4.6 Article

Inhibition of CK2α Down-Regulates Hedgehog/Gli Signaling Leading to a Reduction of a Stem-Like Side Population in Human Lung Cancer Cells

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 7, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0038996

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 CA140654-01A1]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, P.R.C. [9451008901003072]
  3. Kazan, McClain, Abrams, Fernandez, Lyons, Greenwood, Harley & Oberman Foundation, Inc
  4. Estate of Robert Griffiths
  5. Jeffrey and Karen Peterson Family Foundation
  6. Paul and Michelle Zygielbaum
  7. Estate of Norman Mancini
  8. Barbara Isackson Lung Cancer Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Protein kinase CK2 is frequently elevated in a variety of human cancers. The Hedgehog (Hh) signaling pathway has been implicated in stem cell maintenance, and its aberrant activation has been indicated in several types of cancer, including lung cancer. In this study, we show that CK2 is positively involved in Hh/Gli signaling in lung cancer cell lines A549 and H1299. First, we found a correlation between CK2 alpha and Gli1 mRNA levels in 100 primary lung cancer tissues. Down-regulation of Gli1 expression and transcriptional activity were demonstrated after the silencing of CK2 alpha in lung cancer cells. In addition, CK2 alpha siRNA down-regulated the expression of Hh target genes. Furthermore, two small-molecule CK2 alpha inhibitors led to a dose-dependent inhibition of Gli1 expression and transcriptional activity in lung cancer cells. Reversely, forced overexpression of CK2 alpha resulted in an increase both in Gli1 expression and transcriptional activity in A549 cells. Finally, the inhibition of Hh/Gli by CK2 alpha siRNA led to a reduction of a cancer stem cell-like side population that shows higher ABCG2 expression level. Thus, we report that the inhibition of CK2 alpha down-regulates Hh/Gli signaling and subsequently reduces stem-like side population in human lung cancer cells.

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