4.7 Article

Doxorubicin acts via mitochondrial ROS to stimulate catabolism in C2C12 myotubes

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-CELL PHYSIOLOGY
卷 302, 期 1, 页码 C195-C202

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpcell.00217.2011

关键词

skeletal muscle; cancer cachexia; oxidative stress; reactive oxygen species

资金

  1. American Heart Association [09PRE2020088]
  2. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [T32 HL-086341]
  3. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [T32HL086341] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gilliam LA, Moylan JS, Patterson EW, Smith JD, Wilson AS, Rabbani Z, Reid MB. Doxorubicin acts via mitochondrial ROS to stimulate catabolism in C2C12 myotubes. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 302: C195-C202, 2012. First published September 21, 2011; doi:10.1152/ajpcell.00217.2011.-Doxorubicin, a commonly prescribed chemotherapeutic agent, causes skeletal muscle wasting in cancer patients undergoing treatment and increases mitochondrial reactive oxygen species (ROS) production. ROS stimulate protein degradation in muscle by activating proteolytic systems that include caspase-3 and the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. We hypothesized that doxorubicin causes skeletal muscle catabolism through ROS, causing upregulation of E3 ubiquitin ligases and caspase-3. We tested this hypothesis by exposing differentiated C2C12 myotubes to doxorubicin (0.2 mu M). Doxorubicin decreased myotube width 48 h following exposure, along with a 40-50% reduction in myosin and sarcomeric actin. Cytosolic oxidant activity was elevated in myotubes 2 h following doxorubicin exposure. This increase in oxidants was followed by an increase in the E3 ubiquitin ligase atrogin-1/muscle atrophy F-box (MAFbx) and caspase-3. Treating myotubes with SS31 (opposes mitochondrial ROS) inhibited expression of ROS-sensitive atrogin-1/MAFbx and protected against doxorubicin-stimulated catabolism. These findings suggest doxorubicin acts via mitochondrial ROS to stimulate myotube atrophy.

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