4.6 Article

Lipoprotein Lipase Links Dietary Fat to Solid Tumor Cell Proliferation

期刊

MOLECULAR CANCER THERAPEUTICS
卷 10, 期 3, 页码 427-436

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-10-0802

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NIH [RO1CA126618, DK07508]
  2. Howard Hughes Medical Foundation [52005870]
  3. Norris Cotton Cancer Center
  4. Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO)
  5. N.C.I. Bay Area Breast Cancer SPORE [P50 CA58207]
  6. Dartmouth Medical School
  7. [G.0590.08]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many types of cancer cells require a supply of fatty acids (FA) for growth and survival, and interrupting de novo FA synthesis in model systems causes potent anticancer effects. We hypothesized that, in addition to synthesis, cancer cells may obtain preformed, diet-derived FA by uptake from the bloodstream. This would require hydrolytic release of FA from triglyceride in circulating lipoprotein particles by the secreted enzyme lipoprotein lipase (LPL), and the expression of CD36, the channel for cellular FA uptake. We find that selected breast cancer and sarcoma cells express and secrete active LPL, and all express CD36. We further show that LPL, in the presence of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins, accelerates the growth of these cells. Providing LPL to prostate cancer cells, which express low levels of the enzyme, did not augment growth, but did prevent the cytotoxic effect of FA synthesis inhibition. Moreover, LPL knockdown inhibited HeLa cell growth. In contrast to the cell lines, immunohistochemical analysis confirmed the presence of LPL and CD36 in the majority of breast, liposarcoma, and prostate tumor tissues examined (n = 181). These findings suggest that, in addition to de novo lipogenesis, cancer cells can use LPL and CD36 to acquire FA from the circulation by lipolysis, and this can fuel their growth. Interfering with dietary fat intake, lipolysis, and/or FA uptake will be necessary to target the requirement of cancer cells for FA. Mol Cancer Ther; 10(3); 427-36. (C)2011 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

4.6
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