Skip to main content
Figure 2 | BMC Pharmacology

Figure 2

From: Contrasting effects of linaclotide and lubiprostone on restitution of epithelial cell barrier properties and cellular homeostasis after exposure to cell stressors

Figure 2

Effects of active linaclotide and lubiprostone on IFN-γ- induced changes of T84 epithelial cell barrier function and homeostasis: (A) ΔTER; (B) ΔFITC-LPS flux; (C) Δoccludin/actin ratio and (D) ΔΔmitochondrial membrane potential; and (E) Effect of active linaclotide and lubiprostone on TNF-α-induced changes of T84 epithelial cell barrier function measured as ΔTER and effect of methadone. 200 nM active linaclotide, 100 nM lubiprostone, 100 ng/ml IFN-γ and 50 ng/ml TNF-α were used. Data is plotted as mean ± S.E. (A) ΔTER: n = 3, #p < 0.02 wrt control, *p < 0.001 wrt DMSO, p < 0.0005 for IFN-γ/lin vs IFN-γ/lubi. Basal TERs = 1.56 ± 0.01 kΩ/cm2 and 1.26 ± 0.02 for control and DMSO respectively. Δlin vs Δlubi, p < 0.0005. (B) ΔFITC-LPS flux: n = 3, #p < 0.05 wrt control, *p < 0.005 wrt DMSO, p < 0.0005 for IFN-γ/lin vs IFN-γ/lubi. Basal LPS fluxes = 361.1 ± 3.4 and 378.1 ± 3.6 em units @ 530 nm for control and DMSO respectively. Δlin vs Δlubi, p < 0.01. (C) Δoccludin/actin ratio: n = 3, #p < 0.02 wrt control, *p < 0.0005 wrt DMSO, p < 0.0005 for IFN-γ/lin vs IFN-γ/lubi. Basal ratios = 0.98 ± 0.01 and 0.98 ± 0.01 for control and DMSO respectively. Δlin vs Δlubi, p < 0.0005. (D) ΔΔmitochondrial membrane potential: n = 8, #p < 0.001 wrt control, *p < 0.0005 wrt DMSO, p < 0.0005 for IFN-γ/lin vs IFN-γ/lubi. Basal Δ mito pds = 224.0 ± 0.2 and 211.1 ± 8.8 mV for control and DMSO respectively. Δlin vs Δlubi, p < 0.0005. (E) ΔTER: 1 μM methadone was used. NS, not significant wrt TNF-α/control, *p < 0.01 wrt TNF-α/DMSO, # p < 0.005 wrt TNF-α/lubi and p < 0.02 for TNF-α/lin vs TNF-α/lubi. Basal TERs = 1.32 ± 0.06 and 1.19 ± 0.01 kΩ/cm2 for control and DMSO respectively. Δlin vs Δlubi, p < 0.05.

Back to article page