Tag Archives: MYL9
ERN1 dependent regulation of TMED10, MYL9, SPOCK1, CUL4A and CUL4B genes expression at glucose and glutamine deprivations in U87 glioma cells
O. H. Minchenko*, O. S. Hnatiuk, D. O. Tsymbal, Y. M. Viletska,
S. V. Danilovskyi, O. V. Halkin, I. V. Kryvdiuk, O. V. Rudnytska
Palladin Institute of Biochemistry, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv;
*e-mail: ominchenko@yahoo.com
Received: 05 April 2020; Accepted: 25 June 2020
It was shown previously that inhibition of ERN1 (endoplasmic reticulum to nucleus signaling 1) pathway, a central mediator of the unfolded protein response, leads to suppression of tumor growth through down-regulation of key pro-proliferative and up-regulation of tumor suppressor factors and modifies the sensitivity of these genes to glucose and glutamine deprivation. However, the executive mechanisms of ERN1 mediated control of glioma cell proliferation are not yet known. The goal of this study was to estimate the effect of glucose and glutamine deprivations on expression of cancer related genes in glioma U87 cells at ERN1 signaling inhibition for evaluation of their possible significance in ERN1 mediated control of glioma cell proliferation. We have studied the effect of glucose and glutamine deprivations on the expression level of cancer related genes encoding TMED10 (transmembrane p24 trafficking protein 10), MYL9 (myosin, light chain 9, regulatory), SPOCK1 (sparc/osteonectin, cwcv and kazal-like domains proteoglycan 1), CUL4A (cullin 4A), and CUL4B in U87 glioma control cells and cells with ERN1 knockdown. It was shown that at glucose deprivation the expression level of MYL9, SPOCK1 and CUL4B genes was significantly up-regulated in control glioma cells. ERN1 knockdown modified the sensitivity to glucose deprivation of all studied genes except TMED10 gene. At glutamine deprivation the expression of MYL9, CUL4A and CUL4B genes was shown to be up-regulated in control glioma cells. The sensitivity of MYL9, TMED10 and CUL4B gene expression to glutamine deprivation in glioma cells with ERN1 knockdown was significantly modified, while CUL4A and SPOCK1 gene expression did not respond to ERN1 inhibition. The present study demonstrates that glucose and glutamine deprivation affected the expression of the most studied genes in a specific manner and that inhibition of ERN1 signaling preferentially modified their expression at glucose and glutamine deprivation.
Hypoxic regulation of the expression of cell proliferation related genes in U87 glioma cells upon inhibition of IRE1 signaling enzyme
O. H. Minchenko1, D. O. Tsymbal1, D. O. Minchenko1,2,
O. O. Riabovol1, O. O. Ratushna1, L. L. Karbovskyi1
1Palladin Institute of Biochemistry, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv;
e-mail: ominchenko@yahoo.com;
2Bohomolets National Medical University, Kyiv, Ukraine
We have studied the effect of inhibition of IRE1 (inositol requiring enzyme 1), which is a central mediator of endoplasmic reticulum stress and a controller of cell proliferation and tumor growth, on hypoxic regulation of the expression of different proliferation related genes in U87 glioma cells. It was shown that hypoxia leads to up-regulation of the expression of IL13RA2, CD24, ING1, ING2, ENDOG, and POLG genes and to down-regulation – of KRT18, TRAPPC3, TSFM, and MTIF2 genes at the mRNA level in control glioma cells. Changes for ING1 and CD24 genes were more significant. At the same time, inhibition of IRE1 modifies the effect of hypoxia on the expression of all studied genes. In particular, it increases sensitivity to hypoxia of the expression of IL13RA2, TRAPPC3, ENDOG, and PLOG genes and suppresses the effect of hypoxia on the expression of ING1 gene. Additionally, it eliminates hypoxic regulation of KRT18, CD24, ING2, TSFM, and MTIF2 genes expressions and introduces sensitivity to hypoxia of the expression of BET1 gene in glioma cells. The present study demonstrates that hypoxia, which often contributes to tumor growth, affects the expression of almost all studied genes. Additionally, inhibition of IRE1 can both enhance and suppress the hypoxic regulation of these gene expressions in a gene specific manner and thus possibly contributes to slower glioma growth, but several aspects of this regulation must be further clarified.