4.8 Article

Inhibition of DYRK1A destabilizes EGFR and reduces EGFR-dependent glioblastoma growth

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 123, 期 6, 页码 2475-2487

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/JCI63623

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministerio de Educacion y Ciencia (MEC) [SAF2008-04531]
  2. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion (MICINN) [PLE2009-0115]
  3. Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores y Cooperacion [MAEC-AE-CID A/023963/09]
  4. Fondo de Investigacion Sanitaria [FIS-PS09-01977]
  5. Fundacion Mutua-madrilena grants [FMM 2007/057, FMM2011/89]
  6. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [21249013] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glioblastomas (GBMs) are very aggressive tumors that are resistant to conventional chemo- and radiotherapy. New molecular therapeutic strategies are required to effectively eliminate the subpopulation of GBM tumor-initiating cells that are responsible for relapse. Since EGFR is altered in 50% of GBMs, it represents one of the most promising targets; however, EGFR kinase inhibitors have produced poor results in clinical assays, with no clear explanation for the observed resistance. We uncovered a fundamental role for the dual-specificity tyrosine phosphorylation-regulated kinase, DYRK1A, in regulating EGFR in GBMs. We found that DYRK1A was highly expressed in these tumors and that its expression was correlated with that of EGFR. Moreover, DYRK1A inhibition promoted EGFR degradation in primary GBM cell lines and neural progenitor cells, sharply reducing the self-renewal capacity of normal and tumorigenic cells. Most importantly, our data suggest that a subset of GBMs depends on high surface EGFR levels, as DYRK1A inhibition compromised their survival and produced a profound decrease in tumor burden. We propose that the recovery of EGFR stability is a key oncogenic event in a large proportion of gliomas and that pharmacological inhibition of DYRK1A could represent a promising therapeutic intervention for EGFR-dependent GBMs.

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

4.8
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