4.4 Article

Harmol induces apoptosis by caspase-8 activation independently on Fas/Fas ligand interaction in human lung carcinoma H596 cells

期刊

ANTI-CANCER DRUGS
卷 20, 期 5, 页码 373-381

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/CAD.0b013e32832a2dd9

关键词

apoptosis; beta-carboline alkaloids; harmol; lung carcinoma

资金

  1. Tokyo Medical University Cancer Research Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The beta-carboline alkaloids are naturally existing plant substances. It is known that these alkaloids have a wide spectrum of neuropharmacological, psychopharmacological, and antitumor effects. Therefore, they have been traditionally used in oriental medicine for the treatment of various diseases including cancers and malaria. In this study, harmol and harmalol, which are beta-carboline alkaloids, were examined for their antitumor effect on human lung carcinoma cell lines, and structure-activity relationship was also investigated. H596, H226, and A549 cells were treated with harmol and harmalol, respectively. Apoptosis was induced by harmol only in H596 cells. In contrast, harmalol had negligible cytotoxicity in three cell lines. Harmol induced caspase-3, caspase-8, and caspase-9 activities and caspase-3 activities accompanied by cleavage of poly-(ADP-ribose)-polymerase. Furthermore, harmol treatment decreased the native Bid protein, and induced the release of cytochrome c from mitochondria to cytosol. The apoptosis induced by harmol was completely inhibited by caspase-8 inhibitor and partially inhibited by caspase-9 inhibitor. The antagonistic antibody ZB4 blocked Fas ligand-induced apoptosis, but had no effect on harmol-induced apoptosis. Harmol had no significant effect on the expression of Fas. In conclusion, our results showed that the harmol could cause apoptosis-inducing effects in human lung H596 cells through caspase-8-dependent pathway but independent of Fas/Fas ligand interaction. Anti-Cancer Drugs 20:373-381 (C) 2009 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

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

4.4
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