4.6 Article

Rapamycin inhibits hTERT telomerase mRNA expression, independent of cell cycle arrest

期刊

GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY
卷 100, 期 3, 页码 487-494

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.08.053

关键词

rapamycin; telomerase; cell cycle; ovarian cancer; cervical cancer

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [5K08CA085772] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives. Rapamycin and its analogues have been shown to be promising as anti-neoplastic agents but have not been extensively studied in gynecologic malignancies. Our goal was to examine the ability of rapamycin to suppress growth and regulate telomerase activity in cervical and ovarian cancer cell lines. Methods. Cell proliferation was assessed after exposure to rapamycin. Cell cycle progression was determined by flow cytometry, and apoptosis was evaluated by DNA fragmentation. hTERT mRNA levels were quantified by real-time RT-PCR. Western blot analysis was performed to assess PTEN status, phosphorylated S6 and total S6 expression. Results. Rapamycin inhibited growth of all the cervical cancer cell lines and 3 of the 4 ovarian cancer cell lines in a dose-dependent manner with IC50 values <50 nM. Loss of PTEN protein expression was seen in only one of the cervical cancer cell lines. Rapamycin induced G I arrest in those cell lines sensitive to its growth inhibitory effects. In all cell lines, rapamycin rapidly inhibited phosphorylation of S6 and resulted in decreased levels of total S6 protein. Treatment with rapamycin reduced hTERT mRNA expression in both rapamycin-sensitive and -resistant cell lines within 24 h. Thus, the effect of rapamycin on hTERT expression was not dependent on its ability to induce G1 cell cycle arrest. Conclusions. Our data suggest that rapamycin may potentially exert its anti-tumor effects through two independent pathways by G I cell cycle arrest as well as suppression of telomerase activity by inhibition of hTERT mRNA transcription. (C) 2005 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