Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

AACR logo

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CCR Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Breast Cancer
      • Clinical Trials
      • Immunotherapy: Facts and Hopes
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Clinical Cancer Research
Clinical Cancer Research
  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CCR Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Breast Cancer
      • Clinical Trials
      • Immunotherapy: Facts and Hopes
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

Human Cancer Biology

Voltage-Gated Sodium Channel Expression and Potentiation of Human Breast Cancer Metastasis

Scott P. Fraser, James K.J. Diss, Athina-Myrto Chioni, Maria E. Mycielska, Huiyan Pan, Rezan F. Yamaci, Filippo Pani, Zuzanna Siwy, Monika Krasowska, Zbigniew Grzywna, William J. Brackenbury, Dimis Theodorou, Meral Koyutürk, Handan Kaya, Esra Battaloglu, Manuela Tamburo De Bella, Martin J. Slade, Robert Tolhurst, Carlo Palmieri, Jie Jiang, David S. Latchman, R. Charles Coombes and Mustafa B.A. Djamgoz
Scott P. Fraser
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
James K.J. Diss
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Athina-Myrto Chioni
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maria E. Mycielska
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Huiyan Pan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rezan F. Yamaci
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Filippo Pani
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Zuzanna Siwy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Monika Krasowska
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Zbigniew Grzywna
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
William J. Brackenbury
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dimis Theodorou
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Meral Koyutürk
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Handan Kaya
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Esra Battaloglu
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Manuela Tamburo De Bella
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Martin J. Slade
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert Tolhurst
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carlo Palmieri
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jie Jiang
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David S. Latchman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
R. Charles Coombes
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mustafa B.A. Djamgoz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0327 Published August 2005
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

This article has a correction. Please see:

  • Article on Sodium Channels and Breast Cancer Metastasis - November 18, 2005

Abstract

Purpose: Ion channel activity is involved in several basic cellular behaviors that are integral to metastasis (e.g., proliferation, motility, secretion, and invasion), although their contribution to cancer progression has largely been ignored. The purpose of this study was to investigate voltage-gated Na+ channel (VGSC) expression and its possible role in human breast cancer.

Experimental Design: Functional VGSC expression was investigated in human breast cancer cell lines by patch clamp recording. The contribution of VGSC activity to directional motility, endocytosis, and invasion was evaluated by in vitro assays. Subsequent identification of the VGSC α-subunit(s) expressed in vitro was achieved using reverse transcription-PCR, immunocytochemistry, and Western blot techniques and used to investigate VGSCα expression and its association with metastasis in vivo.

Results: VGSC expression was significantly up-regulated in metastatic human breast cancer cells and tissues, and VGSC activity potentiated cellular directional motility, endocytosis, and invasion. Reverse transcription-PCR revealed that Nav1.5, in its newly identified “neonatal” splice form, was specifically associated with strong metastatic potential in vitro and breast cancer progression in vivo. An antibody specific for this form confirmed up-regulation of neonatal Nav1.5 protein in breast cancer cells and tissues. Furthermore, a strong correlation was found between neonatal Nav1.5 expression and clinically assessed lymph node metastasis.

Conclusions: Up-regulation of neonatal Nav1.5 occurs as an integral part of the metastatic process in human breast cancer and could serve both as a novel marker of the metastatic phenotype and a therapeutic target.

  • breast cancer
  • metastasis
  • voltage-gated sodium channel
  • neonatal Nav1.5

Breast cancer is the most common cancer of women and the second leading cause of female cancer mortality, accounting for about 10% of all cancer deaths in the western world (1, 2). To date, several breast cancer metastasis–associated genes have been identified both individually and in combination in microarray analyses (3, 4). These include oncogenes (e.g., ras and c-myc), cell cycle–associated markers (e.g., Ki67), adhesion molecules (e.g., E-cadherins), motility factors (e.g., hepatic growth factor), growth factors and their receptors (e.g., epidermal growth factor/Her-2 and fibroblast growth factor), and the well-established steroid hormones (e.g., estrogen and progesterone; refs. 3, 4). However, indirect measures of metastatic progression (including size of primary carcinoma, assessment of intratumoral vascular invasion, and lymph node involvement) remain the most widely used methods in clinical management. At present, although it is possible to detect micrometastases, approximately one third of women who seem disease-free at primary diagnosis eventually develop overt metastases (5, 6). Clinicians, therefore, require a more accurate diagnosis to predict the development of metastatic disease.

Ion channels are major signaling molecules expressed in a wide range of tissues where they have significant involvement in determining a variety of cellular functions: proliferation, solute transport, volume control, enzyme activity, secretion, invasion, gene expression, excitation-contraction coupling, intercellular communication, etc. (7). Consequently, ion channel defects (both genetic and epigenetic) are frequently an underlying cause of disease states (e.g., refs. 8–10). Ion channels, including voltage-gated ion channels (i.e., those activated by a change in membrane potential), could similarly have a significant role in cancer. Interestingly, electrodiagnosis has been practiced clinically, although its cellular/molecular basis remains unknown (11). We have shown previously that strongly metastatic human and rat prostate cancer cells express functional voltage-gated Na+ channels (VGSC; refs. 12, 13). Importantly, VGSC activity contributes to many cellular behaviors integral to metastasis, including cellular process extension (14), lateral motility and galvanotaxis (15, 16), transverse invasion (12, 13, 17), and secretory membrane activity (18, 19). Consistent with this, (i) endogenous VGSC levels/activity were increased in a subline of the weakly metastatic LNCaP cells that exhibited significantly greater invasiveness and (ii) overexpression of VGSC alone was sufficient to increase in vitro cellular invasive potential, leading to the conclusion that VGSC activity is necessary and sufficient for cancer cell invasiveness (20).

Carcinomas of the breast and prostate share a number of similar features, including hormone sensitivity, a pronounced tropism for metastasis to bone and tendency for cooccurrence in families (21). A recent in vitro study has shown that the human MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell line expressed functional VGSCs (22). However, both the molecular nature of the VGSC and its functional relevance to breast cancer in vivo are currently unknown. The present study aimed to determine (i) functional VGSC expression in breast cancer cell lines with a range of metastatic potential, (ii) whether VGSC activity contributed to cellular behaviors integral to metastasis, (iii) the molecular nature of the “culprit” VGSC(s), and (iv) whether VGSCα expression also occurred in breast cancer in vivo and correlated with metastasis.

Materials and Methods

Cell culture. MDA-MB-231, MDA-MB-468, and MCF-7 cells were grown in DMEM supplemented with 4 mmol/L l-glutamine and 5% to 10% fetal bovine serum. MCF-10A cells were grown in DMEM/Nut Mix F-12 supplemented with 4 mmol/L l-glutamine, 5% horse serum, 10 μg/mL insulin, 5 μg/mL hydrocortisone, 20 ng/mL epidermal growth factor, and 100 ng/mL cholera toxin.

Electrophysiology and pharmacology. Details of the patch pipettes, solutions, and the whole cell recording protocols were as described previously (12, 13, 23). Experiments on the cell lines were done on at least three separate dishes that had been in culture for 1 to 3 days. Further details are given in Fig. 1 legend. Tetrodotoxin was applied locally to individual cells by a puff pipette. All other compounds were bath applied.

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Voltage-gated membrane currents in a human breast epithelial cell line and human breast cancer cells. A, voltage-gated membrane currents recorded in (left to right) MCF-10A, MCF-7, MDA-MB-468, and MDA-MB-231 cells. The currents were generated by pulsing the membrane potential from a holding voltage of −100 mV, in 5 mV steps, from −60 to +60 mV for 200 ms. Voltage pulses were applied with a repeat interval of 20 seconds. Every second current trace generated is displayed. B, dose-response curve for the effects of tetrodotoxin (TTX) on the VGSC current in MDA-MB-231 cells. The percentage reduction of the peak current at the fourth pulse (to −10 mV) following drug application was plotted as a function of drug concentration. Points, means of >5 different cells; bars, SE. Inset, a typical effect (and recovery) of one concentration of the drug on the inward current. B, the holding potential was −100 mV; the cell was pulsed repeatedly to −10 mV for 40 milliseconds every 20 seconds. The effect of tetrodotoxin was recorded from the fourth pulse following application.

Proliferation and toxicity assays. Proliferation was determined using the colorimetric 3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay (12). Results were obtained from eight separate experiments (each done in triplicate) with or without 10 μmol/L tetrodotoxin applied for 48 hours. Determination of tetrodotoxin toxicity was as described previously (14).

In vitro assays. Transwell assays were done with cells plated onto a 24-well cell insert with 12-μm pores at a density of 1.5 × 105 cells/mL, according to the manufacturer's instructions (BD Labware, Franklin Lakes, NJ). Cells were allowed to settle for 3 hours and treated appropriately for 7 hours. The number of cells migrating over 7 hours was determined using the 3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay (12). Results were compiled as the mean of eight repeats of drug versus control readings from individual dishes. Galvanotaxis was studied and variables determined as described previously (16). Endocytosis, employing horseradish peroxidase as a tracer, was done and effects quantified as described previously (18). Invasion assays were as before (12, 13) with cells plated at 2.5 × 105 cells per well in a chemotactic gradient of 1:10% fetal bovine serum. After 48 hours, invaded cells were quantified using 3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide.

Reverse transcription-PCRs on breast cancer cells in vitro. Total cellular RNA was isolated from two batches of each of the cell lines by the acid guanidium thiocyanate-phenol-chloroform method (24). VGSCα degenerate primer screens were then done, as described previously (25) to identify the major VGSCαs expressed. Reactions designed to amplify specific VGSCαs were subsequently done on both strongly and weakly metastatic cell line extracts, using primer sequences and reaction annealing temperatures as described previously (25). VGSCα sequences were submitted to Genbank (accession nos. AJ310882-AJ310887 and AJ310896-AJ310900). Finally, semiquantitative PCRs based on kinetic observation of reactions were carried out as described previously (25) to determine relative VGSCα expression levels. NADH/cytochrome b5 reductase (hCytb5R) was used to control for the effects of variations in quality and quantity of the initial RNA, efficiency of the reverse transcription, and amplification between samples (25, 26).

“Neonatal” Nav1.5 antibody. A polyclonal antibody (NESOpAb) was generated against a synthetic peptide with an amino acid sequence contained within the extracellular D1:S3 of neonatal Nav1.5/VSENIKLGNLSALRC-NH2. Four rabbits were immunized and antibody purified as described previously (27). The specificity of the antibody for the neonatal splice form of Nav1.5 was validated on cell lines transfected with either neonatal or “adult” Nav1.5 expression plasmids, by Western blotting, immunocytochemistry, and electrophysiology (28).

Immunocytochemistry and immunohistochemistry. Cells were plated on poly-l-lysine-coated coverslips for 48 hours. Paraformaldehyde fixation protocol was standard procedure. NESOpAb was used as the primary antibody. The secondary antibody was swine anti-rabbit conjugated to FITC (DAKO, Glostrup, Denmark). For immunohistochemistry, fresh-frozen or wax-embedded breast biopsies were prepared according to standard protocols. Primary antibody was NESOpAb. Secondary antibody was biotinylated swine anti-rabbit (DAKO). Avidin-biotin complex (DAKO) was then applied according to manufacturer's recommendation and the colour reaction was developed with a diaminobenzidine kit (Vector Laboratories, Burlingame, CA). Digital images were captured using Image-Pro Plus software (Media Cybernetics, Silver Spring, MD) and exported without further manipulation.

Reverse transcription-PCRs on breast biopsy tissues. Total cellular RNA was isolated from 0.1 to 0.5 g pieces of frozen tissue and single-stranded cDNA synthesized as above. Expression of Nav1.5, Nav1.6, and Nav1.7 was then investigated by reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR), with hCytb5R reactions also done to control for the quality of the extracted RNA; samples which did not yield evident hCytb5R products were rejected unless UGSC expression was evident. RT-PCRs were carried out on each of at least two cDNA templates, manufactured independently from the same RNA extract. Sequences obtained from the human biopsies were submitted to Genbank (accession nos. AJ310888-AJ310895).

Epithelial cell purification. Epithelial cells were purified as described previously (29). Briefly, tissue was minced and digested in type IV collagenase in RPMI 1640 and 5% FCS, 2 mmol/L l-glutamine, 100 units/mL penicillin, 0.1 mg/mL streptomycin, 50 units/mL polymixin B, and 2.5 mg/mL amphotericin B until a single cell suspension was achieved. Undigested material was removed and redigested. Epithelial cells were purified and cultured in BCM [DMEM/F-12 (1:1) supplemented with 15 mmol/L HEPES, 2 mmol/L l-glutamine, 100 units/mL penicillin, 0.1 mg/mL streptomycin, 50 units/mL polymixin B, 2.5 mg/mL amphotericin B, 5 mg/mL insulin, 10 mg/mL apo-transferrin, 100 mmol/L ethanolamine, 1 mg/mL hydrocortisone, and 10 ng/mL epidermal growth factor] containing 10% FCS.

Data analysis. All quantitative data were determined to be normally distributed and are presented as means ± SEs. Statistical significance was determined with Student's t test or χ2 test, as appropriate. Results were considered significant at P < 0.05 (*).

Results

Functional voltage-gated Na+ channel expression in breast cancer in vitro: electrophysiology and pharmacology. The essential electrophysiologic characteristics of a normal human breast epithelial cell line and three human breast cancer cell lines with a range of metastatic potentials were determined. Importantly, 70% of the strongly metastatic MDA-MB-231 cells tested (n = 69 of 99) expressed inward currents (representing influx of positive charge) activated by membrane depolarization (Fig. 1A). The inward currents were abolished in Na+-free medium (data not shown), consistent with functional VGSC expression. In contrast, the normal breast epithelial cell line MCF-10A and the weakly metastatic MCF-7 and MDA-MB-468 breast cancer cells (n = 19-72) showed no inward currents (Fig. 1A). Membrane depolarization also activated outward currents (representing efflux of positive charge), which were reduced in line with increased metastatic potential in the cell lines studied (Fig. 1A, left to right). These currents were nearly completely (97%) abolished upon substituting Cs+ for intracellular K+ in MCF-7 cells, consistent with functional voltage-gated K+ channel expression. Resting potentials in the normal extracellular bath medium were also inversely correlated with metastatic potential: MDA-MB-231 (−18.9 ± 2.1 mV), MDA-MB-468 (−31.1 ± 2.2 mV), MCF-7 (−39.9 ± 2.9 mV), and MCF-10A (−49.8 ± 2.6 mV; n = 9-27).

The VGSC currents in the MDA-MB-231 cells were suppressed by tetrodotoxin in a concentration-dependent manner with a concentration for half-blockage (IC50) of 2.7 ± 0.5 μmol/L (n = 6; Fig. 1B), in agreement with functional expression of tetrodotoxin-resistant VGSCs. However, there was a small but consistent significant reduction (9 ± 3%; P < 0.05) in peak current with 100 nmol/L tetrodotoxin, indicating that a tetrodotoxin-sensitive VGSC was also present as a minor component (Fig. 1B). In addition, several clinically relevant antiarrhythmics and local anesthetics, as follows, blocked the VGSC currents with a range of potencies (IC50 values): flecainide (8.2 ± 1.3 μmol/L), mexiletine (11.0 ± 4.4 μmol/L), lidocaine (20.3 ± 3.0 μmol/L), procainamide (911 ± 163 μmol/L), and disopyramide (4,100 ± 200 μmol/L; n = 3-5).

Contribution of voltage-gated Na+ channel activity to metastatic cell behaviors in vitro. The possibility that functional VGSCs found in MDA-MB-231 cells contributed directly to metastatic behavior was examined using assays of (A) motility, (B) endocytosis, and (C) invasion (Fig. 2). These were measured in the presence and absence of tetrodotoxin (10 μmol/L) that would significantly (∼80%) block VGSC activity but was nontoxic and did not affect cell proliferation. (A) Directional motility of the MDA-MB-231 cells was suppressed by tetrodotoxin (10 μmol/L). Transwell migration was reduced by 52% (P < 0.01; Fig. 2A1). A lower (200 nmol/L) concentration of tetrodotoxin had no effect (data not shown). In addition, in a direct current electric field, the cells had an anodal occupancy of 94% and this was reduced to 56% following tetrodotoxin treatment, similar to control (i.e., nonfield) conditions (57%; Fig. 2A2). (B) Endocytosis, a measure of secretion and plasma membrane protein internalization, was also reduced by tetrodotoxin (47%) as well as by the removal of extracellular Na+ (53%; P < 0.05 for both). However, the VGSC “opener” aconitine increased endocytosis by 14% (P < 0.05; Fig. 2B). (C) Finally, in a widely used in vitro assay of metastatic cell behavior, tetrodotoxin application inhibited Matrigel invasion of MDA-MB-231 cells by 49% (P < 0.001; Fig. 2C).

Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

In vitro evidence for VGSC involvement in metastatic MDA-MB-231 cell behaviors. A1, transwell motility data, normalized with respect to the control condition (CON, 100%) and following a 10-hour treatment with 10 μmol/L tetrodotoxin (TTX). A2, galvanotaxis. Superimposed trajectories of 50 cells are shown in each panel, the starting point being at the origin. i, control (no applied electric field); ii, electric field of 3 V/cm; iii, electric field of 3 V/cm with 10 μmol/L tetrodotoxin. B, endocytosis. Histobars, control (CON); 10 μmol/L tetrodotoxin (TTX); Na+-free (SF); 400 μmol/L aconitine (ACN) treatments. C, Matrigel invasion. Each part details control conditions or following treatment with 10 μmol/L tetrodotoxin. *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; and ***, P < 0.001, statistically significant differences.

In contrast to the MDA-MB-231 cells, weakly metastatic MCF-7 cells were unable to migrate across transwell filters or invade through Matrigel and their galvanotactic motility and endocytic activity (both significantly weaker, compared with MDA-MB-231 cells) were unaffected by 10 μmol/L tetrodotoxin treatment (data not shown).

Molecular identity of breast cancer voltage-gated Na+ channels in vitro. Using RT-PCR techniques, three VGSCαs were identified in both MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7 cells: Nav1.5 (tetrodotoxin resistant), Nav1.6 and Nav1.7 (both tetrodotoxin sensitive; Fig. 3A). The overall level of VGSCα expression was much higher (>100-fold) in MDA-MB-231 compared with MCF-7 cells (Fig. 3B). This higher expression level was primarily due to Nav1.5 (∼1,800-fold greater expression in MDA-MB-231 cells), which constituted ∼82% of the overall VGSCα mRNA expression in strongly metastatic cells. Nav1.7 levels, making up most of the remaining ∼18%, were also relatively higher in MDA-MB-231 cells. This agrees with the functional VGSC expression specifically in MDA-MB-231 cells being mainly tetrodotoxin resistant. Nav1.6 was expressed at relatively low levels, which were similar in both cell lines.

Fig. 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 3.

Expression of VGSCα isoforms in breast cancer cells. A, semiquantitative PCR electrophoresis results for Nav1.5, Nav1.6, Nav1.7, and hCytb5R controls done on MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7 cells. Representative PCR cycle numbers for given bands are indicated above the gels. Top, derived from MDA-MB-231 cell extracts; bottom, from MCF-7 extracts. B, proposed relative (%) expression levels of the three VGSCαs found to occur in the strongly (white columns) and weakly (black columns) metastatic cell lines. In each case, the vertical axis denotes the approximate level of expression with respect to total levels of expression of these three VGSCαs in the strongly metastatic MDA-MB-231 cells. Relative expression levels were estimated from degenerate screens and semiquantitative PCR data, taken together. C, details of the VGSCα splice forms expressed in the breast cancer cells. Gel images (left) and idealized bands representing each PCR product are indicated (side, right). 5′ and 3′ denote D1:S3 5′ (neonatal) and D1:S3 3′ (adult) alternatively spliced exons. Δ denotes forms with both alternatively spliced exons missing. D, Nav1.5 D1:S3 5′ splice form amino acid data compared with the 3′ form and a VGSCα consensus sequence for this alternatively spliced exon. The 10 residue “neonatal-specific” sequence to which the neonatal Nav1.5-specific antibody was generated is boxed. Location of adult/neonatal Nav1.5 alternative splicing in the extracellular S3-4 linker of domain 1 is shown.

All three VGSCαs were present in multiple splice forms (Fig. 3C). Importantly, DNA sequencing revealed that Nav1.5 and Nav1.7 were present predominantly in their D1:S3 5′-splice forms characterized by the absence at exon residue 7 of an aspartate (10). This form has previously been found in Nav1.1-Nav1.3, Nav1.6, and Nav1.7. The present study is the first to identify the existence of a D1:S3 5′-splice form of Nav1.5. This differs from the known D1:S3 3′-splice form at 31 nucleotides, resulting in seven-amino-acid substitutions in an extracellular region of the VGSCα protein (Fig. 3D). All other VGSCα D1:S3 5′-splice forms differ from their D1:S3 3′ counterparts at just one to two amino acids.

Where examined, VGSCα D1:S3 5′-splice forms have previously been found to be expressed specifically in neonatal tissues (30, 31). We generated a novel D1:S3 5′-splice form–specific antibody and used it to verify that the D1:S3 5′-splice variant of Nav1.5 was indeed neonatal (28). This was shown both by immunohistochemistry and Western blotting, comparing expression in neonatal and adult mouse cardiac muscle (where Nav1.5 is abundant; Fig. 4A and B). Furthermore, application of this antibody to the MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7 cells confirmed expression of the Nav1.5 neonatal D1:S3 5′-splice form protein in the strongly metastatic cells specifically (Fig. 4C and D). Importantly, neonatal Nav1.5 was present in the plasma membrane of the MDA-MB-231 cells, confirmed by Western blots on membrane fractions containing Glut-1, a specific marker of plasma membrane (Fig. 4D).

Fig. 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 4.

Characterization of neonatal Nav1.5 expression. A, immunohistochemical comparison of neonatal Nav1.5 expression (as detected with the neonatal Nav1.5-specific voltage-gated Na+ channel antibody, NESOpAb) to “total” VGSC expression (as detected with a pan-specific VGSC antibody) in mouse heart from neonatal or adult tissue. B, Western blot data showing expression of neonatal Nav1.5 in membrane fractions of neonatal but not adult mouse heart tissue. Membrane fractionation was confirmed through expression of the Glut-1 plasma membrane marker. C, representative images of the plasma membrane staining of (1) MDA-MB-231 but not (2) MCF-7 cells with NESOpAb. Negative controls gave no reaction (not illustrated). The cells were not permeabilized, because the antibody was raised to an extracellular epitope. D, Western blot data showing expression of neonatal Nav1.5 (using NESOpAb) in membrane fractions of (1) MDA-MB-231 but not (2) MCF-7 cells. Membrane fractionation was confirmed through expression of the Glut-1 plasma membrane marker.

In vivo expression of neonatal Nav1.5 in human breast biopsy tissues. Neonatal Nav1.5 protein expression was markedly up-regulated in human breast cancer biopsy sections (n = 6), in comparison with normal human breast tissues (n = 4; Fig. 5A). Stained cells were of epithelial origin, as determined by MUC-1 immunoreactivity (not illustrated). Thus, the high level of neonatal Nav1.5 protein expression found earlier in breast cancer in vitro also occurred in vivo. Expression of neonatal Nav1.5 in vivo was further investigated by RT-PCR. In a “double-blind” test, expression of Nav1.5 mRNA (but not Nav1.6 nor Nav1.7) in primary tumors was found to be strongly related to lymph node metastasis (LNM; Fig. 5B). The two characteristics were directly correlated in 14 of the 20 (70%) cases examined, being Nav1.5+/LNM+ (n = 8) or Nav1.5−/LNM− (n = 6; χ2 = 8.0; degree of freedom = 3; 0.05 > P > 0.01). There was no case of Nav1.5−/LNM+; that is, metastasis to lymph nodes did not occur when Nav1.5 was not detectable in the primary tumor. In a further case of a patient with bilateral breast cancer, Nav1.5 expression matched the occurrence of respective LNM: Nav1.5 was present in breast cancer with LNM (10 of 12) but absent from the contralateral breast with no LNM. Importantly, Nav1.5 products were sequenced for 11 of the 14 Nav1.5+ cases and 10 (91%) were found to be the neonatal splice form. In addition, we were also able to readily detect neonatal Nav1.5 mRNA expression in three of five epithelial cell populations purified from primary breast tumors (data not shown).

Fig. 5.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 5.

Correlation of neonatal Nav1.5 expression and breast cancer progression. A, immunohistochemical staining of human breast tissues with NESOpAb. Little staining was detected in normal human breast tissue as illustrated in (i and ii), whereas strong heterogeneous staining was detected in the corresponding image from breast cancer tissue (iii and iv). Bright field images of the sections (i and iii); corresponding phase-contrast images (ii and iv) to show the epithelial structure. The epithelial nature of the stained tissue was verified using an antibody raised against the epithelial marker MUC-1 (not illustrated). Controls done on H&E-stained breast biopsies by preabsorbing the primary antibody with the immunizing peptide did not yield evident staining (vi), in contrast to sections stained with NESOpAb (Av). Bar, 50 μm. B, electrophoresis results of Nav1.5, Nav1.6, Nav1.7, and hCytb5R control RT-PCRs done on 20 breast cancer tissue samples. LNM data for each sample are indicated above the gel images. Multiple bands corresponding to the evident splice form products (as previously described in Fig. 3 and ref. 25; left). PCRs were done for 55, 40, 40, and 30 cycles for Nav1.5, Nav1.6, Nav1.7, and hCytb5R tests, respectively. (+), LNM was present; (−), LNM was not clinically evident.

Discussion

The present study shows (i) that strongly but not weakly nor nonmetastatic breast cancer cells, displayed VGSC currents, mainly composed of a tetrodotoxin-resistant component; (ii) that blockage of the VGSC suppressed several metastatic cell behaviors in vitro; (iii) that a particular tetrodotoxin-resistant VGSCα, Nav1.5, in its newly characterized neonatal splice form, was predominant in strongly metastatic cells; and (iv) that neonatal Nav1.5 protein was markedly up-regulated in clinical breast cancer samples and that Nav1.5 mRNA expression in biopsy samples correlated strongly with clinically assessed lymph node metastasis.

Up-regulation of voltage-gated Na+ channel activity and enhancement of metastatic cell behaviors in vitro. MDA-MB-231 cells expressed a functional VGSC that was predominantly tetrodotoxin resistant. Weakly metastatic/nontumorigenic cell lines did not express functional VGSCs. These results agree with the basic findings of Roger et al. (22). Importantly, the high-level VGSC expression was accompanied by much reduced outward currents in the MDA-MB-231 cell line. Although outward currents are known to play a role during the cell cycle in breast cancer cells (e.g., ref. 32), any significance of the reduction of the outward currents with increased metastatic potential in the cell lines studied remains to be investigated. Nevertheless, the specific combination of reduced outward and emergent VGSC inward currents would render these cells potentially more excitable in line with their “hyperactive” metastatic character.

The effectiveness of tetrodotoxin under resting conditions (in recordings and in vitro assays) would be consistent with VGSCs being tonically active in these cells. Indeed, Roger et al. showed there to be a “window current” between more than −60 and less than −20 mV, covering the prevailing resting membrane potential of approximately −19 mV. Furthermore, the concentration of tetrodotoxin (10 μmol/L) required to produce a functional effect was consistent with (a) Nav1.5 being the VGSC underlying this behavior (at least in the in vitro migration assay where this was specifically tested) and (b) the patch-clamp pharmacology. The molecular mechanisms through which VGSC activity could potentiate directional motility, endocytosis, and invasion, could be direct and/or indirect. Direct effects could involve protein-protein interactions with cytoskeletal or extracellular matrix elements. Indeed, VGSCs physically associate, either via protein-binding domains in the major VGSCα or the auxillary VGSCβs, to ankyrin, contactin, neurofascin, and tenascin (33–37). In addition, Nav1.5 is one of only two VGSCαs that has PDZ domains that could also enable cytoskeletal interactions. Indirect effects could involve a number of intracellular signaling mechanisms. In particular, changes in intracellular Na+, Ca2+, and/or H+ could occur locally as a result of VGSC activity and lead to a variety of cellular effects that could contribute to metastasis. As well as effects upon motility and secretion, such changes could underlie more complex interactive functions such as gene expression, possibly in a feedback fashion (e.g., ref. 38).

Up-regulation of neonatal Nav1.5 voltage-gated Na+ channel in metastatic breast cancer in vitro. RT-PCR showed that the predominant VGSCα expressed was Nav1.5, in agreement with the mainly tetrodotoxin-resistant nature of the VGSC currents recorded. In fact, Nav1.5 was expressed at ∼1,000-fold higher levels in these strongly versus weakly metastatic cells. Regarding the other two minor VGSCαs expressed, Nav1.6 was mainly present in its highly truncated “fail-safe” form and would not be functional (39). On the other hand, Nav1.7 may account for the minor tetrodotoxin-sensitive component of the VGSC currents but its functional relevance, if any, it is not yet known.

Sequencing of Nav1.5 PCR products revealed that Nav1.5 transcripts predominantly possessed the D1:S3 5′ rather than the 3′ exon, being described here for the first time. For other VGSCαs with alternate D1:S3 forms, the 5′ exon is classically associated with neonatal expression (30, 31). Indeed, this was confirmed to also be the case for Nav1.5 using a novel splice form-specific polyclonal antibody. Expression of the neonatal form of the culprit VGSC is consistent with the concept of oncofetal gene expression (e.g., refs. 40, 41). Nevertheless, it is not clear at this stage whether neonatal Nav1.5 specifically is required for the proposed role of VGSC activity in breast cancer metastasis. Bennett et al. (20) have shown that invasion of human prostate cancer cells can be potentiated by the overexpression of a VGSCα (Nav1.4) other than that normally predominant (Nav1.7) in prostate cancer (25). Further work is required to elucidate whether neonatal Nav1.5 is the only VGSCα subtype that can enhance metastastic cell behavior in breast cancer.

At present, the mechanism(s) responsible for the up-regulation of Nav1.5 are not clear. Steroid hormones, especially estrogen, and growth factors (e.g., epidermal growth factor and fibroblast growth factor) are possible candidates, because breast epithelial tissue homeostasis and breast cancer onset/progression are under their strong influence. Epidermal growth factor has been shown to up-regulate VGSC functional expression (42–44). A functional association between fibroblast growth factor and Nav1.5 has also been described (45). Importantly, the Nav1.5 gene (SCN5A) core promoter has been characterized (46) and contains two putative estrogen receptor–binding ERE half-sites.8

Expression of neonatal Nav1.5 in vivo: clinical implications. Taken together, the in vivo data were highly consistent with the in vitro findings regarding both increased VGSC expression with breast cancer progression (metastasis) and the molecular identity (neonatal Nav1.5) of the candidate underlying VGSCα. The strong positive correlation between VGSCα expression and LNM in breast cancer biopsy tissue would suggest that VGSCs could act as an independent prognostic variable in a multivariant approach to this problem. Furthermore, the nature of involvement of VGSC activity in metastatic cell behavior is such as to make it likely that VGSC expression/up-regulation is an early event in the progression of breast cancer to the metastatic mode. The neonatal Nav1.5 may also have therapeutic potential, in two main respects. First, the pharmacologic data indicated that neonatal Nav1.5 was blocked by clinically important antiarrhythmics and local anesthetics; consistent with this, flecainide and mexiletine significantly inhibited endocytic activity in MDA-MB-231 but not MCF-7 cells (data not shown). Although not specifically tested here, it is possible that some such agents would block the neonatal form of the channel more than the adult and could thus be used clinically against metastatic breast cancer, with minimized side effects. Second, the antibody to the neonatal splice form of Nav1.5 (recognizing an extracellular epitope) might itself be a novel, specific mechanism for targeting metastatic breast cancer in the adult (28). Interestingly, tamoxifen, a major anti-breast cancer drug, has been shown to strongly reduce VGSC activity (47, 48).

In conclusion, our results show that a novel neonatal splice form of Nav1.5 is significantly up-regulated during breast cancer progression and potentiates a series of cell behaviors integral to the metastatic cascade. Accordingly, neonatal Nav1.5 may have diagnostic and therapeutic potential in the clinical management of breast cancer.

Footnotes

  • ↵8 J.K.J. Diss, unpublished analysis.

  • Grant support: Cancer Research UK (M.B.A. Djamgoz and R.C. Coombes); Breast Cancer Research Trust (M.J. Slade); Cancer Research Trust, KAV (M. Koyutürk); Medical Research Council, UK (W.J. Brackenbury); Pro Cancer Research Fund (M.B.A. Djamgoz, S.P. Fraser, and F. Pani); and Pro Cancer Research Fund Amber Fellowships (A-M. Chioni and H. Pan).

  • The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

  • Note: S.P. Fraser and J.K.J. Diss contributed equally to this work.

    • Accepted April 18, 2005.
    • Received February 11, 2005.
    • Revision received April 13, 2005.

References

  1. ↵
    Parkin DM, Pisani P, Ferlay J. Estimates of the worldwide incidence of 25 major cancers in 1990. Int J Cancer 1999;80:827–41.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    Wingo PA, Ries LA, Rosenberg HM, Miller DS, Edwards BK. Cancer incidence and mortality, 1973–1995: a report card for the US. Cancer 1998;82:1197–207.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    Schwirzke M, Schiemann S, Gnirke A, Weidle U. New genes potentially involved in breast cancer metastasis. Anticancer Res 1999;19:1801–14.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. ↵
    Van't Veer LJ, Dai HY, van de Vijver MJ, et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 2002;415:530–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    Mansi JL, Gogas H, Bliss JM, et al. Outcome of primary-breast-cancer patients with micrometastases: a long-term follow-up study. Lancet 1999;354:197–202.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    Heimann R, Hellman S. Clinical progression of breast cancer malignant behaviour: what to expect and when to expect it. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:591–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    Hille B. Ionic channels of excitable membranes. 2nd ed. Sunderland (Massachusetts): Sinauer Associates Inc.; 1992.
  8. ↵
    Jurkat-Rott K, Lehman-Horn F. Human muscle voltage-gated ion channels and hereditary disease. Curr Opin Pharmacol 2001;1:280–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. Viswanathan PC, Balser JR. Inherited sodium channelopathies: a continuum of channel dysfunction. Trends Cardiovasc Med 2004;14:28–35.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    Diss JKJ, Fraser SP, Djamgoz MBA. Voltage-gated Na+ channels: functional consequences of multiple subtypes and isoforms for physiology and pathophysiology. Eur Biophys J 2004;33:180–93.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. ↵
    Cuzick J, Holland R, Barth V, et al. Electropotential measurements as a new diagnostic modality for breast cancer. Lancet 1998;352:359–63.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    Grimes JA, Fraser SP, Stephens GJ, et al. Differential expression of voltage-activated Na+ currents in two prostatic tumour cell lines: contribution to invasiveness in vitro. FEBS Lett 1995;369:290–4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    Laniado ME, Lalani E-N, Fraser SP, et al. Expression and functional analysis of voltage-activated Na+ channels in human prostate cancer cell lines and their contribution to invasiveness in vitro. Am J Pathol 1997;150:1213–21.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. ↵
    Fraser SP, Ding Y, Liu A, Djamgoz MBA. Tetrodotoxin suppresses morphological enhancement of the metastatic MAT-LyLu rat prostate cancer cell line. Cell Tissue Res 1999;295:505–12.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    Fraser SP, Salvador V, Manning E, et al. Contribution of functional voltage-gated Na+ channel expression to cell behaviours involved in the metastatic cascade in rat prostate cancer: I. Lateral motility. J Cell Physiol 2003;195:479–87.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    Djamgoz MBA, Mycielska M, Madeja Z, et al. Directional movement of rat prostatic cancer cells in direct-current electric field: involvement of voltage-gated Na+ channel activity. J Cell Sci 2001;114:2697–705.
  17. ↵
    Smith P, Rhodes NP, Shortland AP, et al. Sodium channel protein expression enhances the invasiveness of rat and human prostate cancer cells. FEBS Letts 1998;423:19–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    Mycielska ME, Fraser SP, Szatkowski M, Djamgoz MBA. Contribution of functional voltage-gated Na+ channel expression to cell behaviours involved in the metastatic cascade in rat prostate cancer: II. Secretory membrane activity. J Cell Physiol 2003;195:461–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    Krasowska M, Grzywna ZJ, Mycielska ME, Djamgoz MB. Patterning of endocytic vesicles and its control by voltage-gated Na(+) channel activity in rat prostate cancer cells: fractal analyses. Eur Biophys J 2004;33:535–42.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    Bennett ES, Smith BA, Harper JM. Voltage-gated Na+ channels confer invasive properties on human prostate cancer cells. Pflugers Arch 2004;447:908–14.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    Rodriguez C, Calle EE, Tatham LM, et al. Family history of breast cancer as a predictor for fatal prostate cancer. Epidemiology 1998;9:525–9.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  22. ↵
    Roger S, Besson P, Le Guennec J-Y. Involvement of a novel fast inward current in the invasion capacity of a breast cancer cell line. Biochim Biophys Acta 2003;1616:107–11.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    Fraser SP, Grimes JA, Diss JKJ, Stewart D, Dolly JO, Djamgoz MBA. Predominant expression of Kv1.3 voltage-gated K+ channel subunit in rat prostate cancer cell lines: electrophysiological, pharmacological and molecular characterisation. Pflugers Arch 2003;446:559–71.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    Chomczynski P, Sacchi N. Single-step method of RNA isolation by acid guanidinium thiocyanate-phenol-chloroform extraction. Ann Biochem 1987;162:156–9.
  25. ↵
    Diss JKJ, Archer SN, Hirano J, Fraser SP, Djamgoz MBA. Expression profiles of voltage-gated Na+ channel α-subunit genes in rat and human prostate cancer cell lines. Prostate 2001;48:165–78.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    Fitzsimmons SA, Workman P, Grever M, et al. Reductase enzyme expression across the National Cancer Institute Tumor cell line panel: correlation with sensitivity to mitomycin C and EO9. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996;88:259–69.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. ↵
    Hermanson M, Funa K, Hartman M, et al. Platelet-derived growth-factor and its receptors in human glioma tissue - Expression of messenger-RNA and protein suggests the presence of autocrine and paracrine loops. Cancer Res 1992;52:3213–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. ↵
    Chioni A-M, Fraser SP, Pani F, et al. A Novel polyclonal antibody specific for the Nav1.5 voltage-gated Na+ channel “neonatal” isoform. J Neurosci Methods. In press.
  29. ↵
    Kothari MS, Ali S, Buluwela L, et al. Purified malignant mammary epithelial cells maintain hormone responsiveness in culture. Br J Cancer 2003;88:1071–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    Sarao R, Gupta SK, Auld VJ, Dunn RJ. Developmentally regulated alternative RNA splicing of rat-brain sodium-channel messenger-RNAs. Nucleic Acids Res 1991;19:5673–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. ↵
    Gustafson TA, Clevinger EC, Oneill TJ, et al. Mutually exclusive exon splicing of type-III brain sodium channel-α subunit RNA generates developmentally-regulated isoforms in rat-brain. J Biol Chem 1993;268:18648–53.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. ↵
    Ouadid-Ahidouch H, Le Bourhis X, Roudbaraki M, et al. Changes in the K+ current-density of MCF-7 cells during progression through the cell cycle: possible involvement of a h-ether.a-gogo K+ channel. Receptors Channels 2001;7:345–56.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  33. ↵
    Srinivasan J, Schachner M, Catterall WA. Interaction of voltage-gated sodium channels with the extracellular matrix molecules tenascin-C and tenascin-R. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1998;95:15753–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. Xiao ZC, Ragsdale DS, Malhotra JD, et al. Tenascin-R is a functional modulator of sodium channel β subunits. J Biol Chem 1999;274:26511–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. Malhotra JD, Kazen-Gillespie K, Hortsch M, Isom LL. Sodium channel β subunits mediate homophilic cell adhesion and recruit ankyrin to points of cell-cell contact. J Biol Chem 2000;275:11383–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. Kazarinova-Noyes K, Malhotra JD, McEwen DP. Contactin associates with Na+ channels and increases their functional expression. J Neurosci 2001;21:7517–25.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. ↵
    Ratcliffe CF, Westenbroek RE, Curtis R, Catterall WA. Sodium channel β1 and β3 subunits associate with neurofascin through their extracellular immunoglobulin-like domain. J Cell Biol 2001;154:427–34.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. ↵
    Itoh K, Stevens B, Schachner M, Fields RD. Regulated expression of the neural cell adhesion molecule L1 specific patterns of neural impulses. Science 1995;270:1369–72.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. ↵
    Plummer NW, McBurney MW, Meisler MH. Alternative splicing of the sodium channel SCN8A predicts a truncated two-domain protein in fetal brain and non-neuronal cells. J Biol Chem 1997;272:24008–15.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. ↵
    Ariel I, de Groot N, Hochberg A. Imprinted H19 gene expression in embryogenesis and human cancer: the oncofetal connection. Am J Med Genet 2000;921:46–50.
    OpenUrl
  41. ↵
    Monk M, Holding C. Human embryonic genes re-expressed in cancer cells. Oncogene 2001;20:8085–91.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    Toledo-Aral JJ, Brehm P, Halegoua S, Mandel G. A single pulse of nerve growth factor triggers long-term neuronal excitability through sodium channel gene induction. Neuron 1995;14:607–11.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. Cota G, Meza U, Monjaraz E. Regulation of Ca and Na channels in GH3 cells by epidermal growth factor. In: Latorre R, Saez JC, editors. From ion channels to cell-cell conversations. NY: Plenum Press; 1977. p. 185–97.
  44. ↵
    Montano X, Djamgoz MBA. Epidermal growth factor, neurotropins and the metastatic cascade in prostate cancer. FEBS Letts 2004;571:1–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. ↵
    Liu CJ, Dib-Hajj SD, Renganathan M, et al. Modulation of the cardiac sodium channel Nav I.S by fibroblast growth factor homologous factor 1B. J Biol Chem 2003;278:1029–36.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  46. ↵
    Yang P, Kuperschmidt S, Roden DM. Cloning and initial characterization of the human cardiac sodium channel (SCN5A) promoter. Cardiovasc Res 2004;61:56–65.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  47. ↵
    Smithermann KA, Sontheimer H. Inhibition of glial Na+ and K+ currents by tamoxifen. J Membr Biol 2001;181:125–35.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. ↵
    He J, Kargacin ME, Kargacin GJ, Ward CA. Tamoxifen inhibits Na+ and K+ currents in rat ventricular myocytes. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 2003;285:H661–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
Clinical Cancer Research: 11 (15)
August 2005
Volume 11, Issue 15
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover

Sign up for alerts

View this article with LENS

Open full page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Clinical Cancer Research article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Voltage-Gated Sodium Channel Expression and Potentiation of Human Breast Cancer Metastasis
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Clinical Cancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Clinical Cancer Research.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Voltage-Gated Sodium Channel Expression and Potentiation of Human Breast Cancer Metastasis
Scott P. Fraser, James K.J. Diss, Athina-Myrto Chioni, Maria E. Mycielska, Huiyan Pan, Rezan F. Yamaci, Filippo Pani, Zuzanna Siwy, Monika Krasowska, Zbigniew Grzywna, William J. Brackenbury, Dimis Theodorou, Meral Koyutürk, Handan Kaya, Esra Battaloglu, Manuela Tamburo De Bella, Martin J. Slade, Robert Tolhurst, Carlo Palmieri, Jie Jiang, David S. Latchman, R. Charles Coombes and Mustafa B.A. Djamgoz
Clin Cancer Res August 1 2005 (11) (15) 5381-5389; DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0327

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Voltage-Gated Sodium Channel Expression and Potentiation of Human Breast Cancer Metastasis
Scott P. Fraser, James K.J. Diss, Athina-Myrto Chioni, Maria E. Mycielska, Huiyan Pan, Rezan F. Yamaci, Filippo Pani, Zuzanna Siwy, Monika Krasowska, Zbigniew Grzywna, William J. Brackenbury, Dimis Theodorou, Meral Koyutürk, Handan Kaya, Esra Battaloglu, Manuela Tamburo De Bella, Martin J. Slade, Robert Tolhurst, Carlo Palmieri, Jie Jiang, David S. Latchman, R. Charles Coombes and Mustafa B.A. Djamgoz
Clin Cancer Res August 1 2005 (11) (15) 5381-5389; DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0327
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Sirt7 Promotes Colorectal Cancer Tumorigenesis
  • Contact Guidance Controls T-cell Migration in PDAC
  • MET in Papillary RCC
Show more Human Cancer Biology
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Privacy Policy
Facebook  Twitter  LinkedIn  YouTube  RSS

Articles

  • Online First
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • CCR Focus Archive
  • Meeting Abstracts

Info for

  • Authors
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers
  • Librarians

About Clinical Cancer Research

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Permissions
  • Submit a Manuscript
AACR logo

Copyright © 2021 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Clinical Cancer Research
eISSN: 1557-3265
ISSN: 1078-0432

Advertisement