4.3 Article

NK4, an HGF antagonist, prevents hematogenous pulmonary metastasis by inhibiting adhesion of CT26 cells to endothelial cells

期刊

CLINICAL & EXPERIMENTAL METASTASIS
卷 26, 期 5, 页码 447-456

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10585-009-9244-0

关键词

HGF; c-Met; NK4; CT26; Pulmonary metastasis; Endothelial cell; FAK

类别

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) plays a definitive role in invasive, angiogenic, and metastatic activities of tumor cells by binding to the c-Met receptor. NK4, a competitive antagonist for HGF and the c-Met receptor, prevents tumor cell growth and metastasis via its bifunctional properties to act as an HGF antagonist and angiogenesis inhibitor. In the present study, we investigated the inhibitory effectiveness of NK4 on hematogenous pulmonary metastasis of the CT26 murine colon cancer cell line, focusing on tumor cell adhesion to endothelial cells. In an in vitro adhesion assay, HGF facilitated adhesion of CT26 cells to a murine endothelial cell line (F-2) in a dose-dependent manner. Furthermore, the enhancing effect of HGF on CT26-F-2 cell interaction was blocked by NK4 as well as by anti-HGF antibody. Similarly, HGF-induced phosphorylation of focal adhesion kinase (FAK), downstream of integrin signaling, was reduced by NK4 and by anti-HGF antibody. However, distinct integrin expression on the surface of CT26 cells was not altered by HGF. In an in vivo experimental pulmonary metastasis assay, stable NK4 expression potently decreased the number of pulmonary metastatic foci. The NK4-induced suppression of pulmonary metastasis was partially reversed when HGF was intraperitoneally administered in an adhesive phase. These results suggest that NK4 could act on tumor cells to inhibit CT26 adhesion to endothelial cells by reducing FAK phosphorylation, which is regulated by inside-out HGF/c-Met signaling, and thereby suppress hematogenous pulmonary metastasis.

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

4.3
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