4.4 Article

The combination therapy of HIF1α inhibitor LW6 and cisplatin plays an effective role on anti-tumor function in A549 cells

期刊

NEOPLASMA
卷 66, 期 5, 页码 776-784

出版社

AEPRESS SRO
DOI: 10.4149/neo_2018_180921N708

关键词

non-small cell lung cancer; HIF1 alpha; LW6; sensitivity; cisplatin

类别

资金

  1. Guangxi Natural Science Foundation [2015GXNSFBA139170]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha (HIF1 alpha) has been demonstrated to be involved in the resistance of various human cancer cells to chemotherapies. However, correlation between HIF1a and sensitivity of human non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cells to cisplatin has not been illuminated. The aim of present study was to investigate the effects of HIF1 alpha on drug resistance in NSCLC cells. A549 cells were incubated in 21% or 0.5% O-2 followed by the assessment of HIF1 alpha level with qRT-PCR and western blot, and ROS levels by DCFH-DA assays. Effects of hypoxia or HIF1 alpha inhibitor LW6 on the proliferation and apoptosis of A549 cells were evaluated via CCK-8 and flow cytometry assays. IC50 of A549 cells to cisplatin was determined by MTT assay. The mitochondrial membrane potential (MMP) was measured via JC-1 staining. Moreover, the expression of apoptosis related protein (Bcl-2, Bax) and drug resistance related proteins (MDR1, MRP1) were measured by western blotting. Exposure of A549 cells to 1% O-2 significantly upregulated HIF1 alpha expression, maintained cell viability to cisplatin but decreased the ROS level, which promoted chemoresistance to cisplatin. LW6-treated A549 cells showed an increase in ROS level that blocked the hypoxia induced resistance to cisplatin and in addition, decreased expression of MDR1 and MRP1 in cisplatin-treated cells. This study revealed that hypoxia-improved cisplatin chemoresistance of NSCLC cells by regulated MDR1 and MRP1 expression via HIF1 alpha/ROS pathway is reversed by LW6, suggesting that LW6 may act as effective sensitizer in chemotherapy for NSCLC.

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

4.4
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