4.6 Article

NOX4 mediates cytoprotective autophagy induced by the EGFR inhibitor erlotinib in head and neck cancer cells

期刊

TOXICOLOGY AND APPLIED PHARMACOLOGY
卷 272, 期 3, 页码 736-745

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.taap.2013.07.013

关键词

HNSCC; EGFR; Erlotinib; Autophagy; NOX4; LC3B

资金

  1. Department of Pathology
  2. American Cancer Society [NIH K01CA134941, IRG-77-004-34]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs) overexpress epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and EGFR inhibitors are routinely used in the treatment of HNSCC. However, many HNSCC tumors do not respond or become refractory to EGFR inhibitors. Autophagy, which is a stress-induced cellular self-degradation process, has been reported to reduce the efficacy of chemotherapy in various disease models. The purpose of this study is to determine if the efficacy of the EGFR inhibitor erlotinib is reduced by activation of autophagy via NOX4-mediated oxidative stress in HNSCC cells. Erlotinib induced the expression of the autophagy marker LC3B-II and autophagosome formation in FaDu and Cal-27 cells. Inhibition of autophagy by chloroquine and knockdown of autophagy pathway genes Beclin-1 and Atg5 sensitized both cell lines to erlotinib-induced cytotoxicity, suggesting that autophagy may serve as a protective mechanism. Treatment with catalase (CAT) and diphenylene iodonium (DPI) in the presence of erlotinib suppressed the increase in LC3B-II expression in FaDu and Cal-27 cells. Erlotinib increased NOX4 mRNA and protein expression by increasing its promoter activity and mRNA stability in FaDu cells. Knockdown of NOX4 using adenoviral siNOX4 partially suppressed erlotinib-induced LC3B-II expression, while overexpression of NOX4 increased expression of LC3B-II. These studies suggest that erlotinib may activate autophagy in HNSCC cells as a pro-survival mechanism, and NOX4 may play a role in mediating this effect. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. 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