中国癌症杂志 ›› 2015, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (2): 99-104.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-3969.2015.02.004

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

SU11274逆转肝细胞生长因子诱导不同EGFR基因型非小细胞肺癌细胞株对吉非替尼耐药

严春花1,玄香兰2,张佳1,安昌善1   

  1. 1. 延边大学附属医院呼吸内科,吉林 延吉133000 ;
    2. 延边第二人民医院呼吸内科,吉林 延吉133000
  • 出版日期:2015-02-28 发布日期:2015-05-13
  • 通信作者: 安昌善 E-mail:cs_an2003@aliyun.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(81160291)。

SU11274 reverse gefitinib resistance induced by hepatocyte growth factor in different EGFR gene type of non-small cell lung cancer cells

YAN Chunhua1, XUAN Xianglan2, ZHANG Jia1, AN Changshan1   

  1. 1.Department of Respiratory Disease, Yanbian University Hospital, Yanji Jilin 133000, China; 2. Department of Respiratory Disease, Yanbian Second People’s Hospital, Yanji Jilin 133000, China
  • Published:2015-02-28 Online:2015-05-13
  • Contact: AN Changshan E-mail: cs_an2003@aliyun.com

摘要:    背景与目的:肝细胞生长因子(hepatocyte growth factor,HGF)诱导敏感非小细胞肺癌(nonsmall cell lung cancer,NSCLC)细胞对表皮生长因子受体酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor,EGFR-TKI)耐药,其机制与c-Met激活有关。本研究探讨c-Met抑制剂SU11274逆转HGF诱导的不同EGFR基因型NSCLC细胞株对吉非替尼耐药及逆转耐药机制。方法:选择人NSCLC细胞株PC9(EGFR突变型)、H292(EGFR野生型)和A549(EGFR野生型),应用吉非替尼和SU11274单独或联合作用于HGF诱导的细胞株。实验分为6组:C组(不加药对照组)、H组(HGF处理组)、G组(吉非替尼处理组)、S(SU11274处理组)、HG组(HGF+吉非替尼处理组)和HGS组(HGF+吉非替尼+SU11274处理组)。MTT法检测对细胞增殖的影响,流式细胞术检测细胞凋亡的影响;应用蛋白质印迹法(Western blot)检测细胞中c-Met及其下游通道Stat3、Akt和Erk1/2蛋白表达水平。结果:吉非替尼对3种细胞的生长抑制作用均呈浓度依赖性,HGF处理能够缓解吉非替尼的增殖抑制作用(P<0.05);不同浓度吉非替尼联合SU11274作用于HGF诱导细胞时,3种细胞株存活率比吉非替尼单独作用于HGF诱导细胞时明显降低(P<0.05);HGS组的细胞凋亡比HG组明显增加(P<0.05);HGS组的c-Met、Stat3、Akt和Erk1/2活化蛋白量比HG组明显减少。结论:c-Met抑制剂SU11274可逆转HGF诱导的不同EGFR基因型NSCLC细胞株对吉非替尼耐药,其机制可能与抑制HGF活化的c-Met及其下游通道蛋白表达有关。

关键词:  肝细胞生长因子, 吉非替尼, 耐药, SU11274, 非小细胞肺癌

Abstract:    Background and purpose: Hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) induce epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) resistance in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cells, the mechanism might be related with activation of c-Met. The present study aimed to explore whether c-Met inhibitor SU11274 reverse gefitinib resistance induced by HGF in different EGFR gene types of NSCLC. Methods: PC9 (EGFR-activating mutant), H292 (EGFR-wild type) and A549 (EGFR-wiled) were chosen. The experiments were divided into 6 groups: C group (control), H group (HGF), G group (gefitinib), S group (SU11274), GH group (gefitinib+HGF), GSH group (gefitinib+SU11274+HGF). The cell survival was measured by MTT assay; the cell apoptosis was measured by flow cytometry (FCM); the expressions of c-Met, Stat3, Akt and Erk1/2 protein were examined by Western blot. Results: Gefitinib inhibited cell growth of 3 cells lines in a dose-dependent manner, and treating with HGF could relieve inhibition of cell growth caused by gefitinib. The cell survival when treating the HGF-induced cell lines with defferent concentration of gefitinib combined with SU11274 was significantly decreased than that when treating HGF-induced cell lines with gefitinib alone. In 3 cell lines, the apoptosis rate in HGS group was higher than that in HG group (P<0.05). In three cells lines, the p-Met, p-Stat3, p-Akt and p-Erk1/2 expressions in HGS group were lower than that in HG group (P<0.05). Conclusion: SU11274 reversed gefitinib resistance induced by HGF in different EGFR gene types of NSCLC cells, the mechanism might be related with inhibiting the HGF-induced activation of c-Met and its downstream signaling pathway.

Key words:  Hepatocyte growth factor, Gefitinib, Resistance, SU11274, Non-small cell lung cancer