4.8 Article

Apoptosis and erythroid differentiation triggered by Bcr-Abl inhibitors in CML cell lines are fully distinguishable processes that exhibit different sensitivity to caspase inhibition

期刊

ONCOGENE
卷 26, 期 17, 页码 2445-2458

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.onc.1210034

关键词

imatinib; PD166326; apoptosis; erythroid differentiation; caspases; CML

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Imatinib targets the Bcr-Abl oncogene that causes chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) in humans. Recently, we demonstrated that besides triggering apoptosis in K562 cells, imatinib also mediated their erythroid differentiation. Although both events appear to proceed concomitantly, it is not known at present whether or not imatinib-induced apoptosis and differentiation are interdependent processes. Hence, we investigated the requirements for Bcr-Abl inhibitor-mediated apoptosis and erythroid differentiation in several established and engineered CML cell lines. Imatinib triggered apoptosis and erythroid differentiation of different CML cell lines, but only apoptosis exhibited sensitivity to ZVAD-fmk inhibition. Conversely, the p38 mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase inhibitor, SB202190, significantly slowed down erythroid differentiation without affecting caspase activation. Furthermore, imatinib and PD166326, another Bcr-Abl inhibitory molecule, triggered erythroid differentiation of K562 cell clones, nevertheless resistant to Bcr-Abl inhibitor-induced apoptosis. Finally, short hairpin RNA inhibitor (shRNAi) silencing of caspase 3 efficiently inhibited caspase activity but had no effect on erythroid differentiation, whereas silencing of Bcr-Abl mimicked imatinib or PD166326 treatment, leading to increased apoptosis and erythroid differentiation of K562 cells. Taken together, our findings not only demonstrate that Bcr-Abl inhibitor-mediated apoptosis and differentiation are fully distinguishable events, but also that caspases are dispensable for erythroid differentiation of established CML cell lines.

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