4.5 Article

αvβ3 integrin-mediated drug resistance in human laryngeal carcinoma cells is caused by glutathione-dependent elimination of drug-induced reactive oxidative species

期刊

MOLECULAR PHARMACOLOGY
卷 74, 期 1, 页码 298-306

出版社

AMER SOC PHARMACOLOGY EXPERIMENTAL THERAPEUTICS
DOI: 10.1124/mol.107.043836

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As a model for determination of the role of integrins in drug resistance, we used alpha(v)beta(3) integrin-negative human laryngeal carcinoma cell line (HEp2) and three HEp2-derived cell clones with a gradual increase of alpha(v)beta(3) integrin expression. The alpha(v)beta(3) integrin expression protects cells from cisplatin, mitomycin C, and doxorubicin. In HEp2-alpha(v)beta(3) integrin-expressing cells, the constitutive expression of Bcl-2 protein and the level of glutathione (GSH) were increased compared with HEp2 cells. Pretreatment of HEp2-alpha(v)beta(3) integrin-expressing cells with an inhibitor of GSH synthesis, buthionine sulfoximine (BSO), decreased the level of GSH and partially reverted drug resistance to all above-mentioned drugs, but it did not influence the expression of Bcl-2. Sensitivity to selected anticancer drugs did not change with overexpression of Bcl-2 in HEp2 cells, nor with silencing of Bcl-2 in HEp2-alpha(v)beta(3) integrin-expressing cells, indicating that Bcl-2 is not involved in resistance mechanism. There was no difference in DNA platination between HEp2 and HEp2-alpha(v)beta(3) integrin-expressing cells, indicating that the mechanism of drug resistance is independent of cisplatin detoxification by GSH. A strong increase of reactive oxidative species (ROS) formation during cisplatin or doxorubicin treatment in HEp2 cells was reduced in HEp2-alpha(v)beta(3) integrin-expressing cells. Since this increased elimination of ROS could be reverted by GSH depletion, we concluded that multidrug resistance is the consequence of GSH-dependent increased ability of alpha(v)beta(3)-expressing cells to eliminate drug-induced ROS.

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

4.5
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