4.6 Article

DHA induces ER stress and growth arrest in human colon cancer cells: associations with cholesterol and calcium homeostasis

期刊

JOURNAL OF LIPID RESEARCH
卷 49, 期 10, 页码 2089-2100

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1194/jlr.M700389-JLR200

关键词

gene expression; phosphorylated eIF2 alpha; antioxidant response; heat shock response; cytosolic free Ca2+; cell cycle; total cholesterol level; cholesterol synthesis

资金

  1. The Faculty of Medicine, NTNU, The Cancer Research Fund, Trondheim University Hospital
  2. Functional Genomics Program (FUGE)
  3. Norwegian Microarray Consortium (NMC), Trondheim
  4. FUGE, The Norwegian Research Council
  5. NTNU

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) are normal constituents of the diet, but have properties different from other fatty acids (e. g., through generation of signaling molecules). N-3 PUFAs reduce cancer cell growth, but no unified mechanism has been identified. We show that docosahexaenoic acid (DHA; 22:6 n-3) causes extensive changes in gene expression patterns at mRNA level in the colon cancer cell line SW620. Early changes include unfolded protein response (UPR) and increased levels of phosphorylated eIF2 alpha as verified at protein level. The latter is considered a hallmark of endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress and is abundantly present already after 3 h. It may coordinate many of the downstream changes observed, including signaling pathways for cell cycle arrest/apoptosis, calcium homeostasis, cholesterol metabolism, ubiquitination, and proteasomal degradation. Also, eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), but not oleic acid (OA), induced key mediators of ER stress and UPR at protein level. Accumulation of esterified cholesterol was not compensated for by increased total levels of cholesterol, and mRNAs for cholesterol biosynthesis as well as de novo synthesis of cholesterol were reduced. These results suggest that cytotoxic effects of DHA are associated with signaling pathways involving lipid metabolism and ER stress.

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