4.7 Article

Mutual amplification of apoptosis by statin-induced mitochondrial stress and doxorubicin toxicity in human rhabdomyosarcoma cells

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY
卷 143, 期 6, 页码 715-724

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjp.0705928

关键词

HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors; statins; apoptosis; rhabdomyosarcoma; Bax; doxorubicin; RD cells

向作者/读者索取更多资源

1 Besides their cholesterol-lowering effect, 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) show antiproliferative behaviour, which has been suggested as a promising anticancer strategy. However, the signalling cascades leading to statin-induced death of cancer cells are poorly characterized. 2 Here we show that statins activate the mitochondrial pathway of apoptosis in rhabdomyosarcoma RD cells via translocation of Bax from the cytosol to mitochondria. The prototypical representative of statins, simvastatin, induced consecutive activation of caspase 9 and 3 in a concentration-dependent manner. 3 The permeability transition pore inhibitor bongkrekic acid was capable of completely preventing simvastatin-induced caspase 9 and 3 activity, corroborating the mitochondrial pathway of apoptosis as the sole mechanism of statin action. Alternative pathways via death receptors, that is, caspase 8 or calpain activation, were not triggered by simvastatin. 4 Simvastatin-treated RD cells could be completely rescued from apoptosis by the co-application of mevalonic acid, indicating that deprivation of cholesterol precursors is essential for statin-induced apoptosis. 5 However, pretreatment with subthreshold concentrations of simvastatin was sufficient to augment doxorubicin toxicity via the mitochondrial apoptotic machinery. Moreover, the presence of doxorubicin increased the potency of simvastatin to trigger caspase activation. 6 Taken together, these data highlight the therapeutic anticancer potential of statins and their additivity and mutual sensitization, in combination with doxorubicin in human rhabdomyosarcoma cells.

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