QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: mol.106.032284v1 mol.106.032284v2 71/5/1435    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lui, V. W. Y. Articles by Grandis, J. R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lui, V. W. Y. Articles by Grandis, J. R.

Antiproliferative Mechanisms of a Transcription Factor Decoy Targeting Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription (STAT) 3: The Role of STAT1

From the Department of Clinical Oncology, the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong (V.W.Y.L.); and Departments of Pathology (A.L.B.), Otolaryngology (P.K., R.J.L., M.O., E.C., M.F., J.R.G.), Pharmacology (D.J., J.R.G.), and Medicine (D.J.), University of Pittsburgh and University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

We previously developed a transcription factor decoy targeting signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) and reported antitumor activity in both in vitro and in vivo models of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). Based on the known existence of STAT1-STAT3 heterodimers, the high sequence homology between STAT1 and STAT3, as well as expression of both STAT1 and STAT3 in SCCHN, we examined whether the STAT3 decoy interferes with STAT1 signaling. SCCHN cell lines with different STAT1 expression levels (but similar STAT3 levels) were used. Both cell lines were sensitive to the growth-inhibitory effects of the STAT3 decoy compared with a mutant control decoy. Intact STAT1 signaling was demonstrated by interferon- (IFN-)-mediated induction of STAT1 phosphorylation (Tyr701) and interferon-regulatory factor-1 (IRF-1) expression. Treatment with the STAT3 decoy (but not a mutant control decoy) resulted in inhibition of IRF-1 protein expression in both cell lines, indicating specific inhibition of STAT1 signaling by the STAT3 decoy. Because STAT1 is a potential tumor suppressor, we also investigated whether STAT1 signaling mitigated the therapeutic efficacy of the STAT3 decoy. In both PCI-15B and UM-22B cells, STAT1 siRNA treatment resulted in decreased STAT1 expression, without altering the antitumor activity of the STAT3 decoy. Likewise, the antitumor effects of the STAT3 decoy were not altered by STAT1 activation upon IFN- treatment. These results suggest that the therapeutic mechanisms of STAT3 blockade using a transcription factor decoy are independent of STAT1 activation.

Address correspondence to: Jennifer Rubin Grandis, Suite 500, Eye and Ear Institute, 203 Lothrop Street, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15213. E-mail: jgrandis{at}pitt.edu

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. P. Sahu and S. K. Srivastava The Role of STAT-3 in the Induction of Apoptosis in Pancreatic Cancer Cells by Benzyl Isothiocyanate J Natl Cancer Inst, February 4, 2009; 101(3): 176 - 193. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]