4.8 Article

USP33 deubiquitinates and stabilizes HIF-2alpha to promote hypoxia response in glioma stem cells

期刊

EMBO JOURNAL
卷 41, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.15252/embj.2021109187

关键词

deubiquitination; glioma stem cell; HIF2 alpha; hypoxia response; USP33; ERK1/2

资金

  1. Cleveland Clinic Foundation
  2. NIH [NS091080, NS099175]
  3. NIH SIG grants [1S10RR031536-01, S10OD018205]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, USP33 was identified as an essential deubiquitinase that stabilizes HIF-2alpha protein in an ERK1/2-dependent manner to promote hypoxia response in cancer cells. Our findings highlight the role of USP33 as a regulator of hypoxia response in cancer stem cells, indicating its potential as a therapeutic target for brain tumor treatment.
Hypoxia regulates tumor angiogenesis, metabolism, and therapeutic response in malignant cancers including glioblastoma, the most lethal primary brain tumor. The regulation of HIF transcriptional factors by the ubiquitin-proteasome system is critical in the hypoxia response, but hypoxia-inducible deubiquitinases that counteract the ubiquitination remain poorly defined. While the activation of ERK1/2 also plays an important role in hypoxia response, the relationship between ERK1/2 activation and HIF regulation remains elusive. Here, we identified USP33 as essential deubiquitinase that stabilizes HIF-2alpha protein in an ERK1/2-dependent manner to promote hypoxia response in cancer cells. USP33 is preferentially induced in glioma stem cells by hypoxia and interacts with HIF-2alpha, leading to its stabilization through deubiquitination. The activation of ERK1/2 upon hypoxia promoted HIF-2alpha phosphorylation, enhancing its interaction with USP33. Silencing of USP33 disrupted glioma stem cells maintenance, reduced tumor vascularization, and inhibited glioblastoma growth. Our findings highlight USP33 as an essential regulator of hypoxia response in cancer stem cells, indicating a novel potential therapeutic target for brain tumor 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

4.8
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