4.7 Article

Characterization of bortezomib-adapted I-45 mesothelioma cells

期刊

MOLECULAR CANCER
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1476-4598-9-110

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Bortezomib, a proteasome-specific inhibitor, has emerged as a promising cancer therapeutic agent. However, development of resistance to bortezomib may pose a challenge to effective anticancer therapy. Therefore, characterization of cellular mechanisms involved in bortezomib resistance and development of effective strategies to overcome this resistance represent important steps in the advancement of bortezomib-mediated cancer therapy. Results: The present study reports the development of I-45-BTZ-R, a bortezomib-resistant cell line, from the bortezomib-sensitive mesothelioma cell line I-45.I-45-BTZ-R cells showed no cross-resistance to the chemotherapeutic drugs cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and doxorubicin. Moreover, the bortezomib-adapted I-45-BTZ-R cells had decreased growth kinemics and did not over express proteasome subunit beta 5 (PSMB5) as compared to parental I-45 cells. I-45-BTZR cells and parental I-45 cells showed similar inhibition of proteasome activity, but I-45-BTZ-R cells exhibited much less accumulation of ubiquitinated proteins following exposure to 40 nm bortezomib. Further studies revealed that relatively low doses of bortezomib did not induce an unfolded protein response (UPR) in the bortezomib-adapted cells, while higher doses induced UPR with concomitant cell death, as evidenced by higher expression of the mitochondrial chaperone protein Bip and the endoplasmic reticulum ( ER) stress-related pro-apoptotic protein CHOP. In addition, bortezomib exposure did not induce the accumulation of the pro-apoptotic proteins p53, Mcl-1S, and noxa in the bortezomib-adapted cells. Conclusion: These results suggest that UPR evasion, together with reduced pro-apoptotic gene induction, accounts for bortezomib resistance in the bortezomib-adapted mesothelioma cell line I-45-BTZ-R.

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