4.7 Review

Mitochondrial quality control proteases and their modulation for cancer therapy

期刊

MEDICINAL RESEARCH REVIEWS
卷 43, 期 2, 页码 399-436

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/med.21929

关键词

activator; cancer therapy; inhibitor; mitochondrial proteases; quality control

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mitochondrial quality control proteases play a crucial role in maintaining mitochondrial function, regulating cell development, and modulating cancer therapy. They degrade misfolded proteins, regulate mitochondrial morphology, and serve as promising targets for novel antitumor drugs.
Mitochondria, the main provider of energy in eukaryotic cells, contains more than 1000 different proteins and is closely related to the development of cells. However, damaged proteins impair mitochondrial function, further contributing to several human diseases. Evidence shows mitochondrial proteases are critically important for protein maintenance. Most importantly, quality control enzymes exert a crucial role in the modulation of mitochondrial functions by degrading misfolded, aged, or superfluous proteins. Interestingly, cancer cells thrive under stress conditions that damage proteins, so targeting mitochondrial quality control proteases serves as a novel regulator for cancer cells. Not only that, mitochondrial quality control proteases have been shown to affect mitochondrial dynamics by regulating the morphology of optic atrophy 1 (OPA1), which is closely related to the occurrence and progression of cancer. In this review, we introduce mitochondrial quality control proteases as promising targets and related modulators in cancer therapy with a focus on caseinolytic protease P (ClpP), Lon protease (LonP1), high-temperature requirement protein A2 (HrtA2), and OMA-1. Further, we summarize our current knowledge of the advances in clinical trials for modulators of mitochondrial quality control proteases. Overall, the content proposed above serves to suggest directions for the development of novel antitumor drugs.

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