4.4 Article

Quinacrine-Mediated Autophagy and Apoptosis in Colon Cancer Cells Is Through a p53- and p21-Dependent Mechanism

期刊

ONCOLOGY RESEARCH
卷 20, 期 2-3, 页码 81-91

出版社

COGNIZANT COMMUNICATION CORP
DOI: 10.3727/096504012X13473664562628

关键词

Quinacrine (QC); Colon cancer; p21; p53; Autophagy; Apoptosis

类别

资金

  1. Indian Council of Medical Research
  2. Department of Biotechnology, Govt. of India

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We previously showed that quinacrine (QC), a small molecule antimalarial agent, also presented anticancer activity in breast cancer cells through activation of p53, p21, and inhibition of topoisomerase activity. Here we have systematically studied the detailed cell death mechanism of this drug using three colon cancer cell lines (HCT-116 parental, isogenic HCT-116 p53(-/-), and HCT-116 p21(-/-) sublines). QC caused a dose-dependent reduction in cell viability in all three cell lines. However, the parental cells were more susceptible to QC-mediated cell death, suggesting that p53- and p21-dependent processes were involved. QC-mediated cell death was measured with the following endpoints: the Bax/BcI-xL ratio, cleaved PARP, apoptotic nuclei visualized by DAPI staining, and COMET formation. In addition, markers of autophagy were measured. Acridine orange staining revealed increased accumulation of autophagic vacuoles (AVs) after QC treatment in a dose-dependent manner in parental cells, and decreased staining in isogenic HCT-116 p53-/- and HCT-116 P21(-/-) cells. Immunofluorescence of LC3B was significantly lowered in QC-treated cells lacking p53 or p2I, compared to the parental cells. Interestingly, the expression of the autophagy marker LC3B-II after exposure to QC was decreased in either p53 or p21 null cells compared to parental cells. After deletion of p21 in HCT-116 p53(-/-) cells, no change in LC3B-II expression was noted following QC treatment. Collectively, the results suggest that QC-mediated autophagy and apoptosis dependent on p53 and p21.

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

4.4
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