4.6 Article

Absence of Caspase-3 Protects Pancreatic β-Cells from c-Myc-induced Apoptosis without Leading to Tumor Formation

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 284, 期 16, 页码 10947-10956

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M806960200

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes for Health Research
  2. Canadian Diabetes Association

向作者/读者索取更多资源

c-Myc is a powerful trigger of beta-cell apoptosis, proliferation, and dedifferentiation in rodent islets in vivo. In a transgenic mouse model, c-Myc induction causes rapid beta-cell apoptosis and overt diabetes. When suppression of apoptosis is achieved by overexpression of Bcl-xL in an inducible model of c-Myc activation, a full spectrum of tumor development, including distant metastasis, occurs. Caspase-3 is a key pro-apoptotic protein involved in the execution phase of multiple apoptotic pathways. To test whether caspase-3 is an essential mediator of apoptosis in this model of tumorigenesis, we generated caspase-3 knock-out mice containing the inducible c-myc transgene (c-Myc(+) Casp3(-/-)). In contrast to Bcl-x(L)-overexpressing c-Myc(+) mice, c-Myc(+) Casp3(-/-) mice remained euglycemic for up to 30 days of c-Myc activation, and there was no evidence of tumor formation. Interestingly, caspase-3 deletion also led to the suppression of proliferation, perhaps through regulation of the cell cycle inhibitory protein p27, suggesting a possible mechanism for maintaining a balance between suppression of apoptosis and excessive proliferation in the context of c-Myc activation. Additionally, c-Myc-activated Casp3(-/-) mice were protected from streptozotocin-induced diabetes. Our studies demonstrate that caspase-3 deletion confers protection from c-Myc-induced apoptosis and diabetes development without unwanted tumorigenic effects. These results may lead to further elucidation of the mechanisms of c-Myc biology relevant to beta-cells, which may result in novel therapeutic strategies for diabetes.

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