Data from CBX8 Exhibits Oncogenic Activity via AKT/β-Catenin Activation in Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Deregulation of polycomb proteins influences the development and progression of hepatocellular carcinoma. Here we show that chromobox 8 (CBX8) expression is increased in hepatocellular carcinoma and correlates with poor outcome in two independent cohorts containing a total of 879 cases. Ectopic expression of CBX8 facilitated tumor growth and metastasis, whereas CBX8 silencing suppressed these effects. CBX8 efficiently activated AKT/β-catenin signaling via upregulation of the transcription factor EGR1 and miR-365-3p in a noncanonical manner: CBX8 directly bound the EGR1 promoter to enhance its activity. In the nucleus, CBX8 also interacted with EGR1 to prevent its degradation. Furthermore, CBX8 increased the transcription of miR-365a-3p, which promoted the nuclear localization of β-catenin by targeting the 3′-UTR ZNRF1. Inhibiting either EGR1 or miR-365a-3p partially rescued CBX8-mediated malignant phenotypes. In clinical samples, CBX8 expression closely correlated with EGR1, miR-365a-3p, and nuclear β-catenin. Collectively, our results show that CBX8 functions as an oncogene to upregulate EGR1 and miR-365-3p to stimulate the AKT/β-catenin pathway. This newly identified signaling axis may suggest new therapeutic strategies against hepatocellular carcinoma. Significance: Elucidation of a key new element of the β-catenin signaling pathway in liver cancer may suggest new therapeutic targets. Cancer Res; 78(1); 51–63. ©2017 AACR.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Data from CBX8 Exhibits Oncogenic Activity via AKT/β-Catenin Activation in Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- Date Crossref
- 31/03/2023
- Éditeur
- American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
- Type
- posted-content
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.