4.7 Article

Nitric Oxide Prevents Glioblastoma Stem Cells' Expansion and Induces Temozolomide Sensitization

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms241411286

关键词

glioblastoma stem cells (GSCs); glioblastoma multiforme (GBM); nitric oxide (NO); Temozolomide (TMZ); cytostasis; adjuvant treatment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) has high mortality and recurrence rates. Glioblastoma Stem Cells (GSCs) contribute to malignancy resilience. Nitric Oxide (NO) has shown anti-cancer efficacy in GBM cells and can enhance the sensitivity of GSCs to TMZ.
Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) has high mortality and recurrence rates. Malignancy resilience is ascribed to Glioblastoma Stem Cells (GSCs), which are resistant to Temozolomide (TMZ), the gold standard for GBM post-surgical treatment. However, Nitric Oxide (NO) has demonstrated anti-cancer efficacy in GBM cells, but its potential impact on GSCs remains unexplored. Accordingly, we investigated the effects of NO, both alone and in combination with TMZ, on patient-derived GSCs. Experimentally selected concentrations of diethylenetriamine/NO adduct and TMZ were used through a time course up to 21 days of treatment, to evaluate GSC proliferation and death, functional recovery, and apoptosis. Immunofluorescence and Western blot analyses revealed treatment-induced effects in cell cycle and DNA damage occurrence and repair. Our results showed that NO impairs self-renewal, disrupts cell-cycle progression, and expands the quiescent cells' population. Consistently, NO triggered a significant but tolerated level of DNA damage, but not apoptosis. Interestingly, NO/TMZ cotreatment further inhibited cell cycle progression, augmented G0 cells, induced cell death, but also enhanced DNA damage repair activity. These findings suggest that, although NO administration does not eliminate GSCs, it stunts their proliferation, and makes cells susceptible to TMZ. The resulting cytostatic effect may potentially allow long-term control over the GSCs' subpopulation.

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