| Literature DB >> 33230229 |
Julian Trah1, Jonas Arand1, Jun Oh2, Laia Pagerols-Raluy1, Magdalena Trochimiuk1, Birgit Appl1, Hannah Heidelbach2, Deirdre Vincent1, Moin A Saleem3, Konrad Reinshagen1, Anne K Mühlig2, Michael Boettcher4.
Abstract
Lithocholic bile acid (LCA) has been reported to selectively kill cancer cells within many tumor cell lines including neuroblastoma or glioblastoma. Wilms' tumor shares similarities with neuro- and glioblastoma. Hence, the aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of LCA on nephroblastoma. To test the effects of LCA, nephroblastoma cell line WT CLS1 was used. SK NEP1 was tested as well. It was originally classified as a nephroblastoma cell line but was meanwhile reclassified as an ewing sarcoma cell line. As control cell lines HEK 293 from embryonic kidney and RC 124 from adult kidney tissue as well as podocytes were used. The effects were evaluated using proliferation assay, caspase activity assay, FACS and Western blot. LCA showed a dose and time-dependent selective effect inducing apoptosis in nephroblastoma cells. However, these effects were not limited to the nephroblastoma cell line but also affected control kidney cell lines and the sarcoma cells; only podocytes are significantly less affected by LCA (at dosages < 200 µm). There were no significant differences regarding the TGR5 receptor expression. The study showed that LCA has a strong, yet unselective effect on all used in vitro cell-lines, sparing the highly differentiated podocytes in lower concentrations. Further studies are needed to verify our results before dismissing LCA as an anti-cancer drug.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33230229 PMCID: PMC7683553 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-77436-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1LCA kills cultured human nephroblastoma cells. The percentage of viable cells was calculated using the RealTime-Glo MT Cell Viability Assay. All cell-lines were treated as described in “Methods”. Data were evaluated using Prism and are presented as mean ± SD of values from three independent experiments. Significance level was set as p < 0.05 (*< 0.05; **< 0.005; ***< 0.0005; ****< 0.0001).
Figure 2Morphology of the tumor cell-lines WT CLS1 and SK NEP1 and the optical shift due to LCA. WT CLS1 and SK NEP1 were treated with indicated concentrations of LCA for 48 h. Data are representative data of three independent experiments.
Figure 3Podocytes versus nephroblastoma cell line under LCA treatment. All cell-lines were treated as described in “Methods”. Cells were stained with Annexin V and PI. Viable cells were defined as Annexin V and PI negative. Data were evaluated using FlowJo and Prism and are presented as mean ± SD of values from three independent experiments. Significance level was set as p < 0.05 (*< 0.05; **< 0.005; ***< 0.0005; ****< 0.0001).
Figure 4Expression of NRF2 and TGR5. All cell-lines were treated as described in “Methods”. Cell lysates were subjected to immunoblotting with indicated antibodies. Cyclophilin-A served as loading control. Qantification of NRF2 or TGR5 was performed by densitometry. Data were analyzed using ImageStudioLite Version 5.2.5. and ImageJ. Data are presented as mean ± SD of values from three independent experiments. Significance level was set as p < 0.05 (*< 0.05; **< 0.005; ***< 0.0005; ****< 0.0001).
Figure 5Caspase 3 and 7 activation due to LCA. All cell-lines were treated as described in “Methods” with different doses at different timepoints. Data are presented as mean ± SD of values from three independent experiments. Significance level was set as p < 0.05 (*< 0.05; **< 0.005; ***< 0.0005; ****< 0.0001).