4.5 Article

Enhanced expression of nuclear factor I/B in oxaliplatin-resistant human cancer cell lines

期刊

CANCER SCIENCE
卷 102, 期 2, 页码 382-386

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2010.01784.x

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Ministry for Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan [17016075]
  2. University of Occupational and Environmental Health (UOEH), Japan
  3. Vehicle Racing Commemorative Foundation
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [17016075, 22700770, 23701106] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Oxaliplatin is a third-generation platinum drug that has favorable activity in cisplatin-resistant cells. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying oxaliplatin resistance are not well understood. To investigate the molecular mechanisms involved, resistant cell lines were independently derived from colon cancer (DLD1) and bladder cancer (T24) cells. Oxaliplatin-resistant DLD1 OX1 and DLD1 OX2 cell lines were approximately 16.3-fold and 17.8-fold more resistant to oxaliplatin than the parent cell lines, respectively, and had 1.7- and 2.2-fold higher cross-resistance to cisplatin, respectively. Oxaliplatin-resistant T24 OX2 and T24 OX3 cell lines were approximately 5.0-fold more resistant to oxaliplatin than the parent cell line and had 1.9-fold higher cross-resistance to cisplatin. One hundred and fifty-eight genes commonly upregulated in both DLD1 OX1 and DLD1 OX2 were identified by microarray analysis. These genes were mainly involved in the function of transcriptional regulators (14.6%), metabolic molecules (14.6%), and transporters (9.5%). Of these, nuclear factor I/B (NFIB) was upregulated in all oxaliplatin-resistant cells. Downregulation of NFIB rendered cells sensitive to oxaliplatin, but not to cisplatin. Forced expression of NFIB induced resistance to oxaliplatin, but not to cisplatin. Taken together, these results suggest that NFIB is a novel and specific biomarker for oxaliplatin resistance in human cancers. (Cancer Sci 2011; 102: 382-386)

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