Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24971483›Full record

ArticleCell death and differentiation2014

Death receptor-independent FADD signalling triggers hepatitis and hepatocellular carcinoma in mice with liver parenchymal cell-specific NEMO knockout.

H Ehlken, S Krishna-Subramanian, L Ochoa-Callejero, V Kondylis, N E Nadi, B K Straub, P Schirmacher, H Walczak, G Kollias, M Pasparakis

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cell death and differentiation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Prognostic significance and immune correlates of FADD in penile squamous cell carcinoma.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2023
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Regulation of apoptosis by ubiquitination in liver cancer.American journal of cancer research · 2023
    Review
  6. FADD as a key molecular player in cancer progression.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

H Ehlken1] Institute for Genetics, Center for Molecular Medicine (CMMC), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Joseph-Stelzmann-Strasse 26, Cologne D-50931, Germany [2] University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg D-20246, Germany.
S Krishna-SubramanianInstitute for Genetics, Center for Molecular Medicine (CMMC), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Joseph-Stelzmann-Strasse 26, Cologne D-50931, Germany.
L Ochoa-Callejero1] Institute for Genetics, Center for Molecular Medicine (CMMC), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Joseph-Stelzmann-Strasse 26, Cologne D-50931, Germany [2] Oncology Area, Center for Biomedical Research of La Rioja (CIBIR), 26006 Logroño, Spain.
V KondylisInstitute for Genetics, Center for Molecular Medicine (CMMC), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Joseph-Stelzmann-Strasse 26, Cologne D-50931, Germany.
N E NadiInstitute for Genetics, Center for Molecular Medicine (CMMC), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Joseph-Stelzmann-Strasse 26, Cologne D-50931, Germany.
B K StraubInstitute of Pathology, University Hospital Heidelberg, INF 224, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
P SchirmacherInstitute of Pathology, University Hospital Heidelberg, INF 224, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
H WalczakCentre for Cell Death, Cancer and Inflammation (CCCI), UCL Cancer Institute, University College London, 72 Huntley Street, WC1E 6BT London, UK.
G KolliasB.S.R.C. Alexander Fleming, 34 Fleming Street, Vari 16672, Greece.
M PasparakisInstitute for Genetics, Center for Molecular Medicine (CMMC), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Joseph-Stelzmann-Strasse 26, Cologne D-50931, Germany.
University of Cologne · DECologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging Associated Diseases · DEAlexander Fleming Biomedical Sciences Research Center · GRHeidelberg University · DEUniversity College London · GBUniversity Hospital Heidelberg · DE

Funding

Wellcome Trust 096831
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) usually develops in the context of chronic hepatitis triggered by viruses or toxic substances causing hepatocyte death, inflammation and compensatory proliferation of liver cells. Death receptors of the TNFR superfamily regulate cell death and inflammation and are implicated in liver disease and cancer. Liver parenchymal cell-specific ablation of NEMO/IKKγ, a subunit of the IκB kinase (IKK) complex that is essential for the activation of canonical NF-κB signalling, sensitized hepatocytes to apoptosis and caused the spontaneous development of chronic hepatitis and HCC in mice. Here we show that hepatitis and HCC development in NEMO(LPC-KO) mice is triggered by death receptor-independent FADD-mediated hepatocyte apoptosis. TNF deficiency in all cells or conditional LPC-specific ablation of TNFR1, Fas or TRAIL-R did not prevent hepatocyte apoptosis, hepatitis and HCC development in NEMO(LPC-KO) mice. To address potential functional redundancies between death receptors we generated and analysed NEMO(LPC-KO) mice with combined LPC-specific deficiency of TNFR1, Fas and TRAIL-R and found that also simultaneous lack of all three death receptors did not prevent hepatocyte apoptosis, chronic hepatitis and HCC development. However, LPC-specific combined deficiency in TNFR1, Fas and TRAIL-R protected the NEMO-deficient liver from LPS-induced liver failure, showing that different mechanisms trigger spontaneous and LPS-induced hepatocyte apoptosis in NEMO(LPC-KO) mice. In addition, NK cell depletion did not prevent liver damage and hepatitis. Moreover, NEMO(LPC-KO) mice crossed into a RAG-1-deficient genetic background-developed hepatitis and HCC. Collectively, these results show that the spontaneous development of hepatocyte apoptosis, chronic hepatitis and HCC in NEMO(LPC-KO) mice occurs independently of death receptor signalling, NK cells and B and T lymphocytes, arguing against an immunological trigger as the critical stimulus driving hepatocarcinogenesis in this model.

Indexed as

AnimalsApoptosisCarcinoma, HepatocellularFas-Associated Death Domain ProteinHepatitisI-kappa B KinaseIntracellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsLiver NeoplasmsMiceMice, KnockoutNF-kappa BReceptors, Death DomainReceptors, Tumor Necrosis Factor, Type IFadd protein, mouseFas-Associated Death Domain ProteinI-kappa B KinaseIntracellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsNEMO protein, mouseNF-kappa BReceptors, Death DomainReceptors, Tumor Necrosis Factor, Type I

Identifiers

PMID24971483
PMCPMC4211370
OpenAlexW1993153172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.