocrine feedback loop that is especially prominent in mesangial cells.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Preparation and Characterization of Murine Glomerular Mesangial
Cells--
129/SvJ × C57BL/6J wild-type and SPARC-null mice (31)
were maintained in a specific pathogen-free facility. Mice were
euthanized at 3-6 months of age, and the kidneys were removed.
The method for the preparation of primary mesangial cells is based on a
partial collagenase digestion of isolated glomeruli (32). The cortex
was removed and was kept in sterile ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline
(PBS, 120 mM NaCl, 2.7 mM KCl, and 10 mM phosphate-buffered saline, pH 7.5). The following
procedures were performed on ice. 1) The cortex was minced finely with
a scalpel, and the homogenate was passed over sieves with meshes of 180 and 106 µm. 2) The next sieve, with a mesh of 45 µm, retained 98%
of the glomeruli, which were washed 3 times with sterile PBS. 3) The
glomeruli were digested for 15-25 min at 37 °C in a solution of
collagenase (Worthington) (50 mg of collagenase type CLS 4, 184 units/ml, dissolved in 50 ml of PBS).
The suspension was shaken every 3-5 min, and the digestion was stopped
when thread-like collagen-containing fibers began to form on the
glomeruli. The glomeruli were washed 2 times (4 °C, 150 × g) in growth medium (Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (55%), F-12 Nutrient Mixture (20%) (Life Technologies, Inc.), fetal
bovine serum (20%) (Summit Biotechnologies, Stoughton, MA), trace
elements (1%) (Biofluids, Inc., Rockville, MD),
L-glutamine (2 mM), transferrin (5 µg/ml),
insulin (125 units/ml), penicillin G, (500 units/ml), streptomycin
sulfate (500 units/ml), and amphotericin B (2 µg/ml) (Sigma)), placed
in small culture flasks in 2 ml, and incubated at 37 °C in a
humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2. After 10-14 days,
the preparation was checked microscopically. All cell populations
except the mesangial cells were marked on the outside of the flask and
were subsequently scraped off. For passages 0-3, the mesangial cells
were grown to confluence in 50% fresh growth medium and 50%
sterile-filtered conditioned medium.
In these enriched populations of mesangial cells, there were no
macrophages, endothelial- or epithelial-like cells, or fibroblasts, according to morphological criteria. In contrast to other glomerular cells, mesangial cells exhibited immunofluorescent staining for myosin,
-smooth muscle actin, desmin, vimentin, fibronectin, collagen type
IV, and major histocompatibility complex class I antigen. The absence
of von Willebrand factor and cytokeratins 18 and 19 indicated that
endothelial and epithelial cell contamination was minimal. Furthermore,
the use of mesangial cells after passage 3 essentially eliminates
contamination by macrophages and endothelial cells, as these cell types
do not survive multiple passaging under the culture conditions
described above. Experiments were performed on five independent
preparations of mesangial cells isolated from pools of 8 kidneys each.
All experiments were repeated three times if not stated otherwise.
Mesangial cells were detached in a solution of trypsin/EDTA
(0.125%/0.010%, w/v) (Life Technologies, Inc.) and were replated at a
split ratio of 1:3. The cells were used between passages 3 and 8. For
the TGF-
1 assays, wild-type and SPARC-null cells were grown to 80%
confluence in growth medium, as described above. The cells were washed
2 times with PBS and were changed into fresh growth medium for 96 h. To measure the amounts of TGF-
1 protein in the conditioned
culture media of wild-type and SPARC-null cells, we used an
enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kit (R & D Systems Inc.,
Minneapolis, MN) according to the manufacturer's instructions. The
assay was repeated five times.
Preparation of RNA and Cellular Protein--
For the mRNA
preparation, wild-type and SPARC-null cells were grown to 80%
confluence in growth medium. Total cellular RNA was prepared from
mesangial cells by a modified method (33) that incorporated TRI-reagent
(Molecular Research Center Inc., Cincinnati, OH). To increase the
purity of the RNA samples, we added an additional step with 4 M LiCl to eliminate residual contaminating polysaccharides,
a DNase digestion step to eliminate DNA, and an additional
precipitation of the RNA with ethanol. For preparation of cellular
protein, wild-type and SPARC-null cells were grown to 80% confluence
in growth medium. The insoluble (extracellular matrix proteins and
membranes) and soluble cellular protein fractions were prepared either
with the TRI-reagent or by dissolution of the cells in 1% SDS. The
protein concentrations of the cell fractions were determined by the
Bradford protein assay (34).
Preparation of rhSPARC--
rhSPARC was prepared in SF9 cells by
the use of the baculovirus protein expression system (35) and was
collected in serum-free medium. rhSPARC was isolated by anion-exchange
chromatography and was identified by SDS-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis (PAGE) and immunoblotting with a specific monoclonal
anti-SPARC antibody (Haemotological Technologies, Essex Junction,
VT).2 The rhSPARC had
activity similar to that of recombinant SPARC expressed in
Escherichia coli (36) and to SPARC synthesized by cultured
mammalian cells (37), as measured by inhibition of proliferation and
spreading (35).
Analytical Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction
(RT-PCR)--
RT-PCR reactions containing 1 µg of total RNA were
performed with the Access RT-PCR SystemTM (Promega) with
oligonucleotide primers complementary to mouse
-tubulin, mouse
ribosomal protein (rp) S6, mouse SPARC, mouse collagen
1(I) and
2(I), mouse collagen
1 (III), mouse collagen
1 (IV) and
2
(IV), mouse collagen
1 (VIII) and
2 (VIII), mouse fibroblast
growth factor 1 (FGF-1), fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF-2), PDGF-A and
-B chain, and TGF-
1. The primers were designed according to the
Entrez nucleotide query program to retrieve the appropriate cDNAs
from GenBankTM and the Primer selection TM 3 oligonucleotide search program. Furthermore, with the Amplify 1.2 program, the primer pairs were tested for "cross-annealing" such
that up to three primer pairs could be used together in one PCR
reaction (38).
To establish conditions that allow comparison of the amounts of
cDNA produced by RT-PCR, we varied the number of cycles from 24 to
40. For an internal standard, we either amplified
-tubulin mRNA
or rpS6 mRNA, two ubiquitously expressed genes. After
electrophoresis of 1/10 of the PCR reaction (5 µl), the bands
(stained with ethidium bromide (EtBr), 0.5 µg/ml) became visible
after 22 PCR cycles, and the staining reached saturation after 28 cycles. Therefore, a cycle number of 24 was chosen to compare the
different levels of expression of the various mRNAs and to avoid
saturation of the PCR DNA product and EtBr staining. The amounts of
-tubulin or rpS6 appeared to be unchanged between wild-type and
SPARC-null cells. For quantification, values obtained from scanning
densitometry of the cDNA bands generated from the respective
mRNAs were normalized to the
-tubulin or rpS6 band. Since the
-tubulin/rpS6 and the other cDNAs were synthesized in the same
tube, a direct comparison of the levels of expression is reasonable.
Amplification of the newly synthesized first strand cDNA was
performed in a Thermolyne Temptronic Thermal CyclerTM.
Equivalent aliquots of each amplification reaction were separated on a
1.2% agarose gel containing 0.5 µg/ml EtBr in 0.04 M
Tris acetate, 0.001 M EDTA, pH 7.6. The gels were subjected
to electrophoresis for 3 h at 100 V and were subsequently photographed.
Western Blot Analysis and Metabolic Labeling--
Primary
mesangial cell cultures from wild-type and SPARC-null mice were grown
to 80% confluence in the presence of 50 µg/ml sodium ascorbate for
the final 24 h, and protein was prepared as described above. Equal
amounts of protein per lane were resolved by SDS-PAGE (7% gels) under
reducing conditions and were electrotransferred onto nitrocellulose
membranes, which were subsequently blocked for 1 h with 5% nonfat
dry milk and 0.05% Tween 20 (Sigma) in PBS. The blots were incubated
with antibodies against collagen I (guinea pig anti-rat collagen I that
cross-reacts with mouse collagen type I) (24) for 1 h.
Immunoreactivity was detected by incubation of the blot with goat
anti-guinea pig IgG coupled to horseradish peroxidase (Vector
Laboratories Inc., Burlingame, CA), followed by enhanced
chemiluminescence (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). For assessment of
differences in protein loading, the blot was incubated with rabbit
anti-human
-enolase IgG (gift from Dr. E. Plow, Cleveland Clinic,
Cleveland, OH) that cross-reacts with mouse
-enolase, followed
by incubation with goat anti-rabbit IgG conjugated to horseradish peroxidase.
For metabolic labeling, the mesangial cells were grown to 80%
confluence and were incubated with sodium ascorbate (50 µg/ml) for
24 h. Cultures were subsequently incubated in fresh growth medium
containing 50 µCi/ml L-[2,3,4,5-3H]proline
(100 Ci/mmol, NEN Life Science Products). After 18 h, media
containing radiolabeled proteins were removed and mixed with a
proteinase inhibitor mixture (CompleteTM, Roche Molecular
Biochemicals), centrifuged to remove cell debris, and dialyzed against
0.1 N acetic acid to remove unincorporated isotope.
Incorporation of [3H]proline was measured in a
scintillation counter, prior to lyophilization of the supernatants. The
proteins were resuspended in collagenase buffer (50 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 0.15 NaCl, 5 mM CaCl2) to
reflect equal amounts of cpm/ml. Aliquots of the supernatants were
digested for 16 h with bacterial collagenase (Worthington). Equal
volumes of supernatants were resolved by SDS-PAGE (8% gels), stained
with Coomassie Brilliant Blue R, and incubated in EnhanceTM
(NEN Life Science Products) prior to fluorography.
Immunocytochemistry--
Primary mesangial cell cultures from
wild-type and SPARC-null mice were plated on glass coverslips,
incubated with sodium ascorbate (50 µg/ml) for 24 h, and fixed
in 2% paraformaldehyde for 30 min. Paraformaldehyde was removed by
three 5-min washes each with PBS. The coverslips were incubated for 30 min in 2% normal goat serum to block nonspecific binding and 0.5%
Triton X-100 (Sigma) to solubilize the cell membranes. Subsequently, the cells were incubated for 1 h with antibodies against collagen type I. After three rinses in PBS, the coverslips were incubated for 30 min with rhodamine-conjugated goat anti-guinea pig IgG. Immunoreactivity was visualized by fluorescence microscopy (Nikon, Inc., Garden City, NY).
Anti-TGF-
1 Antibody Blocking Experiments--
To determine
whether the effects of exogenous SPARC were exerted through a
TGF-
1-dependent pathway, we cultured cells as described
above and treated them with or without the following: (i)
anti-TGF-
1-blocking antibodies (polyclonal goat anti-human IgG, R & D Systems, Inc., Minneapolis, MN) at a final concentration of 30 µg/ml; (ii) rhSPARC (30 µg/ml, 0.9 µM); (iii)
rhTGF-
1 (1, 5, and 10 ng/ml); and (iv) either rhSPARC or rhTGF-
1
together with anti-TGF-
1-blocking antibodies for 0-6 h. As a
control we used an irrelevant polyclonal goat anti-rabbit IgG (Vector).
Total RNA was prepared as described above, and the levels of mouse
1(I) and mouse TGF-
1 mRNA were determined.
Image Processing--
All immunocytochemistry slides,
autoradiograms, immunoblots, and agarose gels were photographed and
converted to digital computer files with a UMAX S-6E
scannerTM and Adobe Photoshop softwareTM. Files
were processed and analyzed by NIH Image softwareTM and are
presented as composite figures.
 |
RESULTS |
Diminished Expression of Collagen Type I in SPARC-Null
Cells--
SPARC has been implicated as a modulator of interactions
between cells and the extracellular matrix. It is known to bind to growth factors and to matricellular proteins as well as to matrix proteins. Alterations in cell-matrix interactions usually occur during
wound healing, tissue remodeling, and fibrosis (29). Since SPARC (14),
collagen type I (20), and TGF-
1 (22) were among the proteins shown
to be augmented during mesangioproliferative glomerulonephritis, we
examined the effect of SPARC on the expression of collagen type I and
TGF-
1 in mesangial cells cultured from wild-type and SPARC-null
mice. The following results were observed in five independent
preparations of mesangial cells isolated from pools of eight kidneys
each. The experiments were performed four times with all five
preparations. Means ± S.D. were calculated for all experiments.
One of the first observations we made was that SPARC-null mesangial
cells proliferated faster and exhibited a more rounded, cobblestone-like cell shape in comparison to their wild-type
counterparts (35). Confluent monolayers of SPARC-null mesangial cells
displayed very few of the hillocks (localized accumulations of
extracellular matrix) that typify mesangial cell cultures. Mesangial
cells also produced diminished levels of collagen type I, as shown in
Fig. 1. Wild-type cells incubated with
anti-collagen type I antibody exhibited a typical granular staining
pattern throughout the cytoplasm (A), whereas SPARC-null
cells showed significantly less staining for collagen type I
(B). Immunoreactivity with an irrelevant antibody or the
secondary antibody alone was negative (data not shown).

View larger version (45K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Diminished expression of collagen type I
protein by SPARC-null mesangial cells. Mesangial cells (passage 4)
were plated in growth medium on coverslips for 24 h and were fixed
in paraformaldehyde. Immunofluorescence was performed with an antibody
specific for collagen type I. A, wild-type cells;
B, SPARC-null cells.
|
|
The amount of procollagen type I secreted by the SPARC-null cells was
also considerably diminished, relative to levels produced by wild-type
cells (Fig. 2, lanes 1 and
3). Digestion of the secreted protein with collagenase (Fig.
2, lanes 2 and 4) prior to SDS-PAGE confirmed the
identity of these bands as procollagen and its processed
chains.
Under the conditions used for SDS-PAGE, the
1(I) and the
2(I)
chains comigrated in our metabolic labeling and immunoblotting experiments.

View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Reduced secretion of collagen type I by
SPARC-null mesangial cells. Mesangial cells were incubated for
18 h in the presence of [3H]proline; equal cpm of
radiolabeled proteins in the conditioned medium were resolved by
SDS-PAGE on an 8% gel under reducing conditions and were visualized by
autoradiography. Prior to separation, aliquots of the supernatants
containing equivalent amounts of labeled protein were digested with
bacterial collagenase. Lanes 1 and 3, undigested
proteins; lanes 2 and 4, digested proteins.
|
|
Collagen type I mRNA was detectable in mesangial cells by RT-PCR.
The initial amounts of reverse-transcribed mRNAs for
1(I) were
significantly lower in the SPARC-null cells (lane 2) in
comparison with those in wild-type cells (lane 1) (Fig.
3A). By scanning densitometry
with
-tubulin or rpS6 as an internal control, we found consistently
diminished levels of
1(I) mRNA relative to that of wild-type
cells, with a mean value of 44 ± 3%, a decrease of 2.2-fold
(Table I). Similar decreases in
2(I)
mRNA were seen in SPARC-null cells by RT-PCR. Relative to wild-type
cells, levels of
2(I) mRNA in SPARC-null cells were diminished
by 53 ± 4% (1.9-fold). Since the changes in expression of
2(I) were quantitatively similar to those of the
1(I) chain, only
the latter has been shown.

View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Reduced expression of collagen type I
mRNA and protein by SPARC-null mesangial cells. A,
1 µg of total RNA extracted from wild-type and SPARC-null cells was
reverse-transcribed and amplified in the presence of specific primers
for the 1(I) collagen chain, for SPARC, and for -tubulin as a
control for gel loading. The products were subjected to agarose gel
electrophoresis. Lane 1, wild-type cells; lane 2, SPARC-null cells. B, Western blot analysis with an
anti-collagen type I antibody of 40 µg of total cellular protein
(resolved by SDS-PAGE on a 7% gel under reducing conditions) derived
from wild-type (lane 1) and SPARC-null cells (lane
2). -Enolase was used as an internal control.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Expression of collagen type I mRNA in wild-type and SPARC-null
mesangial cells
The levels of collagen type I mRNA in wild-type and SPARC-null
cells were evaluated by scanning densitometry of RT-PCR products.
-Tubulin or rpS6 was used as an internal control.
|
|
The diminished expression of collagen type I mRNA shown in Fig.
3A was consistent with the amounts of protein synthesized by
the mesangial cell strains. The SPARC-null cells expressed significantly less collagen type I relative to wild-type cells (Fig.
3B). By scanning densitometry with
-enolase as an
internal control, we found the level of expression of collagen type I
protein in SPARC-null cells to be diminished 1.4-fold (70 ± 5%),
relative to wild-type cells. By RT-PCR, levels of other collagen types that are known to be expressed in the kidney, e.g. types
III, IV, and VIII, were not altered significantly in SPARC-null cells, in comparison to wild-type cells (data not shown).
SPARC Induces Collagen Type I in Mesangial Cells--
Since the
data above were derived from SPARC-null cells, we asked whether
exogenous SPARC would rescue the expression of collagen type I to
levels typical of wild-type cells. Consequently, we added rhSPARC to a
final concentration of 30 µg/ml (0.9 µM) to wild-type
and SPARC-null cells grown to 80% confluence. The levels of
1(I)
mRNA were increased 1.3-fold (25%) in wild-type cells and 1.6-fold
(60%) in SPARC-null cells, relative to those of unstimulated cells,
after exposure to rhSPARC for 6 h (Fig.
4A). We were not able to
restore completely the expression of collagen type I in SPARC-null
cells to levels typical of wild-type cells. It is therefore possible
that SPARC might not regulate the expression of collagen type I
directly but might exert its effect via an additional factor. The
differences in mRNA expression were calculated as described above
and are shown in Table I. These results were confirmed at the protein
level by immunoblotting for collagen type I (Fig. 4B); the
addition of rhSPARC increased collagen type I by 40 ± 4%
(1.4-fold) in wild-type cells and by 34 ± 2% (1.3-fold) in SPARC-null cells. Interestingly, the addition of rhSPARC was also associated with enhanced processing of procollagen to mature collagen chains (Fig. 4B). SPARC thus appears to influence the
expression of collagen type I in mesangial cells.

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Exogenous SPARC induces the production of
collagen type I mRNA and protein in mesangial cells. Wild-type
and SPARC-null cells were stimulated for 6 h with 30 µg/ml (0.9 µM) rhSPARC. Total RNA and cellular protein were
extracted and subjected to RT-PCR and Western blot analysis,
respectively. A, RT-PCR analysis of collagen type I
mRNA; -tubulin was used as an internal control for gel loading.
B, Western blot analysis of collagen type I protein
(resolved by SDS-PAGE on a 7% gel under reducing conditions), with
-enolase as an internal control. Lanes 1 and
3, unstimulated cells; lanes 2 and 4,
cells stimulated with rhSPARC.
|
|
Diminished Expression of TGF-
1 by Mesangial Cells--
TGF-
1
is one of the requisite factors regulating the expression of
extracellular matrix proteins by mesangial cells (20). Given that
SPARC-null cells appeared to express less collagen type I, we evaluated
the levels of TGF-
1 mRNA and protein in SPARC-null and wild-type
cells. By RT-PCR, SPARC-null cells showed a 55 ± 3% (2.1-fold)
decrease in TGF-
1 mRNA production relative to that observed in
wild-type cells (Fig. 5A). We
used a TGF-
1-specific ELISA to measure the amounts of TGF-
1
protein secreted by the respective mesangial cells. SPARC-null cells
secreted approximately 50% less TGF-
1 protein (2-fold decrease)
into the culture medium (Fig. 5B). These results are
averaged from five independent experiments. The total concentrations of
TGF-
1 protein in the culture medium varied as a function of cell
preparation and passage number (e.g. from 2.0/3.6 to
6.2/13.0 ng/ml for SPARC-null cells/wild-type cells), but the ratios
between the values for the SPARC-null and wild-type cells were between
1.6 and 2.1 (average of 1.9) in five experiments. Expression of other
growth factors that are known to regulate the proliferation of
mesangial cells, such as FGF-1, FGF-2, and PDGF-A and, -B chain, were
not altered significantly in SPARC-null versus wild-type
cells (data not shown).

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Reduced expression of
TGF- 1 mRNA and protein by SPARC-null
mesangial cells. A, 1 µg of total RNA extracted from
wild-type and SPARC-null cells was reverse-transcribed and amplified in
the presence of specific primers for TGF- 1 and for -tubulin; the
transcription products were subjected to agarose gel electrophoresis.
Lane 1, wild-type cells; lane 2, SPARC-null
cells. B, analysis of conditioned media derived from
wild-type and SPARC-null cells by an ELISA specific for TGF- 1. The
volumes of the respective media analyzed were normalized according to
cell number, and levels of TGF- 1 in the growth medium alone are also
shown. Results are averaged from five independent experiments.
|
|
SPARC Induces TGF-
1 in Mesangial Cells--
Both wild-type and
SPARC-null cells, grown to 80% confluence, were stimulated with 0.9 µM rhSPARC. The levels of expression of TGF-
1 mRNA
were increased 1.6-fold in wild-type cells and 1.9-fold in SPARC-null
cells, after exposure to rhSPARC for 6 h (Fig.
6). These results, in combination with
those shown in Fig. 5, indicate that SPARC can stimulate the production
of TGF-
1 in mesangial cells.

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Induction of TGF- 1
mRNA in mesangial cells by SPARC. Wild-type and SPARC-null
cells were stimulated for 6 h with 0.9 µM rhSPARC.
Total RNA was prepared and subjected to RT-PCR analysis for TGF- 1
mRNA; -tubulin mRNA was used as an internal control.
Lanes 1 and 3, unstimulated cells; lanes
2 and 4, cells stimulated with rhSPARC.
|
|
Anti-TGF-
1 Blocking Antibodies Reverse the Stimulatory Effect of
Exogenous SPARC on the Expression of Collagen Type I and
TGF-
1--
To determine whether the effects of exogenous SPARC on
collagen type I expression were exerted through a
TGF-
1-dependent pathway, we treated cells for 0-6 h
with or without anti-TGF-
1-blocking antibodies (30 µg/ml), rhSPARC
(0.9 µM), or rhTGF-
1 (1, 5, and 10 ng/ml). Fig.
7A shows the expression of
collagen type I and TGF-
1 after stimulation of the cells with
rhSPARC at different time points. The expression of TGF-
1 mRNA
was induced significantly after 1 h (lanes 2 and
7) and preceded the induction of collagen type I mRNA
expression, which was first apparent at 4 h (lanes 4 and 9). Therefore, there was delayed induction of collagen
type I after treatment with rhSPARC. In comparison, unstimulated cells did not show any significant changes in the steady-state levels of
collagen type I or TGF-
1 mRNA at these time points. Fig.
7B shows the levels of
1(I) mRNA after treatment of
cells with different concentrations of rhTGF-
1. As expected (21),
TGF-
1 induced the expression of
1(I) mRNA in a
concentration-dependent manner. Fig. 7C shows
the levels of
1(I) mRNA after treatment of cells with the
respective reagents and TGF-
1-blocking antibodies. The effects of
rhSPARC and rhTGF-
1 on the expression of
1(I) mRNA were
diminished significantly in the presence of TGF-
1-blocking IgG
(lanes 5 and 6, wild-type; lanes 11 and 12, SPARC-null). TGF-
1-blocking antibodies alone also
diminished the expression of
1(I) mRNA (Fig. 7C,
lanes 4 and 10). The effects of
rhSPARC, rhTGF-
1, and anti-TGF-
1 IgG on the expression of
1(I)
mRNA are more apparent in the SPARC-null cells, results due
possibly to the endogenous expression of SPARC and TGF-
1 by
wild-type cells. Interestingly, we were not able to block completely
the effect of rhSPARC on the expression of collagen type I in
SPARC-null cells. This finding poses the possibility that SPARC might
have an additional TGF-
1-independent effect on the regulation of
collagen type I. The irrelevant polyclonal goat anti-rabbit IgG had no
effect on the expression of
1(I) mRNA (data not shown). The
differences in
1(I) mRNA levels have been summarized as fold
increase or decrease in Table I.

View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Anti-TGF- 1-blocking
antibodies reverse the stimulatory effect of exogenous SPARC on the
expression of collagen type I by mesangial cells. Wild-type and
SPARC-null cells were stimulated for 0-6 h with rhTGF- 1 (1, 5, and
10 ng/ml) or 0.9 µM rhSPARC in the presence or absence of
anti-TGF- 1 blocking antibodies. Total RNA was prepared and subjected
to RT-PCR. A, RT-PCR analysis of the expression of collagen
type I and TGF- 1 after stimulation with rhSPARC (0.9 µM) (+) at different time points (0 to 6 h); the
induction of collagen type I and TGF- 1 was compared with that of
unstimulated cells ( ); rpS6 was used as an internal control.
Lanes 1-5, wild-type cells; lanes 6-10,
SPARC-null cells. B, RT-PCR analysis of the expression of
collagen type I after stimulation with different concentrations of
rhTGF- 1; rpS6 was used as an internal control. Lane C
denotes buffer control. Lanes 1-4, wild-type cells;
lanes 5-8, SPARC-null cells. C, RT-PCR analysis
of collagen type I expression after stimulation with rhTGF- 1 (5 ng/ml), rhSPARC (0.9 µM), and/or anti-TGF- 1 blocking
antibodies (30 µg/ml); rpS6 was used as an internal control.
Lanes 1-6, wild-type cells; lanes 7-10,
SPARC-null cells; lanes 1 and 7, unstimulated
controls; lanes 2, 5, 8, and 11, stimulation with
rhTGF- 1; lanes 3, 6, 9, and 12, stimulation
with rhSPARC; lanes 4 and 10, incubation with
anti-TGF- 1 blocking antibodies alone; lanes 5 and
11, incubation with anti-TGF- 1-blocking antibodies and
rhTGF- 1; lanes 6 and 12, incubation with
anti-TGF- 1 blocking antibodies and rhSPARC.
|
|
In summary, these results indicate a function for SPARC in the
regulation of collagen type I expression in mesangial cells. Moreover,
SPARC could modulate the composition of the extracellular matrix in a
significant manner in part via its effects on the levels of
TGF-
1.
 |
DISCUSSION |
A variety of kidney diseases are characterized by an excessive
deposition of glomerular matrix (20) and an elevated proliferation of
glomerular mesangial cells (19). One of the functions ascribed to
mesangial cells is the maintenance of glomerular integrity, accomplished in part by the regulation of expression of extracellular matrix proteins and growth factors (15). The proliferation of mesangial
cells is associated typically with the remodeling process that occurs
after kidney injury (14). Characteristics of this proliferative
response are the elevated production of matricellular proteins
(e.g. SPARC), matrix proteins (collagen type I), and cytokines (TGF-
1). The secretion of these factors and the
accumulation of extracellular matrix proteins lead to an expansion of
the glomerular basement membrane (39), an infiltration of
immunocompetent cells (32), and in some cases, to a reversal of the
pathological condition. Therefore, maintenance of glomerular integrity
appears to be important because mesangial dysfunction often leads to
excessive proliferation of the mesangial cells, overproduction of
cytokines and growth factors, and an accumulation of extracellular
matrix. These factors contribute collectively to renal fibrosis,
glomerulosclerosis, glomerulonephritis, and the eventual loss of kidney function.
In this study we have identified two regulated targets of SPARC in
mesangial cells, collagen type I and TGF-
1. The use of cells derived
from normal mice and from mice with a disrupted SPARC gene
indicated that the observed changes in collagen type I and TGF-
1
were attributable to the absence of endogenous SPARC. Confirmation of
these results was provided by rescue experiments with rhSPARC.
Furthermore, our data indicate that SPARC stimulates collagen type I
production via a TGF-
1-dependent pathway. At this point,
the data do not allow us to conclude whether the effect of SPARC
depletion on collagen type I and TGF-
1 is a primary or derivative event.
SPARC modulates interactions among cells, extracellular matrix
proteins, and growth factors and both colocalizes with and binds to
collagen type I (1, 5). However, no induction of collagen type I by
SPARC has been described. We now show that the levels of collagen type
I mRNA and protein (both secreted and cellular forms) are
significantly diminished in mesangial cells from mice with a disrupted
SPARC gene. Furthermore, we demonstrate that exogenous
rhSPARC was able to reverse the diminished production of collagen type
I mRNA and protein. Since collagen types III, IV, and VIII appeared
unchanged in SPARC-null cells compared with their wild-type
counterparts, the regulatory effect of SPARC seems specific for
collagen type I.
How might SPARC exert its effects on the expression of collagen type I
protein? One possibility is the direct binding of SPARC to collagen
(5). SPARC might be needed for alignment of the
chains into the
triple helix. If SPARC is missing, proper processing and/or
posttranslational modification might occur more slowly, and the single
chains would be a target for degradation. Therefore, the overall amount
of intact collagen type I might be diminished in the cells that are not
expressing SPARC. This hypothetical function of SPARC is comparable to
that of HSP47, a heat-shock protein that acts as a collagen chaperone
(40).
Another explanation for the diminished collagen expression in
SPARC-null cells could be related to their altered cell morphology (35). Since SPARC is not available to bind to collagen type I, the
cells might modulate their expression of other extracellular matrix
proteins (and thereby the composition of the extracellular matrix) to
compensate for the lack of a collagen type I-SPARC complex. This
response would be compromised by the addition of exogenous SPARC;
therefore, the expression of collagen type I would be augmented as we
have described here. Interestingly, it has been observed that cells
lacking collagen type I do not deposit SPARC in the extracellular
matrix of certain connective tissues, whereas wild-type cells show
colocalization of SPARC and collagen type I (24). If cell shape is
important in the regulation of protein expression (29), and SPARC
alters cell morphology, the SPARC-null cells might display an altered
behavior in response to collagen. Currently we are investigating the
properties of SPARC-null cells in a three-dimensional collagen type I
environment. Preliminary results indicate that these cells do not
contract native collagen gels as efficiently as their wild-type
counterparts.3
A second question is how SPARC might regulate the transcription of
collagen type I. A possible mechanism involves the interactions of
SPARC with growth factors. Previous reports have shown that SPARC
exerts some its effects through direct binding to PDGF (4) and to
vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) (41) and thereby abrogates
their interaction with cognate receptors on cells. Moreover, in the
case of VEGF, SPARC inhibits the phosphorylation of VEGF-receptor 1 and
the mitogen-activated protein kinases extracellular signal-regulated kinase-1 and -2 (41). Thus, we would predict that signaling pathways
governing the transcription of certain genes might be affected by
SPARC. Since the proliferation of SPARC-null cells is enhanced
significantly (5-10-fold) (35), we also investigated the expression of
growth factors themselves that are known to be inducers of
proliferation and gene transcription in mesangial cells (FGF-1,
FGF-2, and PDGF). We were unable to show any differences in mRNA
levels for these mitogens between wild-type and SPARC-null cells.
Interesting results were obtained, however, with an inhibitor of
mesangial cell proliferation, TGF-
1. There was a significant decrease in the expression of TGF-
1 mRNA and protein in
SPARC-null cells. Since it is known that minimal differences in the
concentration of TGF-
1 can cause diverse biological responses in
various cell types (17) and in mesangial cells (19), we suggest that
the decreased collagen type I expression that was observed might be due
to the diminished levels of TGF-
1. Addition of rhSPARC restored the
levels of TGF-
1 in SPARC-null cells to those of wild-type cells.
Additionally, it induced the accumulation of TGF-
1 mRNA to
levels similar to those of wild-type cells that were exposed to
rhSPARC. In our study, the level of rescue for collagen type I by
rhSPARC was incomplete after 6 h. This result might be due to the
indirect induction of collagen type I transcription by rhSPARC, similar
to the reported induction of metalloproteinases by SPARC (7). We
propose that TGF-
1 acts as a mediator. Therefore, SPARC would first
activate the TGF-
1 system, and second, TGF-
1 would induce the
transcription of collagen type I as reported (20). Thus, we observed an
early induction of TGF-
1 expression and a delayed induction of
collagen type I expression after treatment with rhSPARC, an observation
consistent with the incomplete rescue of collagen type I transcription
after 6 h. It has also been reported that TGF-
1 regulates the
expression of SPARC (25, 42), but ours is the first report that SPARC
induces the expression of TGF-
1. Furthermore, it has been
demonstrated that TGF-
1 is regulated in mesangial cells in an
autocrine manner (43). These findings collectively indicate a positive
autocrine feedback loop between SPARC and TGF-
1.
TGF-
1 is a potent inducer of collagen type I gene expression (25).
We were able to verify these findings in our system, and we observed a
significant, concentration-dependent induction of collagen
type I expression in both wild-type and, to a greater extent, in
SPARC-null cells. Since the levels of collagen type III, IV, or VIII
appeared to be unchanged in the SPARC-null cells in comparison to the
wild-type cells, our findings furthermore imply that the presence of
SPARC is essential for a preferential expression of collagen type I in
mouse mesangial cells. In addition, there are numerous reports
indicating that the expression of various types of collagen, especially
types III and IV in cultured cells, are not solely dependent on
TGF-
1 but on other factors such as cell density (44) and serum
factors (45).
The expression patterns of collagen type I and TGF-
1 in mesangial
cells derived from SPARC-null animals indicate that SPARC mediates its
effects on the production of collagen type I, in part, through
TGF-
1. In support of this hypothesis, there was a decrease in
steady-state levels of
1(I) mRNA induced by SPARC in the
presence of anti-TGF-
1 antibodies. These results provide strong
evidence that SPARC regulates the production of collagen type I via a
TGF-
1-dependent pathway in mouse mesangial cells.
Several alternatives exist (some of which are not mutually exclusive)
for the mechanism(s) by which SPARC affects the production of collagen
type I and TGF-
1: (i) SPARC could exert its effects through its own
(yet unidentified) receptor(s). (ii) Similar to thrombospondin-1,
another matricellular protein (46), SPARC, could be involved in the
TGF-
1 activation cascade, in which latent TGF-
1 is processed to
its active form. (iii) SPARC could modulate the activity or the
conformation of the TGF-
1 receptor complex by its direct binding to
the complex or to an extracellular matrix component (47). (iv) SPARC
could change the configuration of the extracellular matrix and/or the
shape of the cell and could thus affect binding between a ligand and
its cell-surface receptor. (v) Since SPARC has been shown to be
associated with the nuclear matrix (48), it could be involved in the
activation or suppression of gene expression and/or in the modulation
of nuclear shape. These hypotheses are currently under investigation in
our laboratory.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Drs. Kouros Motamed, Christine
Kupprion, David Graves, and Robert Vernon for many helpful discussions
throughout this study. We gratefully acknowledge the technical
assistance of Juliet Carbon and Timothy Dale McClure.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported in part by National Institutes of
Health Grants GM 40711, HL 18645, DK 47459, and GM 18705 (to
A. D. B.), by the University of Washington Royalty Research Fund, by
the Seattle Diabetes Research Council, by National Institutes of Health
Training Grant DK 07467 (to A. D. B.), and by Fr 1223/1-1 from the
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (to A. F.).The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
§
Present address: Dept. of Vascular Biology, The Hope Heart
Institute, 528 18th Ave., Seattle, WA 98122. Tel.: 206-903-2025; Fax:
206-903-2044.

To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Vascular
Biology, The Hope Heart Institute, 528 18th Ave., Seattle, WA 98122. Tel.: 206-903-2025; Fax: 206-903-2044.
2
A. D. Bradshaw, J. A. Bassuk, and E. H. Sage, manuscript in preparation.
3
A. Francki, unpublished observations.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
PDGF, platelet-derived growth factor;
TGF-
1, transforming growth
factor-
1;
rh, recombinant human;
ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent
assay;
PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis;
RT-PCR, reverse-transcribed polymerase chain reaction;
rp, ribosomal protein;
FGF, fibroblast growth factor;
EtBr, ethidium bromide;
VEGF, vascular
endothelial growth factor.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Lane, T. F.,
and Sage, E. H.
(1994)
FASEB J.
8,
163-173[Abstract]
|
| 2.
|
Bornstein, P.
(1995)
J. Cell Biol.
130,
503-506[Free Full Text]
|
| 3.
|
Motamed, K.,
and Sage, E. H.
(1998)
J. Cell. Biochem.
70,
543-552[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Raines, E. W.,
Lane, T. F.,
Iruela-Arispe, M. L.,
Ross, R.,
and Sage, E. H.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
1281-1285[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Sasaki, T.,
Hohenester, E.,
Göhring, W.,
and Timpl, R.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
1625-1634[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Lane, T. F.,
Iruela-Arispe, M. L.,
and Sage, E. H.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
16736-16745[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Tremble, P. M.,
Lane, T. F.,
Sage, E. H.,
and Werb, Z.
(1993)
J. Cell Biol.
121,
1433-1444[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Engelmann, G. L.
(1993)
Cardiovasc. Res.
27,
1598-1605[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Reed, M. J.,
Puolakkainen, P.,
Lane, T. F.,
Dickerson, D.,
Bornstein, P.,
and Sage, E. H.
(1993)
J. Histochem. Cytochem.
41,
1467-1477[Abstract]
|
| 10.
|
Shankavaram, U. T.,
DeWitt, D. L.,
Funk, S. E.,
Sage, E. H.,
and Wahl, L. M.
(1997)
J. Cell. Physiol.
173,
327-34[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Porte, H.,
Triboulet, J. P.,
Kotelevets, L.,
Carrat, F.,
Prévot, S.,
Nordlinger, B.,
DiGioia, Y.,
Wurtz, A.,
Comoglio, P.,
Gespach, C.,
and Chastre, E.
(1998)
Clin. Cancer Res.
4,
1375-1382[Abstract]
|
| 12.
|
Unemori, E. N.,
and Amento, E. P.
(1991)
Curr. Opin. Rheumatol.
3,
953-959[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Floege, J.,
Johnson, R. J.,
Alpers, C. E.,
Fatemi-Nainie, S.,
Richardson, C. A.,
Gordon, K.,
and Couser, W. G.
(1993)
Am. J. Pathol.
142,
637-650[Abstract]
|
| 14.
|
Pichler, R. H.,
Bassuk, J. A.,
Hugo, C.,
Reed, M. J.,
Eng, E.,
Gordon, K. L.,
Pippin, J.,
Alpers, C. E.,
Couser, W. G.,
Sage, E. H.,
and Johnson, R. J.
(1996)
Am. J. Pathol.
148,
1153-1167[Abstract]
|
| 15.
|
Iwano, M.,
Akai, Y.,
Fujii, Y.,
Dohi, Y.,
Matsumura, N.,
and Dohi, K.
(1994)
Clin. Exp. Immunol.
97,
309-314[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Pepper, M. S.
(1997)
Cytokine Growth Factor Rev.
8,
21-43[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Massagué, J.
(1998)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
67,
753-791[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Frank, R.,
Adelmann-Grill, B. C.,
Herrmann, K.,
Haustein, U. F.,
Petri, J. B.,
and Heckmann, M.
(1996)
J. Invest. Dermatol.
106,
36-41[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Floege, J.,
Topley, N.,
and Resch, K.
(1991)
Am. J. Kidney Dis.
17,
673-676[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Poncelet, A. C.,
and Schnaper, H. W.
(1998)
Am. J. Physiol.
275,
F458-F466[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Gilbert, R. E.,
Wilkinson-Berka, J. L.,
Johnson, D. W.,
Cox, A.,
Soulis, T.,
Wu, L.-L.,
Kelly, D. J.,
Jerums, G.,
Pollock, C. A.,
and Cooper, M. E.
(1998)
Kidney Int.
54,
1052-1062[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Yamamoto, T.,
Noble, N. A.,
Cohen, A. H.,
Nast, C. C.,
Hishida, A.,
Gold, L. I.,
and Border, W. A.
(1996)
Kidney Int.
49,
461-469[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Kagami, S.,
Kuhara, T.,
Yasutomo, K.,
Okada, K.,
Loster, K.,
Reutter, W.,
and Kuroda, Y.
(1996)
Exp. Cell Res.
229,
1-6[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Iruela-Arispe, M. L.,
Vernon, R. B.,
Wu, H.,
Jaenisch, R.,
and Sage, E. H.
(1996)
Dev. Dyn.
207,
171-183[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Reed, M. J.,
Vernon, R. B.,
Abrass, I. B.,
and Sage, E. H.
(1994)
J. Cell. Physiol.
158,
169-179[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Lloyd, C. M.,
Minto, A. W.,
Dorf, M. E.,
Proudfoot, A.,
Wells, T. N.,
Salant, D. J.,
and Gutierrez-Ramos, J. C.
(1997)
J. Exp. Med.
185,
1371-1380[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Sato, N.,
Beitz, J. G.,
Kato, J.,
Yamamoto, M.,
Clark, J. W.,
Calabresi, P.,
Raymond, A.,
and Frackelton, A. R.
(1993)
Am. J. Pathol.
142,
1119-1130[Abstract]
|
| 28.
|
Grande, J. P.,
Melder, D. C.,
and Zinsmeister, A. R.
(1997)
J. Lab. Clin. Med.
130,
476-486[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 29.
|
Varedi, M.,
Ghahary, A.,
Scott, P. G.,
and Tredget, E. E.
(1997)
J. Cell. Physiol.
172,
192-199[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Lenz, O.,
Striker, L. J.,
Jacot, T. A.,
Elliot, S. J.,
Killen, P. D.,
and Striker, G. E.
(1998)
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol.
9,
2040-2047[Abstract]
|
| 31.
|
Norose, K.,
Clark, J. I.,
Syed, N. A.,
Basu, A.,
Heber-Katz, E.,
Sage, E. H.,
and Howe, C. C.
(1998)
Invest. Ophthalmol. & Visual Sci.
39,
2674-2680[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Radeke, H. H.,
and Resch, K.
(1992)
Clin. Invest.
70,
825-842[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 33.
|
Chomczynski, P.,
and Sacchi, N.
(1987)
Anal. Biochem.
162,
156-159[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Bradford, M. M.
(1976)
Anal. Biochem.
72,
248-254[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 35.
|
Bradshaw, A. D.,
Francki, A.,
Motamed, K.,
Howe, C. C.,
and Sage, E. H.
(1999)
Mol. Biol. Cell
10,
1569-1579[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Bassuk, J. A.,
Baneyx, F.,
Vernon, R. B.,
Funk, S. E.,
and Sage, E. H.
(1996)
Arch. Biochem. Biophys.
325,
8-19[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Funk, S. E.,
and Sage, E. H.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
2648-2652[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 38.
|
Goswami, P. C.,
Albee, L. D.,
Spitz, D. R.,
and Ridnour, L. A.
(1997)
Cell Proliferation
30,
271-282[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Johnson, R. J.,
Raines, E. W.,
Floege, J.,
Yoshimura, A.,
Pritzl, P.,
Alpers, C.,
and Ross, R.
(1992)
J. Exp. Med.
175,
1413-1416[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Satoh, M.,
Hirayoshi, K.,
Yokota, S.,
Hosokawa, N.,
and Nagata, K.
(1996)
J. Cell Biol.
133,
469-483[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Kupprion, C.,
Motamed, K.,
and Sage, E. H.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
29635-29640[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 42.
|
Wrana, J. L.,
Overall, C. M.,
and Sodek, J.
(1991)
Eur. J. Biochem.
197,
519-528[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 43.
|
Ziyadeh, F. N.,
Sharma, K.,
Ericksen, M.,
and Wolf, G.
(1994)
J. Clin. Invest.
93,
536-542
|
| 44.
|
Wolthuis, A.,
Boes, A.,
and Grond, J.
(1993)
Am. J. Pathol.
143,
1209-1219[Abstract]
|
| 45.
|
Abrass, C. K.,
Spicer, D.,
and Raugi, G. J.
(1995)
Kidney Int.
47,
25-37[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 46.
|
Crawford, S. E.,
Stellmach, V.,
Murphy-Ullrich, J. E.,
Ribeiro, S. M.,
Lawler, J.,
Hynes, R. O.,
Boivin, G. P.,
and Bouck, N.
(1998)
Cell
93,
1159-1170[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 47.
|
Rosenblatt, S.,
Bassuk, J. A.,
Alpers, C. E.,
Sage, E. H.,
Timpl, R.,
and Preissner, K. T.
(1997)
Biochem. J.
324,
311-319
|
|