4.3 Article

CEACAM1 Promotes Melanoma Cell Growth through Sox-2

期刊

NEOPLASIA
卷 16, 期 5, 页码 451-460

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.neo.2014.05.003

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Israel Cancer Research Fund (Research Career Development Award)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The prognostic value of the carcinoembryonic antigen cell adhesion molecule 1 (CEACAM1) in melanoma was demonstrated more than a decade ago as superior to Breslow score. We have previously shown that intercellular homophilic CEACAM1 interactions protect melanoma cells from lymphocyte-mediated elimination. Here, we study the direct effects of CEACAM1 on melanoma cell biology. By employing tissue microarrays and low-passage primary cultures of metastatic melanoma, we show that CEACAM1 expression gradually increases from nevi to metastatic specimens, with a strong dominance of the CEACAM1-Long tail splice variant. Using experimental systems of CEACAM1 knockdown and overexpression of selective variants or truncation mutants, we prove that only the full-length long tail variant enhances melanoma cell proliferation in vitro and in vivo. This effect is not reversed with a CEACAM1-blocking antibody, suggesting that it is not mediated by intercellular homophilic interactions. Downstream, CEACAM1-Long increases the expression of Sox-2, which we show to be responsible for the CEACAM1-mediated enhanced proliferation. Furthermore, analysis of the CEACAM1 promoter reveals two single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that significantly enhance the promoter's activity compared with the consensus nucleotides. Importantly, case-control genetic SNP analysis of 134 patients with melanoma and matched healthy donors show that patients with melanoma do not exhibit the Hardy-Weinberg balance and that homozygous SNP genotype enhances the hazard ratio to develop melanoma by 35%. These observations shed new mechanistic light on the role of CEACAM1 in melanoma, forming the basis for development of novel therapeutic and diagnostic technologies.

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

4.3
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