4.5 Article

Therapeutic potential of IBP as an autophagy inducer for treating lung cancer via blocking PAK1/Akt/mTOR signaling

期刊

MOLECULAR THERAPY-ONCOLYTICS
卷 20, 期 -, 页码 82-93

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.omto.2020.10.014

关键词

-

资金

  1. Project of the Natural Science Foundation of the Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions of China [18KJA18003]
  2. Xuzhou Applied and Basic Research [KC18009]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [NSFC81703569, 81870005]
  4. Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD)
  5. Program of Jiangsu Province [KYCX18-2123]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study reveals that Ipomoea batatas polysaccharides (IBPs) inhibit lung cancer cell proliferation by inducing cytostatic macroautophagy, suggesting IBP as a potential therapeutic agent for lung cancer treatment.
Lung cancer is the most frequent and fatal malignancy in humans worldwide, yet novel successful drugs for control of this disease are still lacking. Ipomoea batatas polysaccharides (IBPs) have been implicated in inhibiting diverse cancer types, but their functions in mitigating lung cancer are largely unknown. In this study, we identify a role of IBP in inhibiting lung cancer proliferation. We found that IBP significantly impedes the proliferation of lung cancer cells by inducing cytostatic macroautophagy both in vitro and in vivo. Mechanistically, IBP specifically promotes ubiquitination-mediated degradation of PAK1 (p21-activated kinase 1) and blocks its downstream Akt1/mTOR signaling pathway, leading to increased autophagic flux. In lung cancer xenografts in mice, IBP-induced cytostatic autophagy suppresses tumor development. Through site-directed mutational analysis, the underlying signaling augments ubiquitination via PAK1-ubiquitin interaction. Collectively, this work unravels the molecular mechanism underpinning IBP-induced cytostatic autophagy in lung cancer and characterizes IBP as a potential therapeutic agent for lung cancer treatment.

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