4.8 Article

Reduced expression of hypoxia-inducible factor-1α in perinecrotic regions of solid tumors

期刊

CANCER RESEARCH
卷 65, 期 16, 页码 7259-7266

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-4480

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hypoxia that develops in solid tumors stabilizes the hypoxia-inducible factor-1 alpha (HIF-1 alpha) subunit of the HIF-1 transcription factor, leading to up-regulation of dozens of hypoxia-regulated genes that increase glycolysis and oxygen delivery. HIF-1 alpha and its downstream target gene CA9 have both been used as surrogate hypoxia markers, and, in general, high expression predicts for a poor response to treatment. Combinations of hypoxia markers offer the opportunity to measure changes in tumor oxygenation that may be relevant to tumor response to treatment. We compared the degree of colocalization of two endogenous markers for hypoxia, HIF-1 alpha and carbonic anhydrase IX (CAIX), with a chemical marker for hypoxia, pimonidazole. Unexpectedly, expression of HIF-1 alpha was reduced in the most hypoxic regions that border necrosis in xenograft tumors composed of SiHa cervical carcinoma, WiDr colon carcinoma, or M006 astrocytoma cells. Similar results were obtained for samples from three cervical cancer biopsies. However, CAIX was present in these perinecrotic cells that were also capable of metabolizing and binding a chemical marker for hypoxia, pimonidazole. In vitro experiments using tumor cells and tumor cubes incubated under anoxic conditions indicated that nutrient deprivation seems to be largely responsible for the lack of HIF-1 alpha expression in perinecrotic regions. The half-life of CAIX was sufficiently long that, once formed, it remained for days in the absence of continued HIF-1 alpha expression. These results have implications for the use of HIF-1 alpha as an indicator of tumor hypoxia and aggressiveness as well as development of hypoxia-directed antitumor therapies based on the expression of HIF-1 alpha.

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