4.7 Article

Suppressing BCL-XL increased the high dose androgens therapeutic effect to better induce the Enzalutamide-resistant prostate cancer autophagic cell death

期刊

CELL DEATH & DISEASE
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41419-020-03321-z

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [CA156700]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81672526]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Hubei [2020CFB379]
  4. Science Foundation of Yichang [A20-2-021]
  5. Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Committee of Shanghai outstanding academic leaders plan [18XD1403500]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that Enzalutamide-resistant prostate cancer cells can be suppressed by high doses of the androgen DHT. Targeting the BCL-XL protein can enhance the inhibitory effect of high-dose DHT on cell growth, promoting cell death.
Most patients with advanced prostate cancer (PCa) initially respond well to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with antiandrogens, but most of them eventually become resistant to ADT. Here, we found that the antiandrogen Enzalutamide-resistant (EnzR) PCa cells can be suppressed by hyper-physiological doses of the androgen DHT. Mechanism dissection indicates that while androgens/androgen receptor (AR) can decrease BCL-2 expression to induce cell death, yet they can also simultaneously increase anti-apoptosis BCL-XL protein expression via decreasing its potential E3 ubiquitin ligase, PARK2, through transcriptionally increasing the miR-493-3p expression to target PARK2. Thus, targeting the high dose DHT/AR/miR-493-3p/PARK2/BCL-XL signaling with BCL-XL-shRNA can increase high-dose-DHT effect to better suppress EnzR cell growth via increasing the autophagic cell death. A preclinical study using in vivo mouse model also validated that suppressing BCL-XL led to enhance high dose DHT effect to induce PCa cell death. The success of human clinical trials in the future may help us to develop a novel therapy using high dose androgens to better suppress CRPC progression.

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