| Literature DB >> 35774428 |
Yajing Zhang1, Yangchun Feng1, Xiaojie Sun2.
Abstract
Background: As erythropoietin (EPO) has been used to treat anemia in cancer patients, negative controversy has continued. Unfortunately, its effects on non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) cell lines are uncertain and the phenomenon of inducing immune escape of tumor cells remains to be explored. This study aimed to provide an important basis for the application of exogenous EPO in the treatment of tumor-associated anemia.Entities:
Keywords: cell proliferation; hypoxia; hypoxia‐inducible factor 1; non‐small cell lung cancer; vascular endothelial growth factor
Year: 2022 PMID: 35774428 PMCID: PMC9215718 DOI: 10.1002/cdt3.12
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chronic Dis Transl Med ISSN: 2095-882X
Figure 1(A) Growth curve of the A549 cell line. (B) Growth curve of the NCI‐H838 cell line
Figure 2Effect of rhEPO on the proliferation of NSCLC cells. The proliferation of the two cell lines was compared after 24 and 48 h intervention with rhEPO (0, 2, and 8 U/ml) under normoxic and hypoxic conditions. (A) Cell diagram under an inverted fluorescence microscope (original magnification ×100). (B) Cell survival rate of the A549 cell line. (C) Cell survival rate of the NCI‐H838 cell line. One‐way ANOVA was used for statistics (*p < 0.05). The results represented the mean ± SD of five independent experiments. (N: Normoxia; H: Hypoxia). ANOVA, analysis of variance; NSCLC, non‐small cell lung cancer; rhEPO, recombinant human erythropoietin
Effects of different treatments on the proliferation of A549 cells (mean ± SD, n = 5)
| Treatments | Cell survival rate (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| 24 h | 48 h | |
| Normoxia | 100.000 ± 7.459 | 100.000 ± 8.802 |
| Hypoxia | 83.287 ± 8.163 | 57.101 ± 4.170 |
| Normoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml | 99.041 ± 7.593 | 104.880 ± 9.112 |
| Hypoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml | 84.766 ± 6.283 | 65.422 ± 4.155 |
| Normoxia + rhEPO 8 U/ml | 102.839 ± 11.801 | 98.829 ± 7.256 |
| Hypoxia + rhEPO 8 U/ml | 85.726 ± 4.641 | 71.205 ± 6.518 |
p < 0.05 versus Normoxia;
p < 0.05 versus Hypoxia;
p < 0.05 versus Normoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml;
p < 0.05 versus Hypoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml;
p < 0.05 versus Normoxia + rhEPO 8 U/ml.
Effects of different treatments on the proliferation of NCI‐H838 cells (mean ± SD, n = 5)
| Treatments | Cell survival rate (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| 24 h | 48 h | |
| Normoxia | 100.000 ± 6.900 | 100.000 ± 4.048 |
| Hypoxia | 72.940 ± 4.553 | 64.606 ± 4.956 |
| Normoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml | 104.149 ± 7.981 | 102.088 ± 6.799 |
| Hypoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml | 79.796 ± 6.851 | 81.287 ± 9.539 |
| Normoxia + rhEPO 8 U/ml | 100.180 ± 4.853 | 107.129 ± 8.827 |
| Hypoxia + rhEPO 8 U/ml | 81.960 ± 6.668 | 85.909 ± 4.613 |
p < 0.05 versus Normoxia;
p < 0.05 versus Hypoxia;
p < 0.05 versus Normoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml;
p < 0.05 versus Hypoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml;
p < 0.05 versus Normoxia + rhEPO 8 U/ml.
The expression levels of VEGF, HIF‐1α and PD‐L1 in A549 cells (mean ± SD, n = 3)
| Treatments | VEGF | HIF‐1α | PD‐L1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Normoxia | 0.459 ± 0.038 | 0.328 ± 0.050 | 0.391 ± 0.014 |
| Hypoxia | 0.632 ± 0.019 | 0.579 ± 0.043 | 0.659 ± 0.035 |
| Normoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml | 0.467 ± 0.041 | 0.374 ± 0.021 | 0.430 ± 0.118 |
| Hypoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml | 0.599 ± 0.074 | 0.510 ± 0.039 | 0.652 ± 0.020 |
| Normoxia + rhEPO 8 U/ml | 0.450 ± 0.090 | 0.311 ± 0.035 | 0.323 ± 0.037 |
| Hypoxia + rhEPO 8 U/ml | 0.519 ± 0.098 | 0.388 ± 0.024 | 0.523 ± 0.029 |
Abbreviations: HIF, hypoxia‐inducible factor; PD‐L1, programmed death‐ligand 1; rhEPO, recombinant human erythropoietin; VEGF, vascular endothelial growth factor.
p < 0.05 versus Normoxia;
p < 0.05 versus Hypoxia;
p < 0.05 versus Normoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml;
p < 0.05 versus Hypoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml;
p < 0.05 versus Normoxia + rhEPO 8 U/ml.
The expression levels of VEGF, HIF‐1α, and PD‐L1 in NCI‐H838 cells (mean ± SD, n = 3)
| Treatment | VEGF | HIF‐1α | PD‐L1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Normoxia | 0.425 ± 0.080 | 0.387 ± 0.031 | 0.517 ± 0.063 |
| Hypoxia | 0.564 ± 0.073 | 0.558 ± 0.042 | 0.802 ± 0.058 |
| Normoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml | 0.432 ± 0.053 | 0.404 ± 0.017 | 0.550 ± 0.024 |
| Hypoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml | 0.495 ± 0.034 | 0.461 ± 0.033 | 0.753 ± 0.062 |
| Normoxia + rhEPO 8 U/ml | 0.452 ± 0.057 | 0.410 ± 0.039 | 0.524 ± 0.091 |
| Hypoxia + rhEPO 8 U/ml | 0.474 ± 0.061 | 0.449 ± 0.021 | 0.782 ± 0.051 |
p < 0.05 versus Normoxia;
p < 0.05 versus Hypoxia;
p < 0.05 versus Normoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml;
p < 0.05 versus Hypoxia + rhEPO 2 U/ml;
p < 0.05 versus Normoxia + rhEPO 8 U/ml.
Figure 3Western blot analysis of EPO‐related molecules in NSCLC cell lines. The expression of each protein was compared after 48 h intervention with rhEPO (0, 2, and 8 U/ml) under normoxic and hypoxic conditions. (A) The histogram showed the relative expression levels of VEGF, HIF‐1α, and PD‐L1 in A549 cells (*p < 0.05). (B) The histogram showed the relative expression levels of VEGF, HIF‐1α, and PD‐L1 in NCI‐H838 cells (*p < 0.05). (C) Western blot bands. The immune response was developed by rabbit anti‐VEGF antibody, rabbit anti‐HIF‐1α antibody, rabbit anti‐PD‐L1 antibody, and mouse anti‐β‐actin monoclonal antibody. β‐actin was used as a loading control. The results represented the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. It showed a representative print. (N: Normoxia; H: Hypoxia). EPO, erythropoietin; HIF, hypoxia‐inducible factor‐1α; NSCLC, non‐small‐cell lung carcinoma; VEGF, vascular endothelial growth factor