Skip to main content
. 2018 Apr 26;126(4):047014. doi: 10.1289/EHP2698

Figure 2.

Figure 2A is a bar graph plotting CYP19 transcripts (coding regions) (y-axis) across DMSO, Frsk, U73122, U73122 plus Frsk, VEGF, PD98059, and PD98059 plus VEGF (x-axis). Figure 2B is a bar graph plotting PII-derived CYP19 transcripts (y-axis) across DMSO, Frsk, U73122, and U73122 plus Frsk (x-axis). Figure 2C is a bar graph plotting I.3-derived CYP19 transcripts (y-axis) across DMSO, Frsk, U73122, and U73122 plus Frsk (x-axis). Figure 2D is a bar graph plotting I.7-derived CYP19 transcripts (y-axis) across DMSO, VEGF, PD98059, and PD98059 plus VEGF (x-axis).

Relative expression of (A) CYP19 coding region (nonpromoter-specific or total), and CYP19 transcripts derived from promoters (B) PII, (C) I.3, and (D) I.7 in Hs578t cells (fold DMSO control). Cells were exposed for 24 h to 10μM forskolin (Frsk) or 2.5ng/mL VEGF, inducers of PII/I.3 or I.7 promoter-mediated CYP19 expression, in the presence or absence of selective inhibitors of the PLC (U73122; 2μM) or MEK/MAPK 1/3 (PD98059; 50μM) signaling pathways. Experiments were performed in triplicate with three different cell passages; per experiment, each treatment was tested in triplicate. *, p<0.05. Statistically significant difference between Hs578t cells pretreated with U73122 compared with those treated with Frsk alone, or between Hs578t cells pretreated with PD98059 compared with those treated with VEGF alone (Student t-test). #, p<0.05. Significantly different from DMSO control (Student t-test).