4.8 Article

Dichotomy in NF-κB signaling and chemoresistance in immunoglobulin variable heavy-chain-mutated versus unmutated CLL cells upon CD40/TLR9 triggering

期刊

ONCOGENE
卷 29, 期 36, 页码 5071-5082

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/onc.2010.248

关键词

CLL; CD40; TLR9; NF-kappa B; Bcl-X-L; IgVH mutation status

资金

  1. Dutch Cancer Society (KWF) [UvA 2007-3856]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) cells circulating in peripheral blood (PB) differ from the leukemic fraction in lymph nodes (LNs) with respect to cell division and drug sensitivity. CD40 stimulation of PB CLL cells in vitro results in chemoresistance and provides a partial model for the LN microenvironment. The TLR9 ligand CpG induces proliferation in immunoglobulin variable heavy-chain- unmutated CLL, but apoptosis in immunoglobulin variable heavy-chain-mutated CLL. To juxtapose proliferative with antiapoptotic signals, we investigated the effects of CpG in the context of CD40 ligation in mutated versus unmutated CLL cells in this study. Prolonged CD40 ligation induced classical, followed by alternative nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-kappa B), activity in both subgroups, correlating with enhanced Bfl-1 and Bcl-X-L levels, respectively. A dichotomy in NF-kappa B signaling occurred on combined CD40/TLR9 triggering. This induced declining p52 and Bcl-X-L levels, and reversed chemoresistance only in mutated cells, whereas unmutated cells proliferated, maintained p52 and Bcl-X-L and remained chemoresistant. The pivotal contribution of Bcl-X-L to chemoresistance was shown by the BH3 mimetic ABT-737 and RNA interference. Finally, in ex vivo LN samples, p52, p65 and Bcl-X-L levels were highly expressed, corroborating the in vitro findings. Thus, a distinction in NF-kappa B activation and drug susceptibility in mutated versus unmutated (LN-like) CLL cells was uncovered, which was causally linked to Bcl-X-L levels. Oncogene (2010) 29, 5071-5082; doi:10.1038/onc.2010.248; published online 28 June 2010

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

4.8
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