4.7 Article

Targeting the COX2/MET/TOPK signaling axis induces apoptosis in gefitinib-resistant NSCLC cells

期刊

CELL DEATH & DISEASE
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41419-019-2020-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81672936, 81672739, 81503105, 81472602]
  2. Independent innovation project of Huazhong University of Science and Technology [2018KFYYXJJ084, 2016YXZD034, 2015QN151]
  3. Hubei Province Health and Family Planning Scientific Research Project [WJ2019M109, WJ2017M050]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

MET overactivation is one of the crucial reasons for tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) resistance, but the mechanisms are not wholly clear. Here, COX2, TOPK, and MET expression were examined in EGFR-activating mutated NSCLC by immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis. The relationship between COX2, TOPK, and MET was explored in vitro and ex vivo. In addition, the inhibition of HCC827GR cell growth by combining COX2 inhibitor (celecoxib), TOPK inhibitor (pantoprazole), and gefitinib was verified ex vivo and in vivo. We found that COX2 and TOPK were highly expressed in EGFR-activating mutated NSCLC and the progression-free survival (PFS) of triple-positive (COX2, MET, and TOPK) patients was shorter than that of triple-negative patients. Then, we observed that the COX2-TXA(2) signaling pathway modulated MET through AP-1, resulting in an inhibition of apoptosis in gefitinib-resistant cells. Moreover, we demonstrated that MET could phosphorylate TOPK at Tyr74 and then prevent apoptosis in gefitinib-resistant cells. In line with these findings, the combination of celecoxib, pantoprazole, and gefitinib could induce apoptosis in gefitinibresistant cells and inhibit tumor growth ex vivo and in vivo. Our work reveals a novel COX2/MET/TOPK signaling axis that can prevent apoptosis in gefitinib-resistant cells and suggests that a triple combination of FDA-approved drugs would provide a low-cost and practical strategy to overcome gefitinib resistance.

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