4.8 Article

The essential role of YAP O-GlcNAcylation in high-glucose-stimulated liver tumorigenesis

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms15280

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81371913, 81301689, 81572330, 81672332]
  2. Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Commission [14YF1412300]
  3. China central colleges and universities basic research-specific cross discipline grant [1501219096]
  4. Ministry of Knowledge Economy (MKE), Republic of Korea [2010101030005A] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)
  5. National Research Foundation of Korea [2008-0061950] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

O-GlcNAcylation has been implicated in the tumorigenesis of various tissue origins, but its function in liver tumorigenesis is not clear. Here, we demonstrate that O-GlcNAcylation can enhance the expression, stability and function of Yes-associated protein (YAP), the downstream transcriptional regulator of the Hippo pathway and a potent oncogenic factor in liver cancer. O-GlcNAcylation induces transformative phenotypes of liver cancer cells in a YAP-dependent manner. An O-GlcNAc site of YAP was identified at Thr241, and mutating this site decreased the O-GlcNAcylation, stability, and pro-tumorigenic capacities of YAP, while increasing YAP phosphorylation. Importantly, we found via in vitro cell-based and in vivo mouse model experiments that O-GlcNAcylation of YAP was required for high-glucose-induced liver tumorigenesis. Interestingly, a positive feedback between YAP and global cellular O-GlcNAcylation is also uncovered. We conclude that YAP O-GlcNAcylation is a potential therapeutic intervention point for treating liver cancer associated with high blood glucose levels and possibly diabetes.

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

4.8
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