4.7 Article

CDC42-interacting protein 4 promotes metastasis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma by mediating invadopodia formation and activating EGFR signaling

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13046-016-0483-z

关键词

NPC; CIP4; N-WASP; Invadopodia formation; EGFR/ERK/MMP-2 axis; Extracellular matrix degradation

类别

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81672872, 81272340, 81472386, 81572901, 81572848, 81402248, 81372572, 81572406]
  2. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 Program) [2012AA02A501]
  3. Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province, China [2014B020212017, 2014B050504004, 2015B050501005, 2014A020209024]
  4. Provincial Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong, China [2016A030311011]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a common malignancy in Southern China and Southeast Asia. In this study, we investigated the functional and molecular mechanisms by which CDC42-interacting protein 4 (CIP4) influences NPC. Methods: The expression levels of CIP4 were examined by Western blot, qRT-PCR or IHC. MTT assay was used to detect the proliferative rate of NPC cells. The invasive abilities were examined by matrigel and transwell assay. The metastatic abilities of NPC cells were revealed in BALB/c nude mice. Results: We report that CIP4 is required for NPC cell motility and invasion. CIP4 promotes the activation of N-WASP that controls invadopodia formation and activates EGFR signaling, which induces downstream MMP2 (matrix metalloproteinase 2) upregulation. In addition, CIP4 could promote NPC metastasis by activating the EGFR pathway. In nude mouse models, distant metastasis was significantly inhibited in CIP4-silenced groups. High CIP4 expression is an independent adverse prognostic factor of overall survival (OS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). Conclusion: We identify the critical role of CIP4 in metastasis of NPC which suggest that CIP4 may be a potential therapeutic target of NPC patients.

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