4.7 Article

Adaptive ERK signalling activation in response to therapy and in silico prognostic evaluation of EGFR-MAPK in HNSCC

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 123, 期 2, 页码 288-297

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41416-020-0892-9

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council
  2. German Cancer Aid in the framework of the Mildred-Scheel MD fellowship program
  3. Heinz Goetze Memorial Fellowship Program of the Athenaeum Foundation
  4. Heidelberg University's Medical Faculty
  5. Projekt DEAL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients frequently develop treatment resistance to cetuximab, a monoclonal antibody against EGFR, as well as radiotherapy. Here we addressed extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) regulation by cetuximab or fractionated irradiation (IR) and conducted in silico prognostic evaluation of the EGFR-MAPK axis in HNSCC. Methods Expression of ERK1/2 phosphorylation (pERK1/2) was determined in HNSCC cell lines, which were treated with cetuximab or fractionated-IR. Furthermore, the effect of fractionated IR on pERK1/2 was confirmed in an ex vivo HNSCC tissue culture model. Expression and prognostic significance of EGFR-ERK axis was evaluated in a cohort of radiotherapy plus cetuximab-treated HNSCC. Correlations among EGFR-MAPK signalling components and association between transcript and protein expression profiles and patient survival in HNSCC were analysed using publicly available databases. Results ERK1/2 phosphorylation was rebounded by prolonged cetuximab administration and was induced by fractionated IR, which could be suppressed by a MEK inhibitor as a radiosensitiser. In silico assessments suggested that EGFR-MAPK cascade genes and proteins could predict HNSCC patients' survival as a prognostic signature. Conclusions Activation of ERK1/2 signalling contributes to the cellular defence of HNSCC against cetuximab and fractionated IR treatment. EGFR-MAPK axis has a prognostic significance in HNSCC.

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