4.6 Article

GBP3 promotes glioma cell proliferation via SQSTM1/p62-ERK1/2 axis

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2017.11.050

关键词

GBP3; Glioma; Cell proliferation; SQSTM1/p62; ERK1/2

资金

  1. National Natural Sciences Foundation of China [81572480]
  2. Program of Medical Innovation Team and Leading Talent of Jiangsu Province [LJ201150]
  3. Science and Technology Plan Projects of Jiangsu Province [BL2012048]
  4. Jiangsu Distinguished Medical Professorship Award
  5. 2nd Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Preponderant Clinic Discipline Group Project [XKQ2015004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Guanylate binding proteins (GBPs) are interferon-inducible large GTPases and play a crucial role in cell autonomous immunity. However, the biology function of GBPs in cancer remains elusive. GBP3 is specifically expressed in adult brain. Here we show that GBP3 is highly elevated in human glioma tumors and glioma cell lines. Overexpression of GBP3 dramatically increased glioma cell proliferation whereas silencing GBP3 by RNA interference produced opposite effects. We further showed that GBP3 expression was able to induce sequestosome-1(SQSTM1, also named p62) expression and activate extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK1/2). The SQSTM1-ERK1/2 signaling cascade was essential for GBP3-promoted cell growth because depletion of SQSTM1 markedly reduced the phosphorylated ERK1/2 levels and GBP3-mediated cell growth, and inhibition of mitogen-activated protein kinase/ERK kinase abolished GBP3-induced glioma cell proliferation. Consistently, GBP3 overexpression significantly promoted glioma tumor growth in vivo and its expression was inversely correlated with the survival rate of glioma patients. Taken together, these results for the first time suggest that GBP3 contributes to the proliferation of glioma cells via regulating SQSTM1-ERK1/2 pathway, and GBP3 might represent as a new potential therapeutic target against glioma. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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