4.5 Article

Melittin inhibits proliferation, migration and invasion of bladder cancer cells by regulating key genes based on bioinformatics and experimental assays

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELLULAR AND MOLECULAR MEDICINE
卷 24, 期 1, 页码 655-670

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jcmm.14775

关键词

antitumour; bioinformatics; bladder cancer; MAPK signalling pathway; melittin

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81673738, 81703875]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The antitumour effect of melittin (MEL) has recently attracted considerable attention. Nonetheless, information regarding the functional role of MEL in bladder cancer (BC) is currently limited. Herein, we investigated the effect of MEL on critical module genes identified in BC. In total, 2015 and 4679 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) associated with BC were identified from the GSE31189 set and The Cancer Genome Atlas database, respectively. GSE-identified DEGs were mapped and analysed using Gene Ontology and Kyoto Encyclopaedia of Genes and Genomes analyses to determine BC-involved crucial genes and signal pathways. Coupled with protein-protein interaction network and Molecular Complex Detection analyses, Modules 2 and 4 were highlighted in the progression of BC. In in-vitro experiments, MEL inhibited the proliferation, migration, and invasion of UM-UC-3 and 5637 cells. The expression of NRAS, PAK2, EGFR and PAK1 in Module 4-enriched in the MAPK signalling pathway-was significantly reduced after treatment with MEL at concentrations of 4 or 6 mu g/mL. Finally, quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and Western blotting analyses revealed MEL inhibited the expression of genes at the mRNA (ERK1/2, ERK5, JNK and MEK5), protein (ERK5, MEK5, JNK and ERK1/2) and phosphorylation (p-ERK1/2, p-JNK, and p-38) levels. This novel evidence indicates MEL exerts effects on the ERK5-MAK pathway-a branch of MAPK signalling pathway. Collectively, these findings provide a theoretical basis for MEL application in BC treatment.

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