4.8 Article

The Ras-MAPK pathway downregulates Caveolin-1 in rodent fibroblast but not in human fibroblasts: implications in the resistance to oncogene-mediated transformation

期刊

ONCOGENE
卷 26, 期 3, 页码 449-455

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.onc.1209792

关键词

caveolin-1; hTERT; normal human diploid fibroblast; oncogenic transformation; Ras-MAPK pathway

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Normal human diploid fibroblasts (HDFs) are refractory to oncogene-mediated transformations in vitro, compared with rodent fibroblasts. As successful oncogene-mediated transformations of normal HDFs have been reported using the human telomerase catalytic subunit, it has been considered that telomerase activity contributes to the species-specific transformability. However, these transformed HDFs are much less malignant compared with those of rodent cells, suggesting the existence of undetermined mechanisms that render HDFs resistant to malignant transformation. Here, cDNA microarray analysis identified caveolin-1 as one of the possible cellular factors involved in such mechanisms. The mitogen-activated protein kinases ( MAPK) pathway downregulates Caveolin-1 in rodent fibroblasts, transformed by coexpression of the SV40 early region and activated H-Ras. In contrast, the coexpression of these two oncogenes in HDFs failed to reduce the expression level of Caveolin-1. These results strongly suggest the presence of critical differences in events following the phosphorylation of ERK during the activation process of the MAPK signaling pathway between human and rodent cells, as the ERK protein was similarly phosphorylated in both systems. Furthermore, the small interfering RNA-mediated suppression of Caveolin-1 facilitated the oncogene-mediated transformation of normal HDFs, clearly indicating that the differences in the transformability between human and rodent cells are due, at least in part, to the mechanism responsible for the resistance to Ras-induced Caveolin-1 downregulation in HDFs.

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