4.1 Article

Intratumoral neutrophil granulocytes contribute to epithelial-mesenchymal transition in lung adenocarcinoma cells

期刊

TUMOR BIOLOGY
卷 36, 期 10, 页码 7789-7796

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s13277-015-3484-1

关键词

Tumor-associated neutrophil; Lung adenocarcinoma; Epithelial-mesenchymal transition

类别

资金

  1. Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [ZR2013HZ001]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81301728]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We previously demonstrated that haemoptysis as a prognostic factor in lung adenocarcinoma and haemoptysis was associated with severe vascular invasion and high circulating white blood cell count. Epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) plays an important role in tumor invasion. We hypothesized there was some relationship between tumor-associated inflammatory cells, tumor invasion, EMT, and haemoptysis. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) was used to detect CD66b and E-cadherin expression in tumor tissue. By co-culture tumor cells with polymorphonuclear neutrophils (PMNs), the expressions of EMT markers were assessed by western blotting. TGF-beta 1 concentrations in the supernatant and the migration activities of tumor cells were performed by ELISA and migration assays. Intratumoral CD66b(+) PMN expression was negatively associated with E-cadherin expression. Haemoptysis was significantly associated with neutrophil infiltration (OR = 4.25, 95 % CI 1.246-14.502). Neutrophils promoted EMT of tumor cells in vitro and enhanced the migration activity of tumor cells. In addition, TGF-beta 1 was up-regulated and Smad4 translocated into nucleus, indicating that TGF-beta/Smad signaling pathway was initiated during the process. We indicated that lung adenocarcinoma with haemoptysis was associated with more PMN infiltration and PMNs promoted EMT, partly via TGF-beta/Smad signal pathway. This may provide mechanistic reasons for why haemoptysis was associated with poor outcome in lung adenocarcinoma.

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

4.1
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