4.7 Article

High hepatic expression of PDK4 improves survival upon multimodal treatment of colorectal liver metastases

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 120, 期 7, 页码 675-688

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41416-019-0406-9

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) [031L0084]
  2. German Research Foundation (DFG) [SCHN 947/4-2, STR 1570/1-1]
  3. Braun Foundation (Braun(R)) [BBST-D-18-00018]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Patients with borderline resectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) frequently receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) to reduce tumour burden, thus making surgical resection feasible. Even though NC can induce severe liver injury, most studies investigating tissue-based prognostic markers focus on tumour tissue. Here, we assessed the prognostic significance of pyruvate-dehydrogenase-kinase isoenzyme 4 (PDK4) within liver tissue of patients undergoing surgical resection due to CRLM. METHODS: Transcript levels of hypoxia-adaptive genes (such as PDK isoenzymes) were assessed in the tissue of healthy liver, corresponding CRLM, healthy colon mucosa and corresponding tumour. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed. Responses to chemotherapy upon up- or down-regulation of PDK4 were studied in vitro. RESULTS: PDK4 expression within healthy liver tissue was associated with increased overall survival and liver function following surgical resection of CRLM. This association was enhanced in patients with NC. PDK4 expression in CRLM tissue did not correlate with overall survival. Up-regulation of PDK4 increased the resistance of hepatocytes and colon cancer cells against chemotherapy-induced toxicity, whereas knockdown of PDK4 enhanced chemotherapy-associated cell damage. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that up-regulated PDK4 expression reduces hepatic chemotherapy-induced oxidative stress and is associated with improved postoperative liver function in patients undergoing multimodal treatment and resection of CRLM.

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