4.6 Article

Extracellular matrix stimulates reactive oxygen species production and increases pancreatic cancer cell survival through 5-lipoxygenase and NADPH oxidase

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpgi.00197.2005

关键词

pancreas

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK-59926] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The extracellular matrix (ECM) facilitates pancreatic cancer cells survival, which is of central importance for pancreatic adenocarcinoma that is highly fibrotic. Here, we show that reactive oxygen species (ROS) mediate the prosurvival effect of ECM in human pancreatic cancer cells. Fibronectin and laminin stimulated ROS production and NADPH oxidase activation in pancreatic cancer cells. Both pharmacological and molecular approaches show that fibronectin stimulated ROS production through activation of NADPH oxidase and NADPH oxidase-independent pathways and that 5-lipoxygenase (5-LO) mediates both these pathways. Analyses of the mechanisms of ROS production by ECM proteins and growth factors indicate that activation of NADPH oxidase (Nox4) is a common mechanism employed both by ECM proteins and growth factors to increase ROS in pancreatic cancer cells. We also found that Nox4 is present in human pancreatic adenocarcinoma tissues and that these tissues display membrane NADPH oxidase activity. ECM proteins and growth factors activate NADPH oxidase through different mechanisms; in contrast to ECM proteins, growth factors activate NADPH oxidase through 5-LO-independent mechanisms. Inhibition of 5-LO or NADPH oxidase with pharmacological inhibitors of these enzymes and with Nox4 or 5-LO antisense oligonucleotides markedly stimulated apoptosis in cancer cells cultured on fibronectin. Our results indicate that ROS generation via 5-LO and downstream NADPH oxidase mediates the prosurvival effect of ECM in pancreatic cancer cells. These mechanisms may play an important role in pancreatic cancer resistance to treatments and thus represent novel therapeutic targets.

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