4.6 Article

Is there a role for the Fas-/Fas-Ligand pathway in chemoresistance of human squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck (SCCHN)?

期刊

ORAL ONCOLOGY
卷 45, 期 1, 页码 69-84

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2008.04.003

关键词

Fas (CD95/APO-1)/FasL (CD95L/CD177); p53; Chemotherapy; Apoptosis; Crossresistance; Head and neck cancer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of the present investigation was to determine the expression of the Fas-receptor/ligand system in established cell tines of squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck (SCCHN), and to study it's functional impact on chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in these SCCHN cell lines. We observed constitutive expression of Fas and FasL in 13 SCCHN cell lines by RT-PCR, Southern-blotting and immunocytochemistry, respectively. Administration of the agonistic Fas-antibody CH-11 led to a significant reduction of viable cells in the colorimetric MTT-assay in 5 out of 13 (38%) cell tines tested and preincubation with Interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) rendered 3 (23%) primarily resistant cell tines sensitive. Cisplatin (cDDP) and bleomycin (BLM) caused dose-dependent cytotoxicity in all cell lines as determined by the 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) and induction of apoptosis. Furthermore, both antineoplastic agents led to an enhanced surface expression of Fas and FasL in all cell lines, and this effect was independent of the respective p53-status. This upregulation of Fas/FasL surface expression increased preexisting Fas-sensitivity only, but failed to make primarily resistant cell tines undergo Fas-mediated growth reduction or apoptosis. Vice versa, blockade of Fas-receptor-ligand-interactions by monoclonal. antibodies directed against FasL was able to attenuate the cytotoxic effect of cDDP and BLM in 2 out of 5 (40%) cell lines tested only. In conclusion, in contrast to many other solid tumors, the Fas/FasL-system does not seem to play an exclusive rote in anticancer drug mediated apoptosis in SCCHN. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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