4.7 Article

Hedgehog and epithelial-mesenchymal transition signaling in normal and malignant epithelial cells of the esophagus

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 125, 期 5, 页码 1212-1221

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.24400

关键词

hedgehog; EMT; SIP1; GLI1; esophageal cancer

类别

资金

  1. The National Institute of Biomedical Innovation
  2. The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan
  3. The Princess Takamatsu Cancer Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It has been established that the Hedgehog (Hh) and epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) signals act on morphogenesis of embryonic and adult tissues. Recently, both signals have been involved in tumor malignancy. However, little is known as to whether Hh and EMT signals act on normal and malignant epithelial cells in the esophagus. By laser microdissection (LMD)-based microarray and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction in the undifferentiated and differentiated epithelial cells of the esophagus, we compared the expression profiles of Hh and EMT signaling molecules of these cells with those of cancers. Whether and how both signalings act in undifferentiated cells and in cancer cells are investigated by treatment of a Hh-signal inhibitor and/or siRNAs of Hh and EMT transcriptional key regulator genes on a mouse primary culture and on human esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) cell lines. Undifferentiated esophageal epithelial cells and most ESCCs coexpressed Hh and EMT signaling genes. Some mesenchymal-related genes were regulated by an EMT regulator SIP1/ZEB2/ZFHX1B, which was a downstream gene of a primary transcriptional transducer GLI1 in Hh signaling. Hh signal block inhibited esophageal keratinocyte differentiation and cancer cell invasion and growth. These findings suggest that the mesenchymal gene expression of undifferentiated cells is maintained or strengthened in cancer cells through Hh signaling. This is a first report showing the presence of crosstalk between Hh and EMT pathways. (C) 2009 UICC

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

4.7
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