4.8 Article

DKK2 Mediates Osteolysis, Invasiveness, and Metastatic Spread in Ewing Sarcoma

期刊

CANCER RESEARCH
卷 73, 期 2, 页码 967-977

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-1492

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Technische Universitat Munchen [KKF_B08-05, A09-02]
  2. Wilhelm-Sander-Stiftung [2009.901.1]
  3. BMBF [FK 01GM0870, 01GM1104B]
  4. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [DFG_GR3728/1-1, DFG_GR3728/2-1, SFB-TR22]
  5. National Genome Research Network (NGFNplus) [01GS0850]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ewing sarcoma, an osteolytic malignancy that mainly affects children and young adults, is characterized by early metastasis to lung and bone. In this study, we identified the pro-metastatic gene DKK2 as a highly overexpressed gene in Ewing sarcoma compared with corresponding normal tissues. Using RNA interference, we showed that DKK2 was critical for malignant cell outgrowth in vitro and in an orthotopic xenograft mouse model in vivo. Analysis of invasion potential in both settings revealed a strong correlation of DKK2 expression to Ewing sarcoma invasiveness that may be mediated by the DKK effector matrix metalloproteinase 1 (MMP1). Furthermore, gene expression analyses established the ability of DKK2 to differentially regulate genes such as CXCR4, PTHrP, RUNX2, and TGF beta 1 that are associated with homing, invasion, and growth of cancer cells in bone tissue as well as genes important for osteolysis, including HIF1 alpha, JAG1, IL6, and VEGF. DKK2 promoted bone infiltration and osteolysis in vivo and further analyses defined DKK2 as a key factor in osteotropic malignancy. Interestingly, in Ewing sarcoma cells, DKK2 suppression simultaneously increased the potential for neuronal differentiation while decreasing chondrogenic and osteogenic differentiation. Our results provide strong evidence that DKK2 is a key player in Ewing sarcoma invasion and osteolysis and also in the differential phenotype of Ewing sarcoma cells. Cancer Res; 73(2); 967-77. (c) 2012 AACR.

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