WIN also decreased expression of specificity protein (Sp) transcription factors Sp1, Sp3, and Sp4, and this is consistent with the observed downregulation of the aforementioned Sp-regulated genes. In addition, we also observed by RNA interference (RNAi) that the oncogenic cap protein eIF4E was an Sp-regulated selleckchem gene also downregulated by WIN in colon cancer cells. WIN-mediated repression of Sp proteins was not affected by cannabinoid receptor antagonists or by knockdown of the receptor but was attenuated by the phosphatase inhibitor

sodium orthovanadate or by knockdown of protein phosphatase 2A (PP2A). WIN-mediated repression of Sp1, Sp3, and Sp4 AZD6738 nmr was due to PP2A-dependent downregulation of microRNA-27a (miR-27a)

and induction of miR-27a-regulated ZBTB10, which has previously been characterized as an “Sp repressor.” The results show that the anticancer activity of WIN is due, in part, to PP2A-dependent disruption of miR-27a:ZBTB10 and ZBTB10-mediated repression of Sp transcription factors and Sp-regulated genes, including eIF4E. (C) 2013 AACR.”
“OBJECTIVE\n\nTo compare the outcomes of flexible ureterorenoscopy (F-URS) and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for treatment of lower pole stones of 10-20 mm.\n\nPATIENTS AND METHODS\n\nThe database of patients with a single lower pole stone of 10-20 mm was examined to obtain two matched groups who were treated with F-URS or ESWL. Matching criteria were stone length, side and patient gender.\n\nStone-free rates were evaluated 3 months after the last treatment session by non-contrast computed tomography. Both groups were compared for retreatment rate, complications and stone-free rate.\n\nRESULTS\n\nThe matched groups included 37 patients who underwent F-URS and 62 patients who underwent ESWL. Retreatment rate was significantly higher for GSK1210151A ESWL (60% vs 8%, P < 0.001).\n\nComplications

were more after F-URS (13.5% vs 4.8%), but the difference was not significant (P = 0.146). All complications were grade II or IIIa on modified Clavien classification.\n\nThe stone-free rate was significantly better after F-URS (86.5% vs 67.7%, P = 0.038). One failure of F-URS (2.7%) and five failures (8%) of ESWL were treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy.\n\nSignificant residual fragments in three patients (8%) after F-URS were treated with ESWL, while significant residual fragments after ESWL in five patients (8%) were treated with F-URS. Residual fragments (<4 mm) were followed every 3 months in one patient (2.7%) after F-URS and in 10 patients (16%) after ESWL.\n\nCONCLUSIONS\n\nFor treatment of lower pole stones of 10-20 mm, F-URS provided significantly higher stone-free rate and lower retreatment rate compared with ESWL.

No related posts.