4.7 Article

Atg7 Overcomes Senescence and Promotes Growth of BrafV600E-Driven Melanoma

期刊

CANCER DISCOVERY
卷 5, 期 4, 页码 410-423

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-14-1473

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. V Foundation for Cancer Research
  2. NIH [R01 CA163591, R01 CA130893]
  3. Val Skinner Foundation
  4. Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey [P30 CA72720]
  5. [L30 CA136372]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Macroautophagy (autophagy hereafter) may promote survival and growth of spontaneous tumors, including melanoma. We utilized a genetically engineered mouse model of melanoma driven by oncogenic Braf(V600E) and deficiency in the Pten tumor suppressor gene in melanocytes to test the functional consequences of loss of the essential autophagy gene autophagy-related-7, Atg7. Atg7 deficiency prevented melanoma development by Braf(V600E) and allelic Pten loss, indicating that autophagy is essential for melanomagenesis. Moreover, Braf(V600E)-mutant, Pten-null, Atg7-deficient melanomas displayed accumulation of autophagy substrates and growth defects, which extended animal survival. Atg7 -deleted tumors showed increased oxidative stress and senescence, a known barrier to melanomagenesis. Treatment with the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib decreased tumor growth and induced senescence that was more pronounced in tumors with Atg7 deficiency. Thus, Atg7 promotes melanoma by limiting oxidative stress and overcoming senescence, and autophagy inhibition may be of therapeutic value by augmenting the antitumor activity of BRAF inhibitors. SIGNIFICANCE: The essential autophagy gene Atg7 promotes development of Braf(V600E)-mutant, Pten-null melanomas by overcoming senescence, and deleting Atg7 facilitated senescence induction and antitumor activity of BRAF inhibition. This suggests that combinatorial BRAF(V600E) and autophagy inhibition may improve therapeutic outcomes in patients whose tumors have BRAF(V600E/K) mutations, an approach currently being explored in clinical trials. (C)2015 AACR.

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

4.7
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