4.5 Article

Ovarian Cancer Cells Commonly Exhibit Defective STING Signaling Which Affects Sensitivity to Viral Oncolysis

期刊

MOLECULAR CANCER RESEARCH
卷 17, 期 4, 页码 974-986

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-18-0504

关键词

-

资金

  1. University of Miami/Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center Grant entitled Analysis of STING and Evaluation of STING Based Therapeutics in Ovarian Cancer
  2. NIH/NCI [RO1CA194404-01]
  3. Science without Borders fellowship from the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq/Brazil)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ovarian cancer is the sixth most prevalent cancer in women and the most lethal of the gynecologic malignancies. Treatments have comprised the use of immunotherapeutic agents as well as oncolytic viruses, with varying results for reasons that remain to be clarified. To better understand the mechanisms that may help predict treatment outcome, we have evaluated innate immune signaling in select ovarian cancer cell lines, governed by the Stimulator of Interferon Genes (STING), which controls self or viral DNA-triggered cytokine production. Our results indicate that STING-dependent signaling is habitually defective in majority of ovarian cancer cells examined, frequently through the suppression of STING and/or the cyclic dinucleotide (CDN) enzyme Cyclic GMP-AMP synthase (cGAS) expression, by epigenetic processes. However, STING-independent, dsRNA-activated innate immune cytokine production, which require RIG-I/MDA5, were largely unaffected. Such defects enabled ovarian cancer cells to avoid DNA damage-mediated cytokine production, which would alert the immunosurveillance system. Loss of STING signaling also rendered ovarian cancer cells highly susceptible to viral oncolytic gamma 34.5 deleted-HSV1 (Herpes simplex virus) infection in vitro and in vivo. Implications: STING signaling evaluation in tumors may help predict disease outcome and possibly dictate the efficacy of oncoviral and other types of cancer therapies.

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

4.5
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