4.6 Article

Hypoxia induces differential translation of enolase/MBP-1

期刊

BMC CANCER
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-10-157

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. James Graham Brown Endowment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Hypoxic microenvironments in tumors contribute to transformation, which may alter metabolism, growth, and therapeutic responsiveness. The alpha-enolase gene encodes both a glycolytic enzyme (alpha-enolase) and a DNA-binding tumor suppressor protein, c-myc binding protein (MBP-1). These divergent alpha-enolase gene products play central roles in glucose metabolism and growth regulation and their differential regulation may be critical for tumor adaptation to hypoxia. We have previously shown that MBP-1 and its binding to the c-myc P-2 promoter regulates the metabolic and cellular growth changes that occur in response to altered exogenous glucose concentrations. Results: To examine the regulation of alpha-enolase and MBP-1 by a hypoxic microenvironment in breast cancer, MCF-7 cells were grown in low, physiologic, or high glucose under 1% oxygen. Our results demonstrate that adaptation to hypoxia involves attenuation of MBP-1 translation and loss of MBP-1-mediated regulation of c-myc transcription, evidenced by decreased MBP-1 binding to the c-myc P-2 promoter. This allows for a robust increase in c-myc expression, early c-myc response, which stimulates aerobic glycolysis resulting in tumor acclimation to oxidative stress. Increased alpha-enolase mRNA and preferential translation/post-translational modification may also allow for acclimatization to low oxygen, particularly under low glucose concentrations. Conclusions: These results demonstrate that malignant cells adapt to hypoxia by modulating alpha-enolase/MBP-1 levels and suggest a mechanism for tumor cell induction of the hyperglycolytic state. This important feedback mechanism may help transformed cells to escape the apoptotic cascade, allowing for survival during limited glucose and oxygen availability.

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