| Title |
Gossypol inhibits growth, invasiveness, and angiogenesis in human prostate cancer cells by modulating NF-κB/AP-1 dependent- and independent-signaling
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical & Experimental Metastasis, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10585-011-9439-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jiahua Jiang, Veronika Slivova, Andrej Jedinak, Daniel Sliva |
| Abstract |
Although previous studies demonstrated anticancer activities of gossypol through the induction of apoptosis, the molecular mechanism(s) responsible for the inhibitory effects of gossypol on the metastatic behavior of cancer cells remain to be elucidated. Here, we show that gossypol inhibits growth of human prostate cancer cells through the modulation of cell cycle regulatory proteins. We also demonstrate that gossypol inhibits invasive behaviors (adhesion, migration, and invasion) and angiogenesis. These effects are mediated by the suppression of AP-1 and NF-κB activity, resulting in the inhibition of secretion of urokinase plasminogen activator and vascular endothelial growth factor, and the down-regulation of expression of chemokine receptor 4 in PC3 cells. In summary, our data suggest that gossypol could have potential therapeutic effect for the treatment of invasive prostate cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 6% |
| China | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 16 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 22% |
| Researcher | 3 | 17% |
| Professor | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 17% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 December 2011.
All research outputs
#21,358,731
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Clinical & Experimental Metastasis
#662
of 778 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,273
of 248,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical & Experimental Metastasis
#13
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 778 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 248,400 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.