OBJECTIVES: The MUC1 antigen can be used to identify epithelial cells from the background of hemopoietic cells. The present investigation describes patterns of overexpression of two novel MUC1 splice variants in human cervical carcinoma cell lines. METHODS: RT-PCR was carried out to determine MUC1 splice variants in the cervical cancer cell lines C-4 II, C-33A, DoTc 2 4510, C-4 I, SiHa, HT3, Hs 636 T (C4-I), and HeLa. RESULTS: The novel MUC1 splice variant D was expressed in all cell lines and the novel MUC1 splice variant C was expressed in all cell lines but C-33A. Variants A and B were expressed in all (variant A) and all but one (variant B) cell line. MUC1/REP was expressed in all cell lines and MUC1/SEC was positive in all but two cell lines (C-33 A, DoTc 2 4510). All but one cell line (C-33A) expressed MUC1/X and MUC1/Y, and two cell lines (C-33 A, DoTc 2 4510) did not express MUC1/Z, respectively. MUC1 variants A, D, and REP could be demonstrated consistently among all eight cervical carcinoma cell lines we have examined. CONCLUSIONS: The present study describes the feasibility of detecting a large number of MUC1 variants, including MUC1 variants C and D which are described for cervical carcinoma cells for the first time. Further studies will examine the presence of MUC1 splice variants' expression in human cervical carcinoma tissue. Copyright 2001 Academic Press.
OBJECTIVES: The MUC1 antigen can be used to identify epithelial cells from the background of hemopoietic cells. The present investigation describes patterns of overexpression of two novel MUC1 splice variants in humancervical carcinoma cell lines. METHODS: RT-PCR was carried out to determine MUC1 splice variants in the cervical cancer cell lines C-4 II, C-33A, DoTc 2 4510, C-4 I, SiHa, HT3, Hs 636 T (C4-I), and HeLa. RESULTS: The novel MUC1 splice variant D was expressed in all cell lines and the novel MUC1 splice variant C was expressed in all cell lines but C-33A. Variants A and B were expressed in all (variant A) and all but one (variant B) cell line. MUC1/REP was expressed in all cell lines and MUC1/SEC was positive in all but two cell lines (C-33 A, DoTc 2 4510). All but one cell line (C-33A) expressed MUC1/X and MUC1/Y, and two cell lines (C-33 A, DoTc 2 4510) did not express MUC1/Z, respectively. MUC1 variants A, D, and REP could be demonstrated consistently among all eight cervical carcinoma cell lines we have examined. CONCLUSIONS: The present study describes the feasibility of detecting a large number of MUC1 variants, including MUC1 variants C and D which are described for cervical carcinoma cells for the first time. Further studies will examine the presence of MUC1 splice variants' expression in humancervical carcinoma tissue. Copyright 2001 Academic Press.
Authors: Neil A Hey; Marcos Meseguer; Carlos Simón; Nechama I Smorodinsky; Daniel H Wreschner; María Elena Ortíz; John D Aplin Journal: Reprod Biol Endocrinol Date: 2003-01-30 Impact factor: 5.211