4.5 Article

Mir-148a Improves Response to Chemotherapy in Sensitive and Resistant Oesophageal Adenocarcinoma and Squamous Cell Carcinoma Cells

期刊

JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY
卷 15, 期 3, 页码 429-438

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11605-011-1418-9

关键词

miRNA; miR-148a; miR-106a; Chemotherapy; Resistance

资金

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG) [Hu 1763/1-1]
  2. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [595964]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Response to chemotherapy varies widely in patients with advanced oesophageal cancer. We investigated the impact of manipulating certain microRNAs on response to cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in oesophageal cancer cells. Methods Cisplatin-/5-fluorouracil-resistant oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma (EAC) cell lines were established, and the impact of ectopic upregulation of miR-106a and miR-148a on response to both drugs was assessed. Results The impact of miR-106a-upregulation was inconsistent. Upregulation was followed by reduced sensitivity to cisplatin in chemotherapy-sensitive EAC cells (cell survival, +8.7 +/- 0.8%; p = 0.003) and an improved response to 5-FU in cisplatin-resistant EAC cells (cell survival, -6.4 +/- 2.5%; p = 0.011). MiR-148a upregulation significantly increased sensitivity to chemotherapy in seven out of ten cell lines, represented by a decrease in cell viability of 22.6 +/- 7.9% to 50.5 +/- 10.6% after cisplatin (p <= 0.014) and 6.0 +/- 0.8% to 15.0 +/- 4.1% after 5-FU treatment (p <= 0.012). The only cell lines in which miR-148a upregulation had no effect were cisplatin-resistant EAC exposed to cisplatin and 5-FU-sensitive and 5-FU-resistant SCC cells exposed to 5-FU. Conclusion MiR-148a sensitized chemotherapy-sensitive oesophageal cancer cell lines to cisplatin and, to a lesser extent, to 5-flurouracil and attenuated resistance in chemotherapy-resistant variants. Further experimental and clinical studies to investigate the exact mechanisms involved are warranted.

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

4.5
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