PURPOSE: Although treatment with interferon-alpha (IFN alpha) results in tumor regression in a subset (< 20%) of patients with renal cell carcinoma, the underlying mechanisms for the resistance of renal cancer (RC) cells to IFN alpha is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 5 RC lines resistant and 5 RC lines sensitive to the antiproliferative effects of IFN alpha for differences in: 1) the number of IFN binding sites, 2) the number of signal-transducing IFNAR-1 chains of the IFN alpha receptor, 3) IFN alpha receptor structure, 4) IFN-stimulated gene (ISG) expression and 5) IFN alpha sensitivity in antiviral assays. RESULTS: No structural alterations in the IFN alpha receptor were detected in any RC line examined, although varying numbers of ligand binding sites and IFNAR-1 signal transducer chains were present. All 5 IFN-sensitive, and 4 of 5 IFN-resistant RC lines were sensitive to the antiviral and gene-inducing actions of IFN alpha. CONCLUSIONS: The resistance of RC lines to IFN's antiproliferative action is not due to defects in ligand binding or in IFN-receptor structure. Our results indicate that the defective antiproliferative response in most RC cells is not due to their failure to induce the gene-inducing and antiviral effects of IFN alpha.
PURPOSE: Although treatment with interferon-alpha (IFN alpha) results in tumor regression in a subset (< 20%) of patients with renal cell carcinoma, the underlying mechanisms for the resistance of renal cancer (RC) cells to IFN alpha is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 5 RC lines resistant and 5 RC lines sensitive to the antiproliferative effects of IFN alpha for differences in: 1) the number of IFN binding sites, 2) the number of signal-transducing IFNAR-1 chains of the IFN alpha receptor, 3) IFN alpha receptor structure, 4) IFN-stimulated gene (ISG) expression and 5) IFN alpha sensitivity in antiviral assays. RESULTS: No structural alterations in the IFN alpha receptor were detected in any RC line examined, although varying numbers of ligand binding sites and IFNAR-1 signal transducer chains were present. All 5 IFN-sensitive, and 4 of 5 IFN-resistant RC lines were sensitive to the antiviral and gene-inducing actions of IFN alpha. CONCLUSIONS: The resistance of RC lines to IFN's antiproliferative action is not due to defects in ligand binding or in IFN-receptor structure. Our results indicate that the defective antiproliferative response in most RC cells is not due to their failure to induce the gene-inducing and antiviral effects of IFN alpha.
Authors: Doron Levin; William M Schneider; Hans-Heinrich Hoffmann; Ganit Yarden; Alberto Giovanni Busetto; Ohad Manor; Nanaocha Sharma; Charles M Rice; Gideon Schreiber Journal: Sci Signal Date: 2014-05-27 Impact factor: 8.192
Authors: Andrea M Murphy; Dahlia M Besmer; Megan Moerdyk-Schauwecker; Natascha Moestl; David A Ornelles; Pinku Mukherjee; Valery Z Grdzelishvili Journal: J Virol Date: 2012-01-11 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Megan Moerdyk-Schauwecker; Nirav R Shah; Andrea M Murphy; Eric Hastie; Pinku Mukherjee; Valery Z Grdzelishvili Journal: Virology Date: 2012-12-14 Impact factor: 3.616
Authors: Vassiliki Saloura; Liang-Chuan S Wang; Zvi G Fridlender; Jing Sun; Guanjun Cheng; Veena Kapoor; Daniel H Sterman; Ronald N Harty; Atsushi Okumura; Glen N Barber; Richard G Vile; Mark J Federspiel; Stephen J Russell; Leslie Litzky; Steven M Albelda Journal: Hum Gene Ther Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 5.695
Authors: Ziyun Du; Meiyun Fan; Jong-Gwan Kim; Dara Eckerle; Leonard Lothstein; Lai Wei; Lawrence M Pfeffer Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2009-08-17 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Albrecht Reichle; Jochen Grassinger; Klaus Bross; Jochen Wilke; Thomas Suedhoff; Bernhard Walter; Wolf-Ferdinand Wieland; Anna Berand; Reinhard Andreesen Journal: Biomark Insights Date: 2007-02-07