Increased nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 expression predicts worse prognosis of prostate cancer patients treated with radical prostatectomy

Nuclear transcription factor Nrf2 suppresses prostate cancer cells growth and migration through upregulating ferroportin

VTo investigate the effect of nuclear transcription factor Nrf2 on the transcription of Ferroportin (FPN) in prostate cancer cells, and the regulation mechanisms of FPN on cell viability, migration and apoptosis of prostate cancer cells.Empty vectors, pEGFPC1-Nrf2, pEGFPC1-FPN, Si-FPN and Si-Nrf2 were transfected into prostate cancer cell line PC3. The expression of mRNA and protein were measured by real time-PCR (RT-PCR) and western blot. Cell viability, migration, cycle and apoptosis were tested by CCK-8 assay, wound healing and flow cytometry, respectively. The interaction between FPN and Nrf2 was confirmed by chromatin immunoprecipitation (CHIP) assay.The viability, migration and mitosis of PC3 cells could be repressed by over-expressed FPN, with decreased intracellular ferritin. The CHIP assay demonstrated that Nrf2 is one transcription factor of FPN and promotes its transcription. With the increase of Nrf2 in PC3 cells, the viability, migration ability and concentration of ferritin were suppressed, while the apoptosis rate was increased. The above effects were counteracted by down-regulating FPN.FPN could inhibit the prostate cancer cell viability, migration and mitosis, which is also related to a decrease of intracellular ferritin content. In conclusion, Nrf2 suppresses prostate cancer cells viability, migration, and mitosis through upregulating FPN.

The prognostic value of NRF2 in solid tumor patients: a meta-analysis

Nuclear factor E2-related factor 2 (NRF2), a transcription factor, is known as a potential therapeutic target of solid tumor for that it is a master regulator of the injury and inflammation response, including controlling antioxidant cell progress. Recent studies showed that NRF2 played significant roles in tumorigenesis and tumor progression, however no association and relationship between NRF2 expression and different clinical manifestation of solid tumor had been accurately evaluated. The present meta-analysis picked up 17 suitable articles from EMBASE, PubMed, and ISI Web of Science databases, including 2238 patients. Combined with results of hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), we concluded that a higher expression of NRF2 would have worse impact on overall survival (HR = 2.29, 95% CI 1.80–2.91, P < 0.05) and disease-free survival (HR = 2.34, 95% CI 1.36–4.00, P < 0.05) by a random-effect model. Moreover, further results were positively correlated to the clinical diagnosis, curative effect observation and prognosis, including tumor differentiation, lymph node metastasis, distant metastasis and clinical stage. Consequently, our data shown that NRF2 is a potential poor prognostic factor in a variety of solid tumors.

Overexpression of NRF2 is correlated with prognoses of patients with malignancies: A meta-analysis

Background

Previous published research has demonstrated that NRF2 expression is a poor prognostic factor for many malignancies. However, because of the small sample enrolled in a single study, it is difficult to draw valuable conclusions. Therefore, we hypothesized that NRF2 overexpression in cancer tissues may be associated with the prognoses of patients with solid malignancies, and conducted a systemic review and meta‐analysis.

Methods

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Science Direct, Embase, and Ovid databases for relevant studies regarding the role of NRF2 expression in solid malignancies was conducted. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted from these studies to provide pooled estimates of the effect of NRF2 expression on patients’ overall and disease‐free survival.

Results

Nine studies met the criteria for analysis. Statistical analysis demonstrated that compared to patients with low NRF2 expression, patients with overexpression of NRF2 had poorer overall survival (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.57–2.56; P < 0.001) and disease‐free survival (HR 3.25, 95% CI 1.29–8.15; P = 0.025).

Conclusion

Published evidence of the role of NRF2 expression in survival of cancer patients is limited. This analysis supports the view that NRF2 overexpression is a poor prognostic factor for solid malignancies, thus optimizing treatment for patients with NRF2 overexpression may improve their overall survival.