4.7 Article

Combination of NRP1-mediated iRGD with 5-fluorouracil suppresses proliferation, migration and invasion of gastric cancer cells

期刊

BIOMEDICINE & PHARMACOTHERAPY
卷 93, 期 -, 页码 1136-1143

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2017.06.103

关键词

Gastric cancer; iRGD; Neuropilin-1; 5-Fluorouracil; Chemotherapy

资金

  1. Key Science and Technology Program of Shaanxi Province, China [2016SF-137]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gastric cancer is one of the most of common cancers in the world. 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) has been identified as one of the standard first-line chemotherapy drugs for locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer. However, poor tumor penetration, bad selectivity and toxic side effects are the major limitations for the application of chemotherapy drugs in anticancer therapy. Recently, plenty of studies demonstrate that the novel tumor-homing peptide iRGD could promote the tumor-penetrating capability of chemotherapy drugs in multiple cancers, and neuropilin-1 (NRP1) protein is the critical mediator for iRGD. Here, we found that NRP1 protein expression was significantly up-regulated in gastric cancer tissues and cell lines by Immunohistochemistry and Western blot. And elevated NRP1 was notably associated with tumor differentiation (P = 0.021), tumor size (P = 0.004), tumor stage(P = 0.028), lymph node metastasis(P = 0.032), TNM tumor stage (P = 0.006) and poorer prognosis. Functionally, the data of Methyl thiazolyl tetrazolium (MTT) assay, Colony formation assay and Transwell assay revealed that NRP1 could facilitate gastric cancer cells proliferation, migration and invasion. Furthermore, iRGD could strengthen the chemotherapy effect of 5-FU on gastric cancer cells through NRP1. Taken together, NPR1 might be a promising tumor target for gastric cancer, and combination of iRGD with 5-FU may be a novel and valuable approach to improving the prognosis of gastric cancer patients. (C) 2017 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

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