4.7 Article

Subtilisin from Bacillus amyloliquefaciens induces apoptosis in breast cancer cells through ubiquitin-proteasome-mediated tubulin degradation

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2022.08.086

关键词

Bacterial protease; Cell death; PARKIN

资金

  1. Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) [67/1/2020-DDI/BMS]
  2. CSIR-SRF fellowship, Govt. of India

向作者/读者索取更多资源

By studying the anti-cancer properties of subtilisin, it was found that subtilisin can induce apoptosis in breast and colon cancer cells by degrading tubulin, without affecting normal cells. This study provides new insights for the development of novel anti-cancer therapies.
To search for novel proteases from environmental isolates which can induce apoptosis in cancer cells, we have purified subtilisin from Bacillus amyloliquefaciens and studied its anti-cancer properties. Subtilisin induced apoptosis in colon (HT29) and breast (MCF7) cancer cells but showed no effect on mouse peritoneal macrophages and normal breast cells (MCF10A). Western blot analysis showed that Bax, Bcl-2 level remained unchanged but tubulin level decreased significantly. Subtilisin does not induce the intrinsic pathway of apoptosis, rather it induced tubulin degradation in MCF-7 cells, whereas in normal cells (MCF-10A) tubulin degradation was not observed. Subtilisin activates ubiquitination and proteasomal-mediated tubulin degradation which was completely restored in presence of proteasome inhibitor MG-132. We further observed PARKIN, one of the known E3-ligase, is overexpressed and interacts with tubulin in subtilisin treated cells. Knockdown of PARKIN effectively downregulates ubiquitination and inhibits degradation of tubulin. PARKIN activation and tubulin degradation lead to ER-stress which in turn activates caspase-7 and PARP cleavage, thus guiding the subtilisin treated cells towards apoptosis. To our knowledge this is the first report of subtilisin induced apoptosis in cancer cells by proteasomal degradation of tubulin.

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