4.6 Article

Graphene oxide regulates cox2 in human embryonic kidney 293T cells via epigenetic mechanisms: dynamic chromosomal interactions

期刊

NANOTOXICOLOGY
卷 12, 期 2, 页码 117-137

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17435390.2018.1425498

关键词

Graphene oxide; cox2; chromatin interactions; surface modification; apoptosis

资金

  1. National Basic Research 973 Program [2014CB932002]
  2. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDB14030502]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81273004, 31470829]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To extend the applications of engineered nanomaterials, such as graphene oxide (GO), it is necessary to minimize cytotoxicity. However, the mechanisms underlying this cytotoxicity are unclear. Dynamic chromosomal interactions have been used to illustrate the molecular bases of gene expression, which offers a more sensitive and cutting-edge technology to elucidate complex biological processes associated with epigenetic regulations. In this study, the role of GO-triggered chromatin interactions in the activation of cox2, a hallmark of inflammation, was investigated in normal human cells. Using chromosome conformation capture technology, we showed that GO triggers physical interactions between the downstream enhancer and the cox2 promoter in human embryonic kidney 293T (293T) via p65 and p300 complex-mediated dynamic chromatin looping, which was required for high cox2 expression. Moreover, tumor necrosis factor- (TNF-alpha), located upstream of the p65 signaling pathway, contributed to the regulation of cox2 activation through dynamic chromatin architecture. Compared with pristine GO and aminated GO (GO-NH2), poly (acrylic acid)-functionalized GO (GO-PAA) induced a weaker inflammatory response and a weaker effect on chromatin architecture. Our results mechanistically link GO-mediated chromatin interactions with the regulation of cox2 and suggest that GO derivatives may minimize toxicity in practical applications.

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