RESUMO
Anaplastic thyroid carcinoma (ATC) is almost universally fatal. Elevated keratin-8 (KRT8) protein expression is an established diagnostic cancer biomarker in several epithelial cancers (but not ATC). Several keratins, including KRT8, have been suggested to have a role in cell biology beyond that of structural cytoskeletal proteins. Here, we provide evidence that KRT8 plays a direct role in the growth of ATCs. Genomic and transcriptomic analysis of >5000 patients demonstrates that KRT8 mutation and copy number amplification are frequently evident in epithelial-derived cancers. Carcinomas arising from diverse tissues exhibit KRT8 mRNA and protein overexpression when compared to normal tissue levels. Similarly, in a panel of patient-derived ATC cell lines and patient tumors, KRT8 expression shows a similar pattern. sh-RNA-mediated KRT8 knockdown in these cell lines increases apoptosis, whereas forced overexpression of KRT8 confers resistance to apoptosis under peroxide-induced cell stress conditions. We further show that KRT8 protein binds to annexin A2, a protein known to mediate apoptosis as well as the redox pathway.
Assuntos
Biomarcadores Tumorais/genética , Carcinoma/metabolismo , Queratina-8/genética , Neoplasias da Glândula Tireoide/metabolismo , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anexina A2/metabolismo , Apoptose , Biomarcadores Tumorais/metabolismo , Carcinoma/genética , Carcinoma/patologia , Linhagem Celular Tumoral , Feminino , Dosagem de Genes , Humanos , Queratina-8/metabolismo , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mutação , Ligação Proteica , Neoplasias da Glândula Tireoide/genética , Neoplasias da Glândula Tireoide/patologia , Regulação para CimaRESUMO
Biochar produced by pyrolysis of organic residues is increasingly used for soil amendment and many other applications. However, analytical methods for its physical and chemical characterization are yet far from being specifically adapted, optimized, and standardized. Therefore, COST Action TD1107 conducted an interlaboratory comparison in which 22 laboratories from 12 countries analyzed three different types of biochar for 38 physical-chemical parameters (macro- and microelements, heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, pH, electrical conductivity, and specific surface area) with their preferential methods. The data were evaluated in detail using professional interlaboratory testing software. Whereas intralaboratory repeatability was generally good or at least acceptable, interlaboratory reproducibility was mostly not (20% < mean reproducibility standard deviation < 460%). This paper contributes to better comparability of biochar data published already and provides recommendations to improve and harmonize specific methods for biochar analysis in the future.