4.7 Article

Caspase 8 activation independent of Fas (CD95/APO-1) signaling may mediate killing of B-chronic lymphocytic leukemia cells by cytotoxic drugs or γ radiation

期刊

BLOOD
卷 98, 期 9, 页码 2800-2807

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood.V98.9.2800

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ligation of the cell-surface Fas molecule by its ligand (Fas-L) or agonistic anti-Fas monoclonal antibodies results in the cleavage and activation of the cysteine protease procaspase 8 followed by the activation of procaspase 3 and by apoptosis. In some leukemia cell lines, cytotoxic drugs induce expression of Fas-L, which may contribute to cell killing through the ligation of Fas. The involvement of Fas, Fas-L, and caspase 8 was studied in the killing of B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL) cells by chlorambucil, fludarabine, or gamma radiation. Spontaneous apoptosis was observed at 24-hour incubation, with additional apoptosis induced by each of the cytotoxic treatments. Although Fas mRNA expression was elevated after exposure to chlorambucil, fludarabine, or gamma radiation, Fas protein levels only increased after irradiation. Therefore, Fas expression may be regulated by multiple mechanisms that allow the translation of Fas mRNA only in response to restricted cytotoxic stimuli. None of the cytotoxic stimuli studied here induced Fas-L expression. An agonistic anti-Fas monoclonal antibody (CH-11) did not significantly augment apoptosis Induction by any of the death stimuli. A Fas-blocking antibody (ZB4) did not inhibit spontaneous, chlorambucil-, fludarabine-, or radiation-induced apoptosis. However, procaspase 8 processing was induced by all cytotoxic stimuli. These data suggest that the Fas/Fas-L signaling system does not play a major role in the induction of apoptosis in B-CLL cells treated with cytotoxic drugs or radiation. However, Fas-independent activation of caspase 8 may play a crucial role In the regulation of apoptosis in these cells. (C) 2001 by The American Society of Hematology.

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