4.7 Article

MiR-21 upregulation increases IL-8 expression and tumorigenesis program in airway epithelial cells exposed to cigarette smoke

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELLULAR PHYSIOLOGY
卷 234, 期 12, 页码 22183-22194

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcp.28786

关键词

bronchial epithelial cells; cigarette smoke; miRNA; oxidative stress

资金

  1. Italian National Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundCigarette smoke exposure, increasing Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) and reactive oxygen species (ROS), promotes inflammatory responses in airway epithelial cells. Chronic inflammation, microRNA (miRNA), and oxidative stress are associated with cancer development. AimsThe present study was aimed to explore whether cigarette smoke exposure, altering miR-21 expression, promoted inflammatory responses and tumorigenesis processes in airway epithelial cells. MethodsAirway normal and cancer epithelial cells (16HBE and A549) were exposed to cigarette smoke extracts (CSE) or with/without agomiR-21, and then it was assessed: a) miR-21 expression; b) signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) nuclear protein expression and ERK1/2 activation; c) IL-8 gene expression and protein release. An antagonist of TLR4 (CLI-095) and the antioxidant flavonoid, apigenin, were also included to evaluate miR-21 expression in CSE exposed cells. ResultsIt was demonstrated that: a) A549 cells constitutively expressed higher levels of miR-21 and IL-8; b) CSE increased STAT3 nuclear expression in 16HBE; c) in both cell lines, CSE and agomiR-21 increased: miR-21 expression; ERK1/2 activation and IL-8 gene expression and protein release; d) TLR4 inhibition counteracted the effects of CSE on miR-21 in A549; e) apigenin reduced miR-21 and IL-8 gene expression in both cell lines. ConclusionsData herein provided identified for the first time new mechanisms supporting the crucial role of cigarette smoke-induced miR-21 expression in the amplification of inflammatory responses and in tumorigenesis processes within the airways.

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