4.6 Article

Disturbance of DKK1 level is partly involved in survival of lung cancer cells via regulation of ROMO1 and γ-radiation sensitivity

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2013.11.038

关键词

Cell survival; DKK1; ROMO1; NSCLC; Radiation resistance; ROS

资金

  1. Ministry of Science, ICT, and Future Planning (Nuclear Research and Development Program) of the Republic of Korea
  2. Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dickkopf1 (DKK1), a secreted protein involved in embryonic development, is a potent inhibitor of the Wnt signaling pathway and has been postulated to be a tumor suppressor or tumor promoter depending on the tumor type. In this study, we showed that DKK1 was expressed differently among non-small-cell lung cancer cell lines. The DKK1 expression level was much higher in A549 cells than in H460 cells. We revealed that blockage of DKK1 expression by silencing RNA in A549 cells caused up-regulation of intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) modulator (ROMO1) protein, followed by partial cell death, cell growth inhibition, and loss of epithelial-mesenchymal transition property caused by ROS, and it also increased gamma-radiation sensitivity. DKK1 overexpression in H460 significantly inhibited cell survival with the decrease of ROMO1 level, which induced the decrease of cellular ROS. Thereafter, exogenous N-acetylcysteine, an antioxidant, or hydrogen peroxide, a pro-oxidant, partially rescued cells from death and growth inhibition. In each cell line, both overexpression and blockage of DKK1 not only elevated p-RB activation, which led to cell growth arrest, but also inactivated AKT/NF-kB, which increased radiation sensitivity and inhibited cell growth. This study is the first to demonstrate that strict modulation of DKK1 expression in different cell types partially maintains cell survival via tight regulation of the ROS-producing ROMO1 and radiation resistance. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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