4.8 Article

ING4 regulates a secretory phenotype in primary fibroblasts with dual effects on cell proliferation and tumor growth

期刊

ONCOGENE
卷 33, 期 15, 页码 1945-1953

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/onc.2013.145

关键词

ING4; p53; tumor suppression; secretory phenotype

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation [SAF2009-09031, SAF2012-32117]
  2. Madrid Regional Government [S2010/BMD-2303]
  3. [SAF2010-20175]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ING proteins have an essential role in the control of a variety of cellular functions whose deregulation is associated with tumor formation and dissemination, such as proliferation, apoptosis, senescence or invasion. Accordingly, loss of function of ING proteins is a frequent event in many types of human tumors. In this report, we have studied the function of ING4, a member of the ING family of tumor suppressors, in the context of normal, non-transformed primary fibroblasts. We show that ING4 negatively regulates cell proliferation in this cell type. The antiproliferative action of ING4 requires its ability to recognize chromatin marks, it is p53-dependent at least in part, and it is lost in an ING4 cancer-associated mutant. Gene expression analysis shows that ING4 regulates the expression and release of soluble factors of the chemokine family. The secretory phenotype regulated by ING4 in primary fibroblasts displays a selective paracrine effect on proliferation, fostering the division of tumor cells, while inhibiting division in primary fibroblasts. Consistently, ING4-expressing fibroblasts promoted tumor growth in vivo in co-injection tumorigenesis assays. Collectively, our results show that ING4 not only can regulate the proliferation of primary non-transformed human fibroblasts, but also orchestrates a secretory phenotype in these cells that promotes tumor cell proliferation in vitro and in vivo. These findings support a critical role for ING4 expression in normal cells in the non-cell-autonomous regulation of tumor growth.

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