4.6 Article

Poly(I:C) induces intense expression of c-IAP2 and cooperates with an IAP inhibitor in induction of apoptosis in cancer cells

期刊

BMC CANCER
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-10-327

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer (comites d'ile de France)
  2. Agence Nationale de la Recherche (EBV-inter)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: There is increasing evidence that the toll-like receptor 3 (TLR3) is an interesting target for anti-cancer therapy. Unfortunately, most laboratory investigations about the impact of TLR3 stimulation on human malignant cells have been performed with very high concentrations -5 to 100 mu g/ml -of the prototype TLR3 ligand, poly(I: C). In a previous study focused on a specific type of human carcinoma - nasopharyngeal carcinoma - we have shown that concentrations of poly(I: C) as low as 100 ng/ml are sufficient to induce apoptosis of malignant cells when combined to a pharmacological antagonist of the IAP family based on Smac mimicry. Methods: This observation prompted us to investigate the contribution of the IAP family in cell response to poly(I: C) in a variety of human malignant cell types. Results: We report a rapid, intense and selective increase in c-IAP2 protein expression observed under stimulation by poly(I: C)(500 ng/ml) in all types of human malignant cells. In most cell types, this change in protein expression is underlain by an increase in c-IAP2 transcripts and dependent on the TLR3/TRIF pathway. When poly(I: C) is combined to the IAP inhibitor RMT 5265, a cooperative effect in apoptosis induction and/or inhibition of clonogenic growth is obtained in a large fraction of carcinoma and melanoma cell lines. Conclusions: Currently, IAP inhibitors like RMT 5265 and poly(I: C) are the subject of separate therapeutic trials. In light of our observations, combined use of both types of compounds should be considered for treatment of human malignancies including carcinomas and melanomas.

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

4.6
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