4.8 Article

Loss-of-function of Nkx3.1 promotes increased oxidative damage in prostate carcinogenesis

期刊

CANCER RESEARCH
卷 65, 期 15, 页码 6773-6779

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-1948

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [U01 CA84294, R01 CA76501, 5P50 CA58236, R01 CA70196] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the significance of oxidative damage for carcinogenesis, the molecular mechanisms that lead to increased susceptibility of tissues to oxidative stress are not well-understood. We now report a link between loss of protection against oxidative damage and loss-of-function of Nkx3.1, a homeobox gene that is known to be required for prostatic epithelial differentiation and suppression of prostate cancer. Using gene expression profiling, we find that Nkx3.1 mutant mice display deregulated expression of several antioxidant and prooxidant enzymes, including glutathione peroxidase 2 and 3 (GPx2 and GPx3), peroydredoxin 6 (Prdx6), and sulfyhydryl oxidase Q6 (Qscn6). Moreover, the formation of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in these mutant mice is associated with increased oxidative damage of DNA, as evident by increased levels of 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine. We further show that progression to prostate adenocarcinoma, as occurs in compound mutant mice lacking Nkx3.1 as well as the Pten tumor suppressor, is correlated with a further deregulation of antioxidants, including superoxide dismutase enzymes, and more profound accumulations of oxidative damage to DNA and protein, the latter manifested by increased levels of 4-hydroxyrionenal. We propose that the essential role of Nkx3.1 in maintaining the terminally differentiated state of the prostate epithelium provides protection against oxidative damage and, thereby, suppression of prostate cancer. Thus, our findings provide a molecular link between a gene whose inactivation is known to be involved in prostate carcinogenesis, namely Nkx3.1, and oxidative damage of the prostatic epithelium.

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