4.7 Article

Obstructing Shedding of the Immunostimulatory MHC Class I Chain-Related Gene B Prevents Tumor Formation

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 15, 期 2, 页码 632-640

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-1305

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. DOD-USMRC New Investigators [W81XWH-04-1-0577]
  2. IDEA Development [W81XWH-06-1-0014]
  3. W Prostate SPORE Program
  4. NIH [1K01CA116002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Clinical observations have suggested that shedding of the MHC class I chain - related molecule (MIC) may be one of the mechanisms by which tumors evade host immunosurveillance and progress. However, this hypothesis has never been proven. In this study, we tested this hypothesis using a prostate tumor model and investigated the effect of shedding of MIC on tumor development. Experimental Design: We generated a shedding-resistant noncleavable form of MICB (MICB.A2). We overexpressed MICB.A2, the wild-type MICB, and the recombinant soluble MICB (rsMICB) in mouse prostate tumor TRAMP-C2 (TC2) cells and implanted these cells into severe combined immunodeficient mice. Results: No tumors were developed in animals that were implanted with TC2-MICB.A2 cells, whereas all the animals that were implanted with TC2, TC2-MICB, or TC2-rsMICB cells developed tumors. When a NKG2D-specific antibody CX5 or purified rsMICB was administered to animals before tumor implantation, all animals that were implanted with TC2-MICB.A2 cells developed tumors. In vitro cytotoxicity assay revealed the loss of NKG2D-mediated natural killer cell function in these prechallenged animals, suggesting that persistent levels of soluble MICB in the serum can impair natural killer cell function and thus allow tumor growth. Conclusions: These data suggest that MIC shedding may contribute significantly to tumor formation by transformed cells and that inhibition of MIC shedding to sustain the NKG2D receptor-MIC ligand recognition may have potential clinical implication in targeted cancer treatment.

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

4.7
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