4.5 Article

Cyclosporine A suppresses keratinocyte cell death through MPTP inhibition in a model for skin cancer in organ transplant recipients

Journal

MITOCHONDRION
Volume 10, Issue 2, Pages 94-101

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.mito.2009.10.001

Keywords

Cyclosporine A; Oxidative stress; Skin cancer; UVA; Organ transplantation; Cell death

Funding

  1. VA Merit Review and Career Development Award
  2. NIH [AR0501552, AR41943]
  3. [GM15431]
  4. [ES00267]
  5. [DK48831]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Transplant recipients have an elevated risk of skin cancer, with a 65- to 250-fold increase in squamous cell carcinoma. Usage of the immunosuppressant cyclosporine A (CsA) is associated with the development of skin cancer. We hypothesized that the increased incidence of skin cancer was due to the action of CsA within keratinocyte mitochondria where it can inhibit mitochondrial permeability transition pore (MPTP) opening. Normally, MPTP opening is induced by oxidative stress such as that caused by UV light and leads to cell death, thereby eliminating a cell that has been exposed to genotoxic insult. However, in the presence of CsA, damaged cells may survive and consequently form tumors. To test this hypothesis, we treated keratinocytes with levels of CsA used therapeutically in transplant patients and assessed their viability following UVA-irradiation. CsA prevented cell death by inhibiting MPTP opening, even though the levels of oxidative stress were increased markedly. Nim811, a non-immunosuppressive drug that can block the MPTP had a similar effect while the immunosuppressive drug tacrolimus that does not interact with the mitochondria had no effect. These findings suggest that CsA may promote skin cancer in transplant patients by allowing keratinocyte survival under conditions of increased genotoxic stress. (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Mitochondria Research Society.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available