4.7 Article

Silencing of the SEC62 gene inhibits migratory and invasive potential of various tumor cells

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 128, 期 10, 页码 2284-2295

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.25580

关键词

endoplasmic reticulum (ER); Sec62; protein translocation; cell migration; cell invasion

类别

资金

  1. Deutsche Krebshilfe [107381/107390]
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [FOR967, SFB 530, C1]
  3. Stiftung Europrofession, HOMFOR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sec62 is part of the protein translocation apparatus in the membrane of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). In yeast, Sec62 participates in the post-translational translocation of proteins into the ER, but its function in mammals remains elusive. Previously we described the amplification and over-expression of the SEC62 gene in prostate cancer cell lines and the protein has been described as a potential target gene in prostate cancer. In the current study we show that in the tumor tissue of prostate cancer patients Sec62 protein levels are elevated compared with tumor-free tissue derived from the same patients or from prostates of control group patients and that the higher Sec62 protein content correlates with an increasing dedifferentiation of the cells. Therefore, up-regulation of Sec62 protein content indeed is a phenomenon associated with prostate cancer progression. Analysis of a multi-tissue tumor array showed that in addition to prostate cancer, overproduction of Sec62 is observed in various other tumors, most significantly in tumors of the lung and the thyroid. To examine the tumor-related functions of Sec62, we silenced the SEC62 gene in the prostate cancer cell-line PC3 as well as in a set of other tumor cell-lines with two different siRNAs. In general, after silencing of SEC62 the cell migration and the invasive potential of the cells was blocked or at least dramatically reduced while cell viability was hardly affected. Thus, the SEC62 gene may indeed be considered as a target gene in the therapy of various tumors.

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