Are you S Bonnette?

Claim your profile

Publications (2)6.98 Total impact

  • Article: Developmental and hormonal signals dramatically alter the localization and abundance of insulin receptor substrate proteins in the mammary gland.
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Insulin receptor substrates (IRS) are central integrators of hormone, cytokine, and growth factor signaling. IRS proteins can be phosphorylated by a number of signaling pathways critical to normal mammary gland development. Studies in transgenic mice that overexpress IGF-I in the mammary gland suggested that IRS expression is important in the regulation of normal postlactational mammary involution. The goal of these studies was to examine IRS expression in the mouse mammary gland and determine the importance of IRS-1 to mammary development in the virgin mouse. IRS-1 and -2 show distinct patterns of protein expression in the virgin mouse mammary gland, and protein abundance is dramatically increased during pregnancy and lactation, but rapidly lost during involution. Consistent with hormone regulation, IRS-1 protein levels are reduced by ovariectomy, induced by combined treatment with estrogen and progesterone, and vary considerably throughout the estrous cycle. These changes occur without similar changes in mRNA levels, suggesting posttranscriptional control. Mammary glands from IRS-1 null mice have smaller fat pads than wild-type controls, but this reduction is proportional to the overall reduction in body size. Development of the mammary duct (terminal endbuds and branch points) is not altered by the loss of IRS-1, and pregnancy-induced proliferation is not changed. These data indicate that IRS undergo complex developmental and hormonal regulation in the mammary gland, and that IRS-1 is more likely to regulate mammary function in lactating mice than in virgin or pregnant mice.
    Endocrinology 07/2003; 144(6):2683-94. · 4.46 Impact Factor
  • Article: Immortal, non-tumourigenic mouse mammary outgrowths express high levels of cyclin B1 and activation of cyclin B1/cdc2 kinase.
    T K Said, S Bonnette, D Medina
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Neoplastic transformation of mouse mammary epithelial cells is the result of several identifiable phenotypic changes which presumably require sequential genetic alterations. In our model system, mammary cells progress from a mortal state (virgin duct) to several morphologically distinct intermediate states. The intermediate states are distinct cell populations that are phenotypically identified as immortal, non-tumourigenic (i.e. EL11), weakly tumourigenic ductal/alveolar hyperplasia (i.e. EL12) and moderately tumourigenic alveolar hyperplasiaa (i.e. TM12) to invasive tumours (i.e. EL12T/TM12T). We have studied the changes in total cyclin A and B1 levels, cyclin A and B1 complexed to cdc2, cyclin B1cdc2 kinase activity and cyclin D proteins in EL11 and EL12 immortalized outgrowth lines. Results revealed increased levels in total cyclin B1 (> 5-fold), cyclin B1/cdc2 (3-4-fold) and cyclin B1/cdc2 kinase activity (2-3.5-fold) in EL11 and EL12 phenotypes when compared to control mammary gland (virgin). No changes in the levels of total cyclin A or cycln A associated to cdc2 were observed. Cyclin D1, D2 and D3 protein levels were low in the EL11 immortal ductal outgrowth. Exposure to hormones via a pituitary isograft stimulated the synthesis of cyclin D1 and D2 but not D3 associated to cdk4 as well as total cdk4 proteins. Bromodeoxyuridine (BrdUrd) labelling indices showed marked increases in immortal ductal outgrowths (EL11 and EL12) when compared to virgin, suggesting that epithelial cells are cycling in these cell populations. Even in the presence of hormone stimulation, EL11 outgrowths were not tumourigenic, suggesting that other events are necessary to drive the cells to a tumourigenic phenotype. The results suggest that increased levels of cyclin B1 and cyclin B1-cdc2 kinase activities are early events and may be an important marker for the immortalized phenotype.
    Cell Proliferation 12/1996; 29(11):623-39. · 2.52 Impact Factor