SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences / 2021 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 1

Proteasomal System Related Stress Response in Different Cancer Cell Lines

Ayse Tarbin Jannuzzi
Betul Karademir Yilmaz
Sema Arslan
Buket Alpertunga
Pages
28–33
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: The difference in the response of the proteasomal system to stress could be the reason for differential adaptation to oxidative stress in different cancer types.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Proteasomal system is the primary protein degradation mechanism and important for cellular homeostasis.
📊
Key Findings & Data:On the other hand, increased proteasome activity protects cancer cells from cell death.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: The difference in the response of the proteasomal system to stress could be the reason for differential adaptation to oxidative stress in different cancer types.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:proteasome activity · 20S proteasome · 26S proteasome

Abstract

Objective: Proteasomal system is the primary protein degradation mechanism and important for cellular homeostasis. On the other hand, increased proteasome activity protects cancer cells from cell death. The objective of this preliminary study was to determine the response of the proteasomal system to oxidative stress in human cancer cell lines including K562 chronic myelogenous leukemia, U251 glioblastoma, DU145 prostate cancer, HepG2C3A hepatoma, and MCF7 breast cancer. Methods: Cells were exposed to hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) as a stressor. 20S and 26S proteasome activities and K48-linked protein ubiquitination levels were determined immediately and 3 hours after exposure. Results: As an immediate response, 20S proteasome activities decreased in only K562 and U251 cells and 20S+26S proteasome activities decreased only in K562 cells. Following 3h of incubation, all cells showed a significant decrease in both 20S and 20S+26S proteasome activities. K48-linked protein ubiquitination levels increased immediately in K562 and DU145 cells. After 3h of incubation, ubiquitination levels increased in all cell lines except MCF7 cells. Conclusion: The difference in the response of the proteasomal system to stress could be the reason for differential adaptation to oxidative stress in different cancer types.

🔖

Cite This Article

Jannuzzi, A. T., Yilmaz, B. K., Arslan, S., Alpertunga, B. (2022). Proteasomal System Related Stress Response in Different Cancer Cell Lines. Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 1, 28–33. https://ajindex.com/articles/474193

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Wang X, Liang Z, Huang H, Liang W. Principles of ethics review on traditional medicine and the practice of institute review board in China. Chin J Integr Med 2011; 17:631–634
  2. Epstein T, Gatenby RA, Brown JS. The Warburg effect as an adaptation of cancer cells to rapid fluctuations in energy demand. PLoS One 2017; 12: e0185085
  3. Liberti M V., Locasale JW. The Warburg Effect: How Does it Benefit Cancer Cells? Trends Biochem Sci 2016; 41:211–218
  4. Sena LA, Chandel NS. Physiological Roles of Mitochondrial Reactive Oxygen Species. Mol Cell 2012; 48: 158–167
  5. Locasale JW, Cantley LC. Metabolic flux and the regulation of mammalian cell growth. Cell Metab 2011; 14(4):443–451
  6. Sullivan LB, Chandel NS. Mitochondrial reactive oxygen species and cancer. Cancer Metab 2014; 2(1):17
  7. Davies KJA. Degradation of oxidized proteins by the 20S proteasome. Biochimie 2001; 83(3–4):301–310
  8. Breusing N, Grune T. Regulation of proteasome-mediated protein degradation during oxidative stress and aging. Biol Chem 2008; 389(3):203–209
  9. Grune T, Reinheckel T, Davies KJ. Degradation of oxidized proteins in mammalian cells. FASEB J 1997; 11(7):526–534
  10. Jung T, Catalgol B, Grune T. The proteasomal system. Molecular Aspects of Medicine 2009; 30:191–296
  11. Jung T, Grune T. The proteasome and the degradation of oxidized proteins: part I—structure of proteasomes. Redox Biol 2013; 1(1):178–182
  12. Glickman MH, Ciechanover A. The ubiquitin-proteasome proteolytic pathway: destruction for the sake of construction. Physiol Rev 2002; 82(2):373–428
  13. Xu P, Duong DM, Seyfried NT, Cheng D, Xie Y, Robert J, et al. Quantitative proteomics reveals the function of unconventional ubiquitin chains in proteasomal degradation. Cell 2009; 137(1):133–145
  14. Strickland E, Hakala K, Thomas PJ, DeMartino GN. Recognition of misfolding proteins by PA700, the regulatory subcomplex of the 26 S proteasome. J Biol Chem 2000; 275(8):5565–5572
  15. Shang F, Taylor A. Ubiquitin–proteasome pathway and cellular responses to oxidative stress. Free Radic Biol Med 2011; 51(1):5–16
  16. Schmidt M, Finley D. Regulation of proteasome activity in health and disease. Biochim Biophys Acta (BBA)-Molecular Cell Res 2014; 1843(1):13–25
  17. Lander GC, Estrin E, Matyskiela ME, Bashore C, Nogales E, Martin A. Complete subunit architecture of the proteasome regulatory particle. Nature 2012; 482(7384):186
  18. Sitte N, Merker K, Grune T. Proteasome-dependent degradation of oxidized proteins in MRC-5 fib