4.7 Article

Targeting filamin A reduces K-RAS-induced lung adenocarcinomas and endothelial response to tumor growth in mice

期刊

MOLECULAR CANCER
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1476-4598-11-50

关键词

Cancer; Angiogenesis; Cytoskeleton; Migration

资金

  1. The Swedish Society of Medicine
  2. The Assar Gabrielsson Foundation
  3. The Sahlgrenska University Hospital
  4. The Swedish Research Council
  5. The Swedish Cancer Society
  6. Novo Nordisk Fonden [NNF11OC1014864] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Many human cancer cells express filamin A (FLNA), an actin-binding structural protein that interacts with a diverse set of cell signaling proteins, but little is known about the biological importance of FLNA in tumor development. FLNA is also expressed in endothelial cells, which may be important for tumor angiogenesis. In this study, we defined the impact of targeting Flna in cancer and endothelial cells on the development of tumors in vivo and on the proliferation of fibroblasts in vitro. Methods: First, we used a Cre-adenovirus to simultaneously activate the expression of oncogenic K-RAS and inactivate the expression of Flna in the lung and in fibroblasts. Second, we subcutaneously injected mouse fibrosarcoma cells into mice lacking Flna in endothelial cells. Results: Knockout of Flna significantly reduced K-RAS-induced lung tumor formation and the proliferation of oncogenic K-RAS-expressing fibroblasts, and attenuated the activation of the downstream signaling molecules ERK and AKT. Genetic deletion of endothelial FLNA in mice did not impact cardiovascular development; however, knockout of Flna in endothelial cells reduced subcutaneous fibrosarcoma growth and vascularity within tumors. Conclusions: We conclude that FLNA is important for lung tumor growth and that endothelial Flna impacts local tumor growth. The data shed new light on the biological importance of FLNA and suggest that targeting this protein might be useful in cancer therapeutics.

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