4.5 Article

Hepatitis B virus X (HBX) protein upregulates β-catenin in a human hepatic cell line by sequestering SIRT1 deacetylase

期刊

ONCOLOGY REPORTS
卷 28, 期 1, 页码 276-282

出版社

SPANDIDOS PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.3892/or.2012.1798

关键词

hepatitis B virus X; SIRT1; beta-catenin; doxorubicin; apoptosis

类别

资金

  1. National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea
  2. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [2010-0020950]
  3. World Class University through the NRF
  4. Korean government [R31-2008-000-20004-0]
  5. National Research Foundation of Korea [2010-0020950] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hepatitis B virus X (HBX) protein has been reported to induce upregulation of beta-catenin, a known proto-oncogene, in p53-knockout and p53-mutant hepatic cell lines both in a GSK-3 beta-dependent manner and via interaction with adenomatous polyposis coli, which results in protection from beta-catenin degradation. In this study, we describe a novel mechanism for HBX-mediated upregulation of beta-catenin. We observed that HBX interacts with SIRT1, a class III histone deacetylase. Furthermore, the presence of HBX attenuated the interaction between SIRT1 and beta-catenin, leading to protection of beta-catenin from the inhibitory action of SIRT1. Reduction of SIRT1 with siRNA or suppression of SIRT1 activity with nicotinamide upregulated beta-catenin protein levels. In contrast, enhancement of SIRT1 activity with resveratrol reduced beta-catenin protein levels. Furthermore, in Hep3B cells stably expressing HBX, overexpression of SIRT1 or treatment with resveratrol enhanced sensitivity to doxorubicin-induced apoptosis, indicating that upregulation of SIRT1 could be a therapeutic strategy for HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma. Based on these results, we propose that HBX upregulates beta-catenin by sequestering SIRT1, which leads to anticancer drug treatment resistance.

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