4.5 Article

Knockdown of BAG3 sensitizes bladder cancer cells to treatment with the BH3 mimetic ABT-737

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
卷 34, 期 2, 页码 197-205

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-015-1616-2

关键词

BAG3; ATG5; ABT-737; Bladder cancer

资金

  1. Medical Faculty, Goethe University Frankfurt (Frankfurter Forschungsforderung)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BAG3 is overexpressed in several malignancies and mediates a non-canonical, selective form of (macro)autophagy. By stabilizing pro-survival Bcl-2 proteins in complex with HSP70, BAG3 can also exert an apoptosis-antagonizing function. ABT-737 is a high affinity Bcl-2 inhibitor that fails to target Mcl-1. This failure may confer resistance in various cancers. Urothelial cancer cells were treated with the BH3 mimetics ABT-737 and (-)-gossypol, a pan-Bcl-2 inhibitor which inhibits also Mcl-1. To clarify the importance of the core autophagy regulator ATG5 and BAG3 in ABT-737 treatment, cell lines carrying a stable lentiviral knockdown of ATG5 and BAG3 were created. The synergistic effect of ABT-737 and pharmaceutical inhibition of BAG3 with the HSF1 inhibitor KRIBB11 or sorafenib was also evaluated. Total cell death and apoptosis were quantified by FACS analysis of propidium iodide, annexin. Target protein analysis was conducted by Western blotting. Knockdown of BAG3 significantly downregulated Mcl-1 protein levels and sensitized urothelial cancer cells to apoptotic cell death induced by ABT-737, while inhibition of bulk autophagy through depletion of ATG5 had no discernible effect on cell death. Similar to knockdown of BAG3, pharmacological targeting of the BAG3/Mcl-1 pathway with KRIBB11 was capable to sensitize both cell lines to treatment with ABT-737. Our results show that BAG3, but not bulk autophagy has a major role in the response of bladder cancer cells to BH3 mimetics. They also suggest that BAG3 is a suitable target for combined therapies aimed at synergistically inducing apoptosis in bladder cancer.

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