4.6 Article

Inhibition of Epithelial to Mesenchymal Transition by E-cadherin Up-regulation via Repression of Slug Transcription and Inhibition of E-cadherin Degradation DUAL ROLE OF SCAFFOLD/MATRIX ATTACHMENT REGION-BINDING PROTEIN 1 (SMAR1) IN BREAST CANCER CELLS

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 289, 期 37, 页码 25431-25444

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M113.527267

关键词

-

资金

  1. DST
  2. CSIR
  3. UGC, Govt of India

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The evolution of the cancer cell into a metastatic entity is the major cause of death in patients with cancer. It has been acknowledged that aberrant activation of a latent embryonic program, known as the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), can endow cancer cells with the migratory and invasive capabilities associated with metastatic competence for which E-cadherin switch is a well-established hallmark. Discerning the molecular mechanisms that regulate E-cadherin expression is therefore critical for understanding tumor invasiveness and metastasis. Here we report that SMAR1 overexpression inhibits EMT and decelerates the migratory potential of breast cancer cells by up-regulating E-cadherin in a bidirectional manner. While SMAR1-dependent transcriptional repression of Slug by direct recruitment of SMAR1/HDAC1 complex to the matrix attachment region site present in the Slug promoter restores E-cadherin expression, SMAR1 also hinders E-cadherin-MDM2 interaction thereby reducing ubiquitination and degradation of E-cadherin protein. Consistently, siRNA knockdown of SMAR1 expression in these breast cancer cells results in a coordinative action of Slug-mediated repression of E-cadherin transcription, as well as degradation of E-cadherin protein through MDM2, up-regulating breast cancer cell migration. These results indicate a crucial role for SMAR1 in restraining breast cancer cell migration and suggest the candidature of this scaffold matrix-associated region-binding protein as a tumor suppressor.

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