4.6 Review

KRAS, YAP, and obesity in pancreatic cancer: A signaling network with multiple loops

期刊

SEMINARS IN CANCER BIOLOGY
卷 54, 期 -, 页码 50-62

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.semcancer.2017.10.007

关键词

Pancreatic cancer; Oncogenic kras; Obesity; Signaling network; YAP

类别

资金

  1. NIH [P01CA163200, R01DK100405, P30DK41301]
  2. Department of Veterans Affair Merit Award [1I01BX001473]
  3. Hirshberg Foundation for Pancreatic Cancer Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) continues to be a lethal disease with no efficacious treatment modalities. The incidence of PDAC is expected to increase, at least partially because of the obesity epidemic. Increased efforts to prevent or intercept this disease are clearly needed. Mutations in KRAS are initiating events in pancreatic carcinogenesis supported by genetically engineered mouse models of the disease. However, oncogenic KRAS is not entirely sufficient for the development of fully invasive PDAC. Additional genetic mutations and/or environmental, nutritional, and metabolic stressors, e.g. inflammation and obesity, are required for efficient PDAC formation with activation of KRAS downstream effectors. Multiple factors upstream of KRAS associated with obesity, including insulin resistance, inflammation, changes in gut microbiota and GI peptides, can enhance/modulate downstream signals. Multiple signaling networks and feedback loops downstream of KRAS have been described that respond to obesogenic diets. We propose that KRAS mutations potentiate a signaling network that is promoted by environmental factors. Specifically, we envisage that KRAS mutations increase the intensity and duration of the growth-promoting signaling network. As the transcriptional activator YAP plays a critical role in the network, we conclude that the rationale for targeting the network (at different points), e.g. with FDA approved drugs such as statins and metformin, is therefore compelling.

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