4.7 Article

Sulindac corrects defective apoptosis and suppresses azoxymethane-induced colonic oncogenesis in p53 knockout mice

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 116, 期 6, 页码 870-875

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.21107

关键词

sulindac; apoptosis; carcinogen; intestinal epithelia; colorectal cancer; p53

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The acute apoptotic response to genotoxic carcinogens (AARGC) might be important for controlling the subsequent colonic mutational load and progression through oncogenesis. We have found previously that AARGC is p53-dependent with a gene-dosage effect, and that decreased AARGC in p53(+/-) and p53(-/-) mice is associated with increased susceptibility to carcinogen-induced oncogenesis. We tested the ability of sulindac to reverse these defects. The effect of sulindac on azoxymethane (AOM)-induced apoptosis was measured in colonic epithelium in wild-type, p53(+/-) and p53(-/-) mice, 8 hr after a single AOM injection. Sulindac supplementation (0.5 +/- 0.1 mg/day) restored defective AARGC in p53(+/-) but not in p53(-/-) mice. For effect on colon tumor development sulindac treatment was started at age 4 weeks in wild-type, p53(+/-) and p53(-/-) mice; three weekly AOM injections were commenced at 6 weeks of age to induce tumors. Sulindac reduced significantly tumor incidence and multiplicity in wild-type mice (17% and 0.3 tumors/mouse compared to 36% and 0.8 respectively without drug), in p53(+/-) mice (38% and 0.8 compared to 64% and 1.63) and in p53(-/-) mice (63% and 1.0 compared to 90% and 1.74). Although loss of p53 function impairs the apoptotic response to AOM-induced DNA damage, sulindac is capable of partly restoring this defect. As sulindac also reverses the increased risk of oncogenesis due to p53 dysfunction, its enhancement of the apoptotic response to initiating mutations might act to reduce mutational load driving oncogenesis. Sulindac is an effective chemopreventive agent in the presence of p53 dysfunction. (C) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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