4.5 Article

DNA Damage-Induced Modulation of GLUT3 Expression Is Mediated through p53-Independent Extracellular Signal-Regulated Kinase Signaling in HeLa Cells

期刊

MOLECULAR CANCER RESEARCH
卷 8, 期 11, 页码 1547-1557

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-10-0011

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many cancer cells exhibit increased rates of uptake and metabolism of glucose compared with normal cells. Glucose uptake in mammalian cells is mediated by the glucose transporter (GLUT) family. Here, we report that DNA-damaging anticancer agents such as Adriamycin and etoposide suppressed the expression of GLUT3, but not GLUT1, in HeLa cells and a tumorigenic HeLa cell hybrid. Suppression of GLUT3 expression determined by the real-time PCR was also evident with another DNA-damaging agent, camptothecin, which reduced the promoter's activity as determined with a luciferase-linked assay. The suppression by these agents seemed to be induced independently of p53, and it was evident when wild-type p53 was overproduced in these cells. In contrast, the mitogen-activated protein kinase/extracellular signal regulated kinase (MAPK/ERK) kinase (MEK) inhibitor U0126 (but not the phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitor LY294002) prevented the drug-induced suppression as determined by reverse transcription-PCR and promoter assays. Furthermore, overexpression of GLUT3 in HeLa cell hybrids increased resistance to these drugs, whereas depletion of the gene by small interfering RNA rendered the cells more sensitive to the drugs, decreasing glucose consumption. The results suggest that DNA-damaging agents reduce GLUT3 expression in cancer cells through activation of the MEK-ERK pathway independently of p53, leading to cell death or apoptosis. The findings may contribute to the development of new chemotherapeutic drugs based on the GLUT3-dependent metabolism of glucose. Mol Cancer Res; 8(11); 1547-57. (C) 2010 AACR.

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