4.4 Article

Phosphatase and Tensin Homolog Reconstruction and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Knockdown Synergistically Inhibit the Growth of Glioblastoma

期刊

CANCER BIOTHERAPY AND RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS
卷 25, 期 6, 页码 713-721

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/cbr.2010.0821

关键词

glioblastoma; PTEN; siRNA; VEGF

资金

  1. Shenzhen Municipal Government
  2. Bureau of Science Technology and Information
  3. Key Lab of Gene and Antibody Therapy
  4. Ministry of Science and Technology of China [2005CCA03500]
  5. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [30570960]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glioblastoma (GBM) is a highly malignant tumor with poor prognosis. Two hallmarks of this disease are a high expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and a depletion of the phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN). In the present study, combined gene therapy using wild-type PTEN reconstruction and VEGF siRNA was examined for its effectiveness in inhibiting tumor growth and tumorigenicity of PTEN-null GBM cells. In U251 GBM cells, PTEN restoration reduced proliferation, arrested the cell cycle at G0/G1 stage, and promoted apoptosis via inhibition of PIK/AKT signaling pathway. Unexpectedly, anchorage-dependent and -independent colony formation ability and the capacity for wound-healing migration of U251 cells with stable expression of VEGF siRNA were significantly inhibited, suggesting that VEGF also appeared to function as an autocrine growth factor in addition to its well-known pro-angiogenic paracrine function. Further, a combined treatment of PTEN restoration and VEGF siRNA had the best tumor suppression effect. In a xenograft study in null mice, both the restoration of PTEN and the expression of VEGF siRNA could significantly inhibit the growth of U251 GBMs, whereas tumor growth was entirely suppressed by a combination of the two treatments. Therefore, the combination of PTEN expression and VEGF knockdown represents an effective gene therapy strategy for malignant gliomas.

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

4.4
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