4.8 Article

Receptor-interacting protein kinase 2 (RIPK2) stabilizes c-Myc and is a therapeutic target in prostate cancer metastasis

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-28340-6

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI R01 [1R01CA218526, 1R01CA232574]
  2. Cedars-Sinai Development of Prostate Cancer Fund
  3. Cedars-Sinai Precision Health Award
  4. UCLA CTSI Core Voucher Award
  5. Department of Defense (DoD)-Early Investigator Research Award [W81XWH-18-10476]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

RIPK2 is identified as a potential therapeutic target for inhibiting prostate cancer metastasis. It is amplified/gained in about 65% of lethal metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer cases. RIPK2 regulates the stability and activity of c-Myc by activating MKK7, and inhibiting RIPK2 signaling effectively impairs prostate cancer metastasis.
Despite progress in prostate cancer (PC) therapeutics, distant metastasis remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality from PC. Thus, there is growing recognition that preventing or delaying PC metastasis holds great potential for substantially improving patient outcomes. Here we show receptor-interacting protein kinase 2 (RIPK2) is a clinically actionable target for inhibiting PC metastasis. RIPK2 is amplified/gained in similar to 65% of lethal metastatic castration-resistant PC. Its overexpression is associated with disease progression and poor prognosis, and its genetic knockout substantially reduces PC metastasis. Multi-level proteomics analyses reveal that RIPK2 strongly regulates the stability and activity of c-Myc (a driver of metastasis), largely via binding to and activating mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 7 (MKK7), which we identify as a direct c-Myc-S62 kinase. RIPK2 inhibition by preclinical and clinical drugs inactivates the noncanonical RIPK2/MKK7/c-Myc pathway and effectively impairs PC metastatic outgrowth. These results support targeting RIPK2 signaling to extend metastasis-free and overall survival.

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