Save
Email
Print
ShareScienceDaily (Aug. 3, 2009) — Colorectal cancer, the second most common cause of death from cancer in the United States, is associated with an abnormally high rate of increase in the number of cells lining the colon (colonic hyperproliferation). In mice, overexpression of the human protein progastrin has been shown to cause colonic hyperproliferation and promote colorectal cancer, but the molecular mechanisms underlying this have remained undetermined.
In a new study, Timothy Wang and colleagues, at Columbia University Medical Center, New York, have revealed a key link between the protein CCKR2 and progastrin-related colonic hyperproliferation. Initial analysis indicated that the Cck2r gene was upregulated in mice that overexpressed human progastrin.
Deletion of this gene in mice that overexpressed human progastrin abolished the colonic hyperproliferation induced by the high levels of human progastrin and markedly diminished the extent of experimentally induced colorectal cancer. As previously published data indicate that levels of progastrin might be elevated in individuals with colorectal cancer, the authors conclude that their study suggests that CCKR2 may be a viable target for the development of drugs to treat or prevent colorectal cancer.
Recommend this story on Facebook, Twitter,
and Google +1:
Other bookmarking and sharing tools:
Story Source:
The above story is reprinted from materials provided by Journal of Clinical Investigation, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.
Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.
Journal Reference:
- Jin et al. Inactivating cholecystokinin-2 receptor inhibits progastrin-dependent colonic crypt fission, proliferation, and colorectal cancer in mice. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 2009; DOI: 10.1172/JCI38918
Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.
more 
