4.5 Article

BIX-01294, a G9a inhibitor, suppresses cell proliferation by inhibiting autophagic flux in nasopharyngeal carcinoma cells

期刊

INVESTIGATIONAL NEW DRUGS
卷 39, 期 3, 页码 686-696

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10637-020-01053-7

关键词

G9a; Inhibitor; BIX-01294; Autophagy; Nasopharyngeal carcinoma

资金

  1. Chongqing Natural Science Foundation [cstc2018jcyjAX0229]
  2. Key Laboratory of Electromagnetic Radiation Protection, Ministry of Education, China [2017DCKF003]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study suggests that high expression of G9a in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) may promote tumor growth, while inhibiting G9a with BIX-01294 (BIX) can suppress tumor growth by inducing autophagic dysregulation. This indicates that BIX may serve as a potential novel strategy for NPC therapy.
G9a, a histone methyltransferase, has been found to be upregulated in a range of tumor tissues, and contributes to tumor growth and metastasis. However, the impact of G9a inhibition as a potential therapeutic target in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is unclear. In the present study we aimed to investigate the anti-proliferative effect of G9a inhibition in the NPC cell lines CNE1 and CNE2, and to further elucidate the molecular mechanisms underlying these effects. The expression of G9a in NPC tumor tissues was significantly higher than that in normal nasopharyngeal tissues. The pharmacological inhibition of G9a by BIX-01294 (BIX) inhibited proliferation and induced caspase-independent apoptosis in NPC cells in vitro. Treatment with BIX induced autophagosome accumulation, which exacerbated the cytotoxic activity of BIX in NPC cells. Mechanistic studies have found that BIX impairs autophagosomes by initiating autophagy in a Beclin-1-independent way, and impairs autophagic degradation by inhibiting lysosomal cathepsin D activation, leading to lysosomal dysfunction. BIX was able to suppress tumor growth, possibly by inhibiting autophagic flux; it might therefore constitute a promising candidate for NPC therapy.

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