4.7 Article

Bortezomib Treatment Modulates Autophagy in Multiple Myeloma

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 9, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm9020552

关键词

autophagy; angiogenesis; multiple myeloma; plasma cells; endothelial cells; drug resistance; bortezomib

资金

  1. Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC) [20441]
  2. Fondo di Sviluppo e Coesione 2007-2013-APQ Ricerca Regione Puglia Programma regionale a sostegno della specializzazione intelligente e della sostenibilita sociale ed ambientale-FutureInResearch
  3. Apulian Regional Project Medicina di Precisione

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although the introduction of bortezomib as a therapeutic strategy has improved the overall survival of multiple myeloma (MM) patients, 15-20% of high-risk patients do not respond to bortezomib over time or become resistant to treatment. Therefore, the development of new therapeutic strategies, such as combination therapies, is urgently needed. Methods: Given that bortezomib resistance may be mediated by activation of the autophagy pathway as an alternative mechanism of protein degradation, and that an enormous amounts of misfolded protein is generated in myeloma plasma cells (PCs), we investigated the effect of the simultaneous inhibition of proteasome by bortezomib and autophagy by hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) treatment on PCs and endothelial cells (ECs) isolated from patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and MM. Results: We found that bortezomib combined with HCQ induces synergistic cytotoxicity in myeloma PCs whereas this effect is lost on ECs. Levels of microtubule-associated protein light chain beta (LC3B) and p62 are differentially modulated in PCs and ECs, with effects on cell viability and proliferation. Conclusions: Our results suggest that treatment with bortezomib and HCQ should be associated with an anti-angiogenic drug to prevent the pro-angiogenic effect of bortezomib, the proliferation of a small residual tumor PC clone, and thus the relapse.

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