4.7 Article

Deficiency of BCAT2-mediated branched-chain amino acid catabolism promotes colorectal cancer development

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbadis.2023.166941

关键词

Colorectal cancer; Branched-chain amino acid; Diet; BCAT2

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study demonstrates that BCAA metabolism is involved in the development of colorectal cancer (CRC). BCAT2 deficiency promotes CRC progression by inhibiting BCAA metabolism and chronically activating the mTORC1 pathway.
Objective: Branched-chain amino acid (BCAA) metabolism is involved in the development of colorectal cancer (CRC); however, the underlying mechanism remains unclear. Therefore, this study investigates the role of BCAA metabolism in CRC progression. Methods: Dietary BCAA was administered to both azoxymethane-induced and azoxymethane/dextran sodium sulfate-induced CRC mouse models. The expression of genes related to BCAA metabolism was determined using RNA sequencing. Adjacent tissue samples, obtained from 58 patients with CRC, were subjected to quantitative real-time PCR and immunohistochemical analysis. Moreover, the suppressive role of branched-chain aminotransferase 2 (BCAT2) in cell proliferation, apoptosis, and xenograft mouse models was investigated. Alterations in BCAAs and activation of downstream pathways were also assessed using metabolic analysis and western blotting.Results: High levels of dietary BCAA intake promoted CRC tumorigenesis in chemical-induced CRC and xenograft mouse models. Both the mRNA and protein levels of BCAT2 were decreased in tumor tissues of patients with CRC compared to those in normal tissues. Proliferation assays and xenograft models confirmed the suppressive role of BCAT2 in CRC progression. Furthermore, the accumulation of BCAAs caused by BCAT2 deficiency facilitated the chronic activation of mTORC1, thereby mediating the oncogenic effect of BCAAs.Conclusion: BCAT2 deficiency promotes CRC progression through inhibition of BCAAs metabolism and chronic activation of mTORC1.

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