4.3 Article

Restoration of p53 using the novel MDM2-p53 antagonist APG115 suppresses dedifferentiated papillary thyroid cancer cells

期刊

ONCOTARGET
卷 8, 期 26, 页码 43008-43022

出版社

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.17398

关键词

dedifferentiated thyroid cancer; radioiodine; anti-tumor; MDM2-p53 interaction; apoptosis

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81071187, 81602066]
  2. Special Public Welfare Project of the Ministry of Science and Technology [200802028]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [16ykpy25]
  4. Third Outstanding Young Talents Training Plan of Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center
  5. Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province, China [2013A022100023]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dedifferentiated papillary thyroid cancer (DePTC) is characterized by aggressive growth, recurrence, distant metastasis, and resistance to radioactive iodine (RAI) therapy. DePTC is also accompanied by poor prognosis and high early-mortality. Nevertheless, most DePTC cells show intact p53 downstream functionality. In cells with wild-type p53, the murine double minute2 (MDM2) protein interacts with p53 and abrogates its activity. Inhibition of the MDM2-p53 interaction restores p53 activity and leads to cell cycle arrest and apoptosis. Restoring p53 function by inhibiting its interaction with p53 suppressors such as MDM2 is thus a promising therapeutic strategy for the treatment of DePTC. The novel MDM2-p53 interaction antagonist APG115 is an analogue of SAR405838, and is being tested in a phase I clinical trial. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of APG115 as a single-agent to treat DePTC. APG115 diminished the viability of p53 wild-type DePTC cells and induced cell cycle arrest and apoptosis. In a human xenograft mouse model, APG115 elicited robust tumor regression and cell apoptosis. These data demonstrate that further research is warranted to determine whether APG115 can be used to effectively treat DePTC 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

4.3
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