4.6 Article

The Distinct Gene Regulatory Network of Myoglobin in Prostate and Breast Cancer

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 10, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142662

关键词

-

资金

  1. Center for Computational Sciences Mainz (CSM)
  2. Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Myoglobin (MB) is not only strongly expressed in myocytes, but also at much lower levels in different cancer entities. 40% of breast tumors are MB-positive, with the globin being coexpressed with markers of tumor hypoxia in a proportion of cases. In breast cancer, MB expression is associated with a positive hormone receptor status and patient prognosis. In prostate cancer, another hormone-dependent cancer type, 53% of tumors were recently shown to express MB. Especially in more aggressive prostate cancer specimen MB expression also correlates with increased patient survival rates. Both findings might be due to tumor-suppressing properties of MB in cancer cells. In contrast to muscle, MB transcription in breast and prostate cancer mainly depends on a novel, alternative promoter site. We show here that its associated transcripts can be upregulated by hypoxia and downregulated by estrogens and androgens in MCF7 breast and LNCaP prostate cancer cells, respectively. Bioinformatic data mining of epigenetic histone marks and experimental verification reveal a hitherto uncharacterized transcriptional network that drives the regulation of the MB gene in cancer cells. We identified candidate hormone-receptor binding elements that may interact with the cancer-associated MB promoter to decrease its activity in breast and prostate cancer cells. Additionally, a regulatory element, 250 kb downstream of the promoter, acts as a hypoxia-inducible site within the transcriptional machinery. Understanding the distinct regulation of MB in tumors will improve unraveling the respiratory protein's function in the cancer context and may provide new starting points for developing therapeutic strategies.

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