4.6 Article

Oxidative phosphorylation is impaired by prolonged hypoxia in breast and possibly in cervix carcinoma

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocel.2010.07.010

关键词

Glycolysis; Hypoxia; Mitochondria; Oxidative phosphorylation; Breast cancer

资金

  1. CONACyT-Mexico [80534, 123636, 83084, 107183, PAPIIT219508]
  2. Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnologia del Distrito Federal [PICS08-5]
  3. CONACyT [2406]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It has been assumed that oxidative phosphorylation (OxPhos) in solid tumors is severely reduced due to cytochrome c oxidase substrate restriction, although the measured extracellular oxygen concentration in hypoxic areas seems not limiting for this activity. To identify alternative hypoxia-induced OxPhos depressing mechanisms, an integral analysis of transcription, translation, enzyme activities and pathway fluxes was performed on glycolysis and OxPhos in HeLa and MCF-7 carcinomas. In both neoplasias exposed to hypoxia, an early transcriptional response was observed after 8 h (two times increased glycolysis-related mRNA synthesis promoted by increased HIF-1 alpha levels). However, major metabolic remodeling was observed only after 24 h hypoxia: increased glycolytic protein content (1-5-times), enzyme activities (2-times) and fluxes (4-6-times). Interestingly, in MCF-7 cells, 24 h hypoxia decreased OxPhos flux (4-6-fold), and 2-oxoglutarate dehydrogenase and glutaminase activities (3-fold), with no changes in respiratory complexes I and IV activities. In contrast, 24 h hypoxia did not significantly affect HeLa OxPhos flux; neither mitochondria related mRNAs, protein contents or enzyme activities, although the enhanced glycolysis became the main ATP supplier. Thus, prolonged hypoxia (a) targeted some mitochondrial enzymes in MCF-7 but not in HeLa cells, and (b) induced a transition from mitochondrial towards a glycolytic-dependent energy metabolism in both MCF-7 and HeLa carcinomas. (c) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据