4.6 Article

Qualitative changes in the proteome of extracellular vesicles accompanying cancer cell transition to mesenchymal state

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL CELL RESEARCH
卷 319, 期 17, 页码 2747-2757

出版社

ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.yexcr.2013.08.003

关键词

Cancer; Extracellular vesicles; EMT; Oncogenes; EGFR; E-cadherin; Cancer stem cells; Proteome; Exosomes

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) [MOP 102736, MOP 111119]
  2. MCH Foundation
  3. Fonds de la recherche en sante du Quebec (FRSQ)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Transitions of the cancer cell phenotype between epithelial and mesenchymal states (EMT) are likely to alter the patterns of intercellular communication. In this regard we have previously documented that EMT-like changes trigger quantitative rearrangements in exosomal vesicle emission in A431 cancer cells driven by oncogenic epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Here we report that extracellular vesicles (EVs) produced by these cancer cells in their epithelial and mesenchymal states exhibit profound qualitative differences in their proteome. Thus, induction of the EMT-like state through blockade of E-cadherin and EGFR stimulation provoked a mesenchymal shift in cellular morphology and enrichment in the CD44-high/CD24-low immunophenotype, often linked to cellular stemness. This change also resulted in reprogramming of the EV-related proteome (distinct from that of corresponding cells), which contained 30 unique protein signals, and revealed enrichment in pathways related to cellular growth, cell-to-cell signaling, and cell movement. Some of the most prominent EV-related proteins were validated, including integrin alpha 42 and tetraspanin CD9. We propose that changes in cellular differentiation status translate into unique qualitative rearrangements in the cargo of EVs, a process that may have implications for intercellular communication and could serve as source of new biomarkers to detect EMT-like processes in cancer. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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