4.7 Article

UCP2 regulates cholangiocarcinoma cell plasticity via mitochondria-to-AMPK signals

期刊

BIOCHEMICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 166, 期 -, 页码 174-184

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.bcp.2019.05.017

关键词

UCP2; Cholangiocarcinoma; EMT; Glycolysis; Mitochondrial ROS

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [81602044]
  2. Zheng Shu Medical Elite Scholarship Fund
  3. Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [LY19H160016, LY17H030001]
  4. Institutional Development Award (IDeA) from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [P20GM121307]
  5. LSU Health Shreveport Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Uncoupling protein 2 (UCP2) is upregulated in several human cancers which contributes to tumorigenesis. However, whether UCP2 expression is amplified in cholangiocarcinoma and whether UCP2 promotes cholangiocarcinoma progression are not known. Our results found that in human cholangiocarcinoma tissues, UCP2 was highly expressed in tumors and its levels were negatively associated with prognosis. Importantly, lymph node invasion of cholangiocarcinoma was associated with higher UCP2 expression. In cholangiocarcinoma cells, cell proliferation and migration were suppressed when UCP2 expression was inhibited via gene knockdown. In UCP2 knockdown cells, glycolysis was inhibited, the mesenchymal markers were downregulated whereas AMPK was activated. The increased mitochondrial ROS and AMP/ATP ratio might be responsible for this activation. When the UCP2 inhibitor genipin was applied, tumor cell migration and 3D growth were suppressed via enhancing the mesenchymal-epithelial transition of cholangiocarcinoma cells. Furthermore, cholangiocarcinoma cells became sensitive to cisplatin and gemcitabine treatments when genipin was applied. In conclusion, our results demonstrate that the amplified expression of UCP2 contributes to the progression of cholangiocarcinoma through a glycolysis-mediated mechanism.

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