Lung cancer occurrence and associated mortality ranks top in all countries. Despite the rapid development of targeted and immune therapies, many patients experience relapse within a few years. It is urgent to uncover the mechanisms that drive lung cancer progression and identify novel molecular targets. Our group has previously identified FGF19 as a prognostic marker and potential driver gene of lung squamous cell carcinomas (LSQ) in Chinese smoking patients. However, the underlying mechanism of how FGF19 promotes the progression of LSQ remains unclear. In this study, we characterized and confirmed that FGF19 serves as an oncogenic driver in LSQ development and progression, and reported that the amplification and high expression of FGF19 in LSQ was significantly associated with poor overall and progression-free survival. A higher serum level of FGF19 was found in lung cancer patients, which could also serve as a novel diagnostic index to screen lung cancer. Overproduction of FGF19 in LSQ cells markedly promoted cell growth, progression and metastasis, while downregulating FGF19 effectively inhibited LSQ progression in vitro and in vivo. Moreover, downregulating the receptor FGFR4 was also effective to suppress the growth and migration of LSQ cells. Since FGF19 could be induced by smoking or endoplasmic reticulum stress, to tackle the more malignant FGF19-overproducing LSQ, we reported for the first time that inhibiting mTOR pathway by using AZD2014 was effective and feasible. These findings have offered a new strategy by using anti-FGF19/FGFR4 therapy or mTOR-based therapy in FGF19-driven LSQ.
Immune Check-Point Inhibitors (ICIs) have shown remarkable promise in treating tumors, including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Nevertheless, the treatment response rate is low. Studies have found that high expression of exosomal PD-L1 is one of the reasons for the low treatment response. Therefore, this study focused on the relationship of the exosomal PD-L1 and clinical response of immunotherapy in NSCLC patients to evaluate whether it could be used as a biomarker to predict the efficacy of ICIs. In this study, clinical information and blood samples of 149 NSCLC patients receiving ICIs were collected. The expression level of exosomal PD-L1 was detected by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay method, and the relationship between exosomal PD-L1 and the efficacy of ICIs was explored. Overall, our study found that the expression level of exosomal PD-L1 lower at pre-treatment, or the max fold increasing change higher at 3-6 weeks had higher disease control rate and longer progression free survival. It revealed that exosomal PD-L1 was associated with the treatment response of patients using ICIs and provided a new tool for the evaluation of clinical efficacy of lung cancer immunotherapy.
Background
Exosomes are nano-sized extracellular vesicles containing different biomolecules such as proteins and microRNAs (miRNAs) that mediate intercellular communication. Recently, numerous studies have reported the important functions of exosomal miRNAs in disease development and the potential clinical application as diagnostic biomarkers. Up to now, the most commonly used methods to extract exosomes are ultracentrifugation (UC) and precipitation-based commercial kit (e.g., ExoQuick). Generally, both UC and ExoQuick method could co-isolate contaminating proteins along with exosomes, with the UC method yielding even purer exosomes than ExoQuick. However, the comparison of these two methods on co-precipitated free miRNAs is still unknown.
Methods
In this study, we isolated exosomes from the human serum with exogenously added cel-miR-39 by UC and ExoQuick and compared the proportion of cel-miR-39 co-precipitated with exosomes extracted by these two methods.
Results
Using exogenous cel-miR-39 as free miRNAs in serum, we concluded that ExoQuick co-isolates a small proportion of free miRNAs while UC hardly precipitates any free miRNAs. We also found that incubation at 37 °C for 1 h could decrease the proportion of free miRNAs, and exosomal miRNAs like miR-126 and miR-152 also decreased when RNase A was used. In conclusion, our findings provide essential information about the details of serum exosome isolation methods for further research on exosomal miRNAs.
BackgroundExosomes are nano-sized extracellular vesicles containing different biomolecules such as proteins and microRNAs (miRNAs) that mediate intercellular communication. Recently, numerous studies have reported the important functions of exosomal miRNAs in disease development and the potential clinical application as diagnostic biomarkers. Up to now, the most commonly used methods to extract exosomes are ultracentrifugation (UC) and precipitation-based commercial kit (e.g., ExoQuick). Generally, both UC and ExoQuick method could co-isolate contaminating proteins along with exosomes, with the UC method yielding even purer exosomes than ExoQuick. However, the comparison of these two methods on co-precipitated free miRNAs is still unknown.ResultsIn this study, we isolated exosomes from the human serum with exogenously added cel-miR-39 by UC and ExoQuick and compared the proportion of cel-miR-39 co-precipitated with exosomes extracted by these two methods. Using exogenous cel-miR-39 as free miRNAs in serum, we concluded that ExoQuick co-isolates a small proportion of free miRNAs while UC hardly precipitates any free miRNAs. We also found that incubation at 37℃ for 1 h could decrease the proportion of free miRNAs, and exosomal miRNAs like miR-126 and miR-152 also decreased when RNase A was used.ConclusionsIn conclusion, our findings provide essential information about the details of serum exosome isolation methods for further research on exosomal miRNAs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.