4.6 Article

Sphingosine kinase 1 is upregulated with lysophosphatidic acid receptor 2 in human colorectal cancer

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 22, 期 8, 页码 2503-2511

出版社

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i8.2503

关键词

Sphingosine kinase 1; Lysophosphatidic acid receptor 2; Carcinogenesis; Colorectal cancer; Sphingosine 1-phosphate

资金

  1. Tokyo Metropolis, Japan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AIM: To examine the expression of SphK1, an oncogenic kinase that produces sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P), and its correlation with the expression of LPAR2, a major lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) receptor overexpressed in various cancers, in human colorectal cancer. METHODS: Real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction was used to measure the mRNA expression of SphK1, LPAR2, and the three major S1P receptors in 27 colorectal cancer samples and corresponding normal tissue samples. We also examined the correlation between the expression of SphK1 and LPAR2. RESULTS: Colorectal cancer tissue in 22 of 27 patients had higher levels of SphK1 mRNA than in normal tissue. In two-thirds of the samples, SphK1 mRNA expression was more than two-fold higher than in normal tissue. Consistent with previous reports, LPAR2 mRNA expression in 20 of 27 colorectal cancer tissue samples was higher compared to normal tissue samples. Expression profiles of all three major S1P receptors, S1PR1, S1PR2, and S1PR3, varied without any trend, with no significant difference in expression between cancer and normal tissues. A highly significant positive correlation was found between SphK1 and LPAR2 expression [Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) = 0.784 and P < 0.01]. The mRNA levels of SphK1 and LPAR2 did not correlate with TNM stage. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that S1P and LPA may play important roles in the development of colorectal cancer via the upregulation of SphK1 and LPAR2, both of which could serve as new therapeutic targets in the treatment of colorectal cancer.

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

4.6
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