Table_1_Sensitization of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Cells to Gefitinib and Reversal of Epithelial–Mesenchymal Transition by Aloe-Emodin Via PI3K/Akt/TWIS1 Signal Blockage.docx
To explore the impacts of AE (aloe-emodin) in gefitinib-resistant NSCLC (non-small cell lung cancer) cells and the corresponding mechanism.
MethodsPC9 and PC9-GR cells were cultured and treated by gefitinib, AE, or the combination of the two drugs. Then, viability, apoptosis, migration and invasion of cells were investigated using CCK-8, TUNEL, wound healing assay, and transwell assay, respectively. Female BALB/c nude mice were employed for the establishment of xenograft tumor models to examine the role of AE in tumor growth.
ResultsPC9-GR cells showed reduced apoptosis and enhanced cell viability, migration and invasion upon treatment by gefitinib, compared with PC9 cells. E-cahherin in PC9-GR cells was down-regulated, while Vimentin, Snail2 (or Slug) and Twist1 in PC9-GR cells were up-regulated, compared with PC9 cells. Meanwhile, treatment by a combination of gefitinib and AE significantly strengthened apoptosis of PC9-GR cells, while attenuated their migration and invasion, compared with the control group or treatment by gefitinib or AE alone. WB results showed that AE could reverse EMT and activation of PI3K/AKT signalling pathway in PC9-GR cells. In vivo experiments showed that tumor growth and EMT of PC9-GR cells were dramatically repressed after treatment by a combination of AE and gefitinib. Additionally, the use of SC97 (a PI3K/Akt pathway activator) could counteract the effects of AE in gefitinib-resistant PC9 cells.
ConclusionsAE could enhance the gefitinib sensitivity of PC9-GR cells and reverse EMT by blocking PI3K/Akt/TWIS1 signal pathway.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.1002/advs.202102678
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.nantod.2021.101279
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.ccm.2019.10.001
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.01.013
- https://doi.org//10.3389/fonc.2019.01044
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.pharmthera.2019.06.005
- https://doi.org//10.1007/978-3-319-91442-8_16
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nrclinonc.2017.44
- https://doi.org//10.1038/s41419-020-02998-6
- https://doi.org//10.3389/fgene.2016.00197
- https://doi.org//10.21037/tlcr-20-141
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.biopha.2016.11.100
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.yexcr.2021.112615
- https://doi.org//10.1002/ptr.6532
- https://doi.org//10.18632/oncotarget.10410
- https://doi.org//10.1089/rej.2018.2104
- https://doi.org//10.1002/ptr.7096
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.ejphar.2015.05.057
- https://doi.org//10.1111/1759-7714.13533
- https://doi.org//10.1038/onc.2010.215
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.drup.2020.100715
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.bbcan.2019.188310
- https://doi.org//10.1021/acsabm.1c01311
- https://doi.org//10.1021/acsabm.1c01107
- https://doi.org//10.1038/nature25183
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.bbcan.2019.188310
- https://doi.org//10.1038/s41388-019-0887-2
- https://doi.org//10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-20-0067
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s13046-019-1043-0
- https://doi.org//10.3389/fcell.2020.591239
- https://doi.org//10.1242/bio.048462
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.biopha.2017.11.034
- https://doi.org//10.3892/or.2020.7687
- https://doi.org//10.1038/s41388-018-0311-3
- https://doi.org//10.1111/jgh.15184
CC BY 4.0