4.8 Article

NEDD9 Promotes Oncogenic Signaling in Mammary Tumor Development

Journal

CANCER RESEARCH
Volume 69, Issue 18, Pages 7198-7206

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-09-0795

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIH [RO1 CA63366, CA113342, CA-06927]
  2. Anny Materiel Command [W81XWH-07-1-0676]
  3. Pennsylvania Tobacco Settlement
  4. Israel Cancer Association and Stanley Abersur Research Foundation
  5. Pew Charitable Fund
  6. Ben-Gurion University of the Negev [T32 CA-009035]
  7. National Cancer Institute [PA50 CA-083638]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the past 3 years, altered expression of the HEF1/CAS-L/NEDD9 scaffolding protein has emerged as contributing to cancer metastasis in multiple cancer types. However, whereas some studies have identified elevated NEDD9 expression as prometastatic, other work has suggested a negative role in tumor progression. We here show that the Nedd9-null genetic background significantly limits mammary tumor initiation in the MMTV-polyoma virus middle T genetic model. Action of NEDD9 is tumor cell intrinsic, with immune cell infiltration, stroma, and angiogenesis unaffected. The majority of the late-appearing mammary tumors of MMTV-polyoma virus middle T;Nedd9(-/-) mice are characterized by depressed activation of proteins including ART, Src, FAK, and extracellular signal-regulated kinase, emphasizing an important role of NEDD9 as a scaffolding protein for these prooncogenic proteins. Analysis of cells derived from primary Nedd9(+/+). and Nedd9(-/-) tumors showed persistently reduced FAK activation, attachment, and migration, consistent with a role for NEDD9 activation of FAK in promoting tumor aggressiveness. This study provides the first in vivo evidence of a role for NEDD9 in breast cancer progression and suggests that NEDD9 expression may provide a biomarker for tumor aggressiveness. [Cancer Res 2009;69(18):7198-206]

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available