4.7 Article

Secreted CXCL1 is a potential mediator and marker of the tumor invasion of bladder cancer

Journal

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
Volume 14, Issue 9, Pages 2579-2587

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-1922

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify proteins that are potentially involved in the tumor invasion of bladder cancer. Experimental Design: We searched for the candidate proteins by comparing the profiles of secreted proteins among the poorly invasive human bladder carcinoma cell line RT112 and the highly invasive cell line T24. The proteins isolated from cell culture supernatants were identified by shotgun proteomics. We found that CXCL1 is related to the tumor invasion of bladder cancer cells. We also evaluated whether the amount of the chemokine CXCL1 in the urine would be a potential marker for predicting the existence of invasive bladder tumors. Results: Higher amount of CXCL1 was secreted from highly invasive bladder carcinoma cell lines and this chemokine modulated the invasive ability of those cells in vitro. It was revealed that CXCL1 regulated the expression of matrix metalloproteinase-13 in vitro and higher expression of CXCL1 was associated with higher pathologic stages in bladder cancer in vivo. We also showed that urinary CXCL1 levels were significantly higher in patients with invasive bladder cancer (pT1-4) than those with noninvasive pTa tumors (P = 0.0028) and normal control (P < 0.0001). Finally, it was shown that CXCL1 was an independent factor for predicting the bladder cancer with invasive phenotype. Conclusions: Our results suggest that CXCL1 modulates the invasive abilities of bladder cancer cells and this chemokine may be a potential candidate of urinary biomarker for invasive bladder cancer and a possible therapeutic target for preventing tumor invasion.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available