Searching the Resource Information Network

Our searching services are busy right now. Please try again later

  • Register
X
Forgot Password

If you have forgotten your password you can enter your email here and get a temporary password sent to your email.

X

Leaving Community

Are you sure you want to leave this community? Leaving the community will revoke any permissions you have been granted in this community.

No
Yes

Rifampicin Does not Significantly Affect the Expression of Small Heterodimer Partner in Primary Human Hepatocytes.

Petr Pavek | Lucie Stejskalova | Lucie Krausova | Michal Bitman | Radim Vrzal | Zdenek Dvorak
Frontiers in pharmacology | 2012

The small/short heterodimer partner (SHP, NR0B2) is a nuclear receptor corepressor lacking a DNA binding domain. SHP is induced by bile acid-activated farnesoid X receptor (FXR) resulting in CYP7A1 gene suppression. In contrast, Pregnane X receptor (PXR) activation by its ligands was recently suggested to inhibit SHP gene transactivation to maximize the induction of PXR target genes. However, there are also conflicting reports in literature whether PXR or rodent Pxr activation down-regulates SHP/Shp expression. Moreover, the PXR-mediated regulation of the SHP gene has been studied only at the SHP mRNA and transactivation (gene reporter assay) levels. In this study, we studied the effect of rifampicin, a prototype PXR ligand, on SHP mRNA, and protein expression in three primary human hepatocyte cultures. We found that SHP mRNA is not systematically down-regulated in hepatocyte in culture after 24 h treatment with rifampicin. Consistently, we did not observe down-regulation of SHP protein in primary human hepatocytes after 24 and 48 h of incubation with rifampicin. We can conclude that although we observed slight down-regulation of SHP mRNA and protein in several hepatocyte preparations, the phenomenon is unlikely critical for PXR-mediated induction of its target genes.

Pubmed ID: 22291651

Research resources used in this publication

None found

Additional research tools detected in this publication

Antibodies used in this publication

None found

Associated grants

None

Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.

This is a list of tools and resources that we have found mentioned in this publication.


Wikipedia (tool)

RRID:SCR_004897

Wikipedia is a free, web-based, collaborative, multilingual encyclopedia project supported by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation. Its 19 million articles (over 3.6 million in English) have been written collaboratively by volunteers around the world, and almost all of its articles can be edited by anyone with access to the site. As of July 2011, there were editions of Wikipedia in 282 languages. Wikipedia was launched in 2001 by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger and has become the largest and most popular general reference work on the Internet, ranking around seventh among all websites on Alexa and having 365 million readers. The name Wikipedia was coined by Larry Sanger and is a combination of wiki (a technology for creating collaborative websites, from the Hawaiian word wiki, meaning quick) and encyclopedia. Wikipedia''s departure from the expert-driven style of encyclopedia building and the large presence of unacademic content has been noted several times. Some have noted the importance of Wikipedia not only as an encyclopedic reference but also as a frequently updated news resource because of how quickly articles about recent events appear. Although the policies of Wikipedia strongly espouse verifiability and a neutral point of view, critics of Wikipedia accuse it of systemic bias and inconsistencies (including undue weight given to popular culture), and allege that it favors consensus over credentials in its editorial processes. Its reliability and accuracy are also targeted. A 2005 investigation in Nature showed that the science articles they compared came close to the level of accuracy of Encyclopedia Britannica and had a similar rate of serious errors.

View all literature mentions