4.7 Article

Increase of human prostate cancer cell (DU145) apoptosis by telmisartan through PPAR-delta pathway

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY
卷 775, 期 -, 页码 35-42

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2016.02.017

关键词

Prostate cancer; Apoptosis; Telmisartan; Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor

资金

  1. National Science Council [NSC 102-2314-B-006-071]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology of Republic of China (Taiwan) [MOST 103-2314-B-006-074-MY2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effect of telmisartan on prostate cancer DU145 cell survival and the underlying mechanism of apoptosis involving peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) pathway were investigated. Cultured DU145 cells were treated pharmacologically with telmisartan and GSK0660 (a PPAR-delta antagonist); or by RNA interference with siRNA of PPAR-delta. The treatment effects on cell survival were evaluated with cell viability assay, life and dead cell staining and flow cytometry. Western blot analysis for PPAR-delta protein expression was also performed. The results showed that telmisartan (0-80 mu m) dose-dependently reduced DU145 cell survival. Flow cytometry demonstrated cancer cell cycle arrest with increase of sub-G1 phase. GSK0660 partially but significantly restored the telmisartan-treated cell viability. Similarly, siRNA of PPAR-delta significantly reversed the telmisartan-induced apoptosis. Western blot showed that telmisartan significantly increased DU145 cell PPAR-delta protein expression. Coincubation with siRNA of PPAR-delta inhibited the telmisartan effect of PPAR-delta up-regulation. In conclusion, telmisartan induces prostate cancer DU145 cells apoptosis through the up-regulation of PPAR-delta protein expression. Pharmacological inhibition or genetic silencing of PPAR-delta activity can both reverse the telmisartan-induced apoptotic effect. Thus the PPAR-delta pathway might be a potential target for the treatment of prostate cancer. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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