Cell Death and Differentiation. Mar/31/2015; 22(4): 549-559

Published online Feb/5/2015

PMID: 25656654

PMC: 4356349

Science Direct: cdd20153

doi: 10.1038/cdd.2015.3

The role of CD95 and CD95 ligand in cancer

Abstract

Facts

CD95 is a surface receptor that has the capacity to mediate apoptosis induction in cancer cells.
To induce apoptosis, CD95 recruits a number of proapoptotic factors including caspase-8 to form the death-inducing signaling complex when stimulated by CD95 ligand (CD95L).
Immune cells (i.e., cytotoxic killer and natural killer cells) use CD95L as one mechanism to kill cancer cells or virus-infected cells.
Most cancer cells are resistant to CD95-mediated apoptosis.
CD95L can not be used systemically for cancer therapy because of the side effects due to apoptosis induction in hepatocytes.

Open Questions

Why do most if not all cancer cells express both CD95 and CD95L?
Why do cancer cells acquire mutations in CD95 usually only in one allele?
Why are the cancer cells that are sensitive to CD95-mediated apoptosis (at least in vitro) among the most sensitive of any cells?

CD95/CD95L in the Immune System

CD95 (Fas/APO-1/TNFRSF6), a cell surface protein that belongs to the tumor necrosis factor receptor family, can mediate apoptosis when bound to its natural ligand, CD95L (CD178/TNFSF6) or stimulated with agonistic antibodies. It is ubiquitously expressed in the body, but is particularly abundant in the thymus, liver, heart, and kidney. CD95L is predominantly expressed in activated T lymphocytes and natural killer cells, and is constitutively expressed in tissues of ‘immune-privilege sites' such as the testis and eye.¹ Experiments with mutant mice have demonstrated the importance of CD95-mediated apoptosis in the maintenance of cell homeostasis and in the deletion of useless or autoreactive T cells.^{1, 2, 3} A mutation found in the lpr (lymphoproliferation) mouse strain causes defective expression of CD95. Lpr mice develop lymphadenopathy and suffer from a systemic lupus erythematosus-like autoimmune disease.⁴ A second mouse strain (gld, generalized lymphoproliferative disease) expresses a mutant form of CD95L. Gld mice have an abnormal phenotype similar to lpr mice, which includes lpr and autoimmune disease.⁵ Complete knockout mice lacking either CD95 or CD95L expression also show an autoimmune phenotype that is more pronounced than the one seen in lpr or gld mice.^{6, 7, 8} A third mutant mouse strain with an lpr-like phenotype (lprcg) was found to have a point mutation (T to A) in the center of the CD95 cytoplasmic region. This mutation generates a receptor in which the ability to transduce an apoptotic signal is blocked.⁹ In a related human condition, autoimmune lymphoproliferative syndrome (ALPS),¹⁰ ALPS type Ia patients carry dominant-negative mutations in CD95 and type Ib patients have mutations in CD95L, resembling mice with lprcg and gld mutations, respectively.

Canonical Signaling of CD95 in Cancer

CD95 is predominantly located at the cell surface, where it has been shown to pre-associate in homotrimers.¹¹ Similar to all death receptors, CD95 carries a conserved stretch of 80 amino acids in its cytoplasmic tail, the death domain (DD), that is essential for apoptosis initiation.^{1, 12, 13} Upon binding of CD95L, the CD95 DD assembles the death-inducing signaling complex (DISC) composed of CD95, the adaptor molecule FADD (Fas-associated with a death domain), procaspase-8, procaspase-10, and the caspase-8/10 regulator c-FLIP.¹³ Activated caspase-8 then initiates the apoptotic program by cleaving various intracellular proteins resulting in the execution of apoptosis.¹⁴ Likely, the most established proapoptotic activity of CD95 is to mediate the apoptotic death of either virus-infected or cancer cells when engaged by a CD8+ cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL; Figure 1). In addition to the perforin/granzyme pathway¹⁵ and some indirect mechanisms involving cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-α (TNFα) and interferon-γ,^{16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23} CD95/CD95L is a direct major system that both CTLs as well as CD4+ cytolytic effector T cells use to eliminate neoplastically transformed cells.^{24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29} CD95 can also mediate receptor interacting protein (RIP)-1-dependent necroptosis under circumstances of caspase inhibition or knockdown of TRAF2.^{30, 31} However, the physiological relevance of this activity for cancer has not been established. Expression of CD95 and CD95L by cancer cells implies that they are themselves resistant to CD95-mediated apoptosis. Indeed, most cancer cells are relatively resistant to CD95-induced apoptosis even with high levels of CD95 at the surface of the cells.³² Cancer cells have multiple ways of becoming resistant to a possible apoptotic insult mediated by CD95. A common mechanism used by the cells is to regulate cell surface expression of the receptor.^{33, 34} The CD95 apoptotic signal can also be inhibited at the level of the DISC via increased expression of cFLIP (cellular FLICE inhibitory protein), which can inhibit the interactions of caspase-8 and -10 with the DISC,³⁵ or via reduced expression of FADD³⁶ or caspase-8.^{37, 38} Loss of apoptosis signaling through CD95 can also be the consequence of deregulation of the expression of the Bcl-2 family proteins or inhibitor of apoptosis proteins, thereby favoring tumor survival.³⁹

Other Activities of the Apoptosis-inducing Receptor CD95

In addition to the activities of CD95 and CD95L in mediating apoptosis induction, mostly in the contest of an immune response,^{1, 2, 3} it is now established that CD95 has multiple nonapoptotic activities.^{40, 41, 42, 43} For example, CD95 is required for efficient liver regeneration following partial hepatectomy;^{44, 45} CD95 activation stimulates renal tubular epithelial cell migration by a β8 integrin-dependent mechanism,⁴⁶ and CD95 provides a mitogenic signal in quiescent hepatic stellate cells through activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR).⁴⁷ CD95 is also important for neurite outgrowth.^{48, 49} CD95 and CD95L have additional, cancer-relevant, activities. We have identified at least five cancer-relevant activities of CD95 that could be targeted for cancer therapy, and one (apoptosis induction through CD95) that should not be (Figure 2).

Apoptosis induction through CD95

Apoptosis induction is the most well-established activity of CD95, documented by thousands of publications and summarized in numerous review articles (e.g., Nagata,¹ Peter and Krammer,¹³ and Nagata⁵⁰). In the context of cancer, it is relevant that CD95L is one of only a few molecules that immune cells use to activate apoptosis to kill cancer cells (Figure 1).⁵¹ Apoptosis induction as a cancer cell killing strategy is presumed to be accomplished by tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes expressing CD95L (Figure 2-1, apoptosis). Apoptosis induction in cancer cells through CD95 is the only scenario in which recombinant CD95L could be used for cancer therapy. However, given the fact that almost all established cancers express CD95, and the fact that most cancer cells are resistant to apoptosis induction, we would suggest that stimulating CD95 on cancer cells may not be an effective approach to killing cancer cells. In addition, stimulation of CD95 could never be used therapeutically because of major side effects such as massive apoptosis induction in the liver.⁵² Based on recent data, we propose that inhibiting the activity of CD95L or targeting CD95L mRNA may be more effective for cancer therapy than using CD95L to induce apoptosis in cancer cells:

The tumor strikes back

It has been demonstrated a number of times that expression of CD95L by apoptosis-resistant tumor cells enables a powerful ‘counterattack' against antitumor immune effector cells, such as cytotoxic killer cells, many of which are themselves sensitive to CD95L-mediated apoptosis^{53, 54, 55} (Figure 2-2, tumor counterattack). However, while there is some evidence for the occurrence of this counterattack, its existence remains controversial.⁵⁶ The reported increased concentration of soluble CD95L (sCD95L) in the serum of many cancer patients was often interpreted in the context of the CD95L counterattack theory (Table 1). Upregulation of CD95L in patient sera would suggest a possible immunosuppressive role for this molecule. However, the generalized immune suppression that would be expected from this situation could not be confirmed in cancer patients; thus, it may be that the increase in CD95L expression in tumor tissues has a more direct role in tumor progression.

The tumor endothelium expresses CD95L

Recently, the tumor strikes back concept was rediscovered in a different form. CD95L is expressed on the tumor endothelium in mice and humans^{57, 58} (Figure 2-3, endothelial cell barrier). CD95L was reported to be expressed by tumor epithelium of various human solid cancers but not by normal endothelial cells.⁵⁹ Tumor cells were found to cause upregulation of membrane-bound (m)CD95L on endothelial cells through the action of interleukin 10, prostaglandin E2, and vascular endothelial growth factor A. Interestingly, mCD95L only induced apoptosis of effector killer T cells but not of regulatory T cells, which were found to be protected by expression of a number of antiapoptotic proteins including cFLIP, Bcl-2, and Bcl-xL. This finding was supported by a syngeneic in vivo mouse model of ovarian cancer, in which it was demonstrated that expression of CD95L on endothelial cells causes reduced CD8 T-cell infiltration into the tumor. Finally, it was shown that mice treated with a neutralizing anti-CD95L antibody show increased infiltration of adoptively transferred tumor vaccine-primed CD8 T cells.⁵⁹ These data suggest that inhibiting endothelial CD95L expression could be a new therapeutic strategy to enhance the potency of adoptive transfer of antitumor T cells.

The tumor-promoting activities of CD95

Although the concept of inducing apoptosis in cancer cells using death ligands such as CD95L was intriguing, it was unlikely that the only function of CD95 was to induce apoptosis. As early as 1993,⁶⁰ it was recognized that CD95 also induces proliferation in various cell types such as T cells, liver cells, and neurons.^{45, 48, 49, 61, 62, 63} In 2004, we reported that stimulation of CD95 on 22 apoptosis-resistant cancer cell lines increases their motility and invasiveness in vitro.⁶⁴ In a study with cells from ALPS patients, as well as cellular and mouse model systems, we demonstrated that nonapoptotic signaling through CD95 involved activation of NF-κB and the three MAP kinases, Erk1/2, JNK1/2, and p38.^{64, 65, 66, 67} In addition, we demonstrated in various cancer cell lines that CD95-mediated invasiveness requires activation of NF-κB and ERK, and involves active caspase-8 and urokinase plasminogen activator.⁶⁴ It is now widely accepted that once cancer cells acquire resistance to CD95-mediated apoptosis, further stimulation of CD95 is tumorigenic (Figure 2-4, invasiveness and growth).^{64, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75} CD95L is expressed in two flavors, a membrane-bound form and a soluble form that is generated through cleavage of mCD95L by metalloproteinases.^{76, 77} mCD95L in vivo is essential for apoptosis induction, whereas sCD95L has nonapoptotic activities and may be the predominant tumor-promoting activity in vivo.⁷⁸ The concept that CD95 can be a tumor promoter has now gained wide acceptance, supported by a number of reports describing marked activities of CD95 in tumor growth and spread (Table 2).

CD95 is coupled to multiple potentially tumorigenic signaling pathways. CD95 was identified in a small hairpin RNA (shRNA) screen as a modifier that renders human lung adenocarcinomas resistant to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors through activation of NF-κB.⁷⁹ Others have demonstrated that CD95 mediates invasion via the Src/PI3K/GSK3β/MMP (matrix metalloproteinase) pathway;^{74, 80} however, the transactivation of tyrosine kinases by CD95 is incompletely understood. In colon cancer, it was shown that activated CD95 promotes the formation of cell protrusions through a new signaling pathway involving platelet-derived growth factor receptor-beta mediated phospholipase C-γ activation and phosphatidylinositol (4,5)-bisphosphate hydrolysis.⁸¹ The subsequent release of cofilin from the plasma membrane and the continued suppression of LIMK1 by Kras/RAF1 together allow robust activation of the cofilin pathway. Cofilin activation was shown to be required for CD95-stimulated formation of membrane protrusions and increased tumor cell invasion. Recently, metalloproteinase-cleaved CD95L was reported to trigger a motility-inducing signaling complex formation in triple-negative breast cancer cells.⁸² Most recently, it was shown that CD95-mediated activation of Sck/Shc2 is indispensable for cell cycle progression of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).⁸³ These data suggest that CD95 is connected to a myriad of prosurvival and migratory signaling pathways.

We recently tested the relevance of these nonapoptotic functions of CD95 and CD95L for cancer cells. We knocked down either CD95 or CD95L in numerous cancer cell lines using multiple small interfering RNA (siRNAs) and shRNAs. This resulted in a profound reduction in growth of the cancer cells.⁴⁴ In addition, we generated tissue-specific knockout mice lacking CD95 expression in the liver or on the surface epithelial cells of the ovaries. Using appropriate tumor mouse models, we found a severe reduction in liver cancer in mice lacking CD95 in hepatocytes (diethylnitrosamine injection model), and mice lacking CD95 in the ovaries barely developed cancer at all (using the Kras^D12G/pten−/− endometrioid ovarian cancer model⁸⁴). Finally, it was shown that mice that only express soluble but not mCD95L suffer from large histiocytic sarcomas in the liver,⁷⁸ likely owing to a lack of apoptosis induction and a tumorigenic activity of CD95L.

A number of studies reported CD95 as a positive prognostic marker for cancer.^{85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99} This is likely owing to the fact that CD95 is often downregulated during tumor progression because cancer cells need to lower the risk of undergoing apoptosis while benefiting from CD95's tumorigenic activities. Occasionally, CD95L was also described as a positive prognostic marker for cancer.^{86, 100, 101} However, the vast majority of reports have shown that disease progression is associated with progressively increased expression of CD95L and sometimes also CD95, and expression of both CD95 and especially of CD95L in most cases act as negative prognostic markers for many cancers (Table 1). In summary, most studies suggest that CD95 and/or CD95L expression promotes tumor growth and favors the establishment of tumor metastases.

Maintenance of CSCs by CD95 and CD95L

The cancer stem cell (CSC) model is an attractive hypothesis that translates properties of normal stem cells into the cancer field, and explains some of the most lethal features of cancers. The CSC model proposes that the cells within a tumor are hierarchically organized, and it predicts the existence of a subpopulation of cells with high tumorigenicity that are able to both self–renew and to generate differentiated cells (non-CSCs).^{102, 103} One of the most malignant features of cancer is the appearance of relapses, sometimes years after radiotherapy or chemotherapeutical intervention, and this has been related to the occurrence of cells with the CSC phenotype.¹⁰⁴ Therefore, elucidating the mechanisms of CSC maintenance is important for understanding tumor cell persistence and relapse, and may enable specific targeting of CSCs, a promising therapeutic strategy to stably eradicate cancer.^{105, 106}

CD95 and CD95 signaling have been connected to normal stem cells.^{45, 107} CD95 was, in fact, previously identified as a candidate stem cell marker (along with well-established stem cell markers such as Lin28, Oct4, Nanog, and Sox2, among others) in a serial analysis of gene expression profiling of human embryonic stem cells.¹⁰⁸ Functional evidence of a prosurvival function of CD95 and CD95L signaling in normal stem cells came from experiments that showed that the stimulation of CD95 signaling in neuronal stem cells did not cause death, but rather increased the survival of neuronal stem cells via a Src/PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway, while, conversely, deletion of CD95 resulted in reduced neurogenesis.¹⁰⁷ Because normal stem cells are often the origin of CSCs, these data were suggestive that CD95 may also have a nonapoptotic function in CSCs.

In the context of cancer, CD95 expression and CD95 signaling have been connected with the differentiation of cells. We reported this based on an analysis of the NCI-60 panel of cancer cells, which could be divided in two super-clusters with distinct differentiation stages that responded differently to CD95 stimulation.¹⁰⁹ Interestingly, expression of CD95 inversely correlated with expression of the stem cell-inhibiting members of the let-7 family of micro RNAs (miRNAs), and stimulation of CD95 caused a reduction in let-7 expression.¹¹⁰ Moreover, and related to this, CD95 has been shown to be capable of inducing the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) differentiation program in gastrointestinal cancer^{111, 112} (Figure 2-5, EMT and CSC maintenance). In these studies, the authors demonstrated that CD95 signaling inactivates GSK3β by ERK/mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling resulting in increased nuclear import and interaction between AP-1 and NFAT4. This increases their transcriptional activity leading to nuclear accumulation of Snail and β-catenin and miR-23a expression, and subsequently, downregulation of E-cadherin and upregulation of MMP9 and vimentin in vivo and in vitro.^{111, 113} EMT has been previously connected with the generation of cells with the properties of CSCs.¹¹⁴

We recently demonstrated that CD95 is required for the survival of CSCs and allows new CSCs to emerge¹¹⁵ (Figure 2-5, EMT and CSC maintenance). Stimulation of CD95 on multiple tumor cells induced a conversion from non-CSCs to CSCs. This reprogramming activity of CD95 was independent of its apoptosis-inducing function, as it was not blocked by the pan-caspase inhibitor zVAD-fmk; rather, it represents a mechanism of retro-differentiation. Strikingly, CSCs from highly apoptosis-sensitive HeyA8 ovarian cancer cells enriched in tumor spheres were found to be almost completely resistant to CD95-mediated apoptosis. For breast cancer, we could connect this novel function of CD95/CD95L to the activity of miR-200, a miRNA previously linked to both EMT and CSCs.^{114, 116, 117} miR-200c expression increased the sensitivity of cancer cells to CD95-mediated apoptosis.¹¹⁸ Stimulation of CD95 not only increased the number of cancer cells with stem cell traits but also prevented differentiation of CSCs, suggesting that CD95 expression on cancer cells maintains the CSC pool.¹¹⁵ A connection between CD95 and CSCs was recently also reported for PDAC.⁸³ CD95 expression strongly correlated with stemness and EMT markers and blocking CD95L reduced tumor growth and metastasis in vivo.

Death induced by CD95R/L elimination

Following up on our finding that CD95 contributes to the proliferation of cancer cells,⁴⁴ we recently reported that the elimination of either CD95 or CD95L kills cancer cells (in vitro and in vivo) in a process we termed DICE (death induced by CD95 or CD95L elimination)¹¹⁹ (Figure 2-6, DICE). This activity of CD95 as a survival factor seems to be mostly relevant to cancer cells, as none of the normal tissues during embryonic development in either CD95 or CD95L knockout mice showed a growth defect or signs of cell death.^{6, 7, 8} Consistently, we found increased sensitivity to DICE in ovarian surface epithelial cells after they were immortalized by expression of hTERT.¹¹⁹

We found that all cancer cells tested (~40 lines tested to date) substantially die by DICE when either CD95 or CD95L is knocked down. We used 15 different non-overlapping si/shRNAs against either of the two genes, and all induce DICE. We generated Tet-inducible vectors (pTIP) to express the shRNAs. They kill all cancer cells when doxycycline is added. In two ovarian cancer mouse models and one mouse model of chemically induced liver cancer, tumor formation was severely reduced in the absence of CD95.^{44, 119} In fact, a reanalysis of the tumor samples revealed that not a single cancer cell could be detected in any of the models that had deleted both alleles of CD95.¹¹⁹ We reported that DICE has the following properties:¹¹⁹

DICE represents a necrotic form of mitotic catastrophe with signs of apoptosis,¹¹⁹ autophagy, and senescence (unpublished data).
DICE is characterized by cell swelling and production of reactive oxygen species followed by DNA damage and activation of caspase-2, resulting in mitochondrial outer membrane permeabilization. Cells eventually die by a RIP1/mixed lineage-like kinase-independent mechanism. Although multiple cell death pathways are activated, RIPK-dependent necroptosis does not seem to be critical, suggesting that DICE induction may not cause inflammation.
DICE could not be inhibited by any of 1200 tested drugs or by knockdown of any single gene in a genome-wide shRNA screen,¹¹⁹ suggesting that it is a robust cell death mechanism that is difficult to block.

We recently postulated that DICE is a fail-safe mechanism, a dead man's switch, that prevents the survival of cancer cells that are devoid of CD95, and, hence, would not be eliminated by the immune system through CD95L/CD95-mediated apoptosis.¹²⁰ Thus, DICE is a naturally occurring antitumor defense mechanism. The observation that in tumor cells both alleles of CD95 are rarely if ever mutated or deleted (reviewed in Peter et al.⁴¹) is consistent with this interpretation. Our recent data show that all cancer cells autonomously produce a small amount of CD95L, suggesting that the loss of either CD95 or CD95L induces DICE, which is consistent with our observation that cancer cells never delete both alleles of CD95.¹¹⁹

Our study of CSCs revealed a crucial role for CD95 signaling in regulating cancer differentiation, and indicated that the two death mechanisms, DICE and canonical CD95-mediated apoptosis, have opposing roles in eliminating CSCs and non-CSCs. Conversion of non-CSCs to CSCs resulted in a loss of sensitivity to CD95-mediated apoptosis and a concomitant increase in the sensitivity of the cells to DICE.¹¹⁵ In fact, we found that DICE preferentially targets CSCs.¹¹⁵ When DICE was induced in multiple cancer cell lines or primary breast cancer cells, they became depleted of CSCs. Cells lost typical CSC surface markers, formed spheres less efficiently, and lost expression of endogenous CSC markers while becoming enriched in the stem cell-controlling miRNA miR-200c.

Targeting CD95L to Kill Cancer Cells

The data summarized above suggest that CD95 and CD95L act as oncogenes once cancer cells have become resistant to the apoptosis-inducing activity of CD95. The data further seem to suggest that the reason that cancer cells die after removal of either CD95 or CD95L is that they are addicted to their oncogenic activities. However, for the following reasons, we would argue that DICE is not the result of a broken oncogene addiction: (1) CD95 and CD95L intrinsically have tumor-suppressive activities in the context of the immune system (see above). (2) Elimination of CD95 or CD95L can kill any cancer cell we have tested, not just cells that overexpress CD95 or CD95L. In fact, CD95L expression in most cancer cells is barely detectable, yet elimination of CD95L induces DICE more effectively in cells that express less CD95L, perhaps because CD95L becomes rate limiting more easily. CD95 and CD95L may be the first identified tumor-suppressive genes that are so important that their loss (which could occur as neoplastically transformed cells continue to acquire mutations) triggers a fail-safe program to kill such cells. An interesting aspect of this model is that, by definition, the DICE mechanism has not been triggered in any cancer cell found in a cancer patient, the implication being that cancer cells do not become resistant to DICE, but they become resistant to apoptosis and may evade DICE by retaining expression of CD95 and CD95L.

Because neither CD95 nor CD95L knockout mice are known to exhibit any defects in the proliferation of any tissue and exhibit no defects in stem cell compartments,^{6, 7, 8} it is possible that CD95 or CD95L could be safely targeted for therapeutic purposes. Targeting CD95L systemically would block all the tumorigenic activities summarized in Figure 2.

Inducing DICE in Combination with Standard Chemotherapy

Although induction of DICE alone may be effective in killing cancer cells, the combination of induction of DICE with existing therapies and concepts may be beneficial in improving outcomes of cancer therapy. During our analysis of the role of CD95 in CSCs, we identified a strong synergy between DICE and CD95-mediated apoptosis in eradicating cancer.¹¹⁵ The synergy is a direct consequence of the differential sensitivities of CSCs and non-CSCs to the two death mechanisms. Thus, a therapy that combined the two death mechanisms could be beneficial to cancer treatment by targeting two differentiation stages of cancer development. It has been reported multiple times that many forms of chemotherapy act by inducing, at least in part, apoptosis in cancer cells, sometimes through upregulation of CD95L.^{121, 122} It is also established that cancer patients who become refractory to therapy have an increased CSC population,^{123, 124} which we recently showed to be more sensitive to DICE than non-CSCs. Thus, a combination of low-dose chemotherapy coupled with targeting CD95 may be beneficial as it should target both non-CSCs and CSCs. Targeting of CD95L could also be a beneficial addition to chemotherapy because chemotherapy-induced upregulation of CD95L has been suggested to not only drive cancer cells into apoptosis but to promote growth of drug resistant tumor cells.¹²⁵

Inducing DICE in Combination with Inhibition of Immune Checkpoint Receptors

An effective mechanism to treat certain cancers involves the mobilization of the immune system. Cancer cells have found ways to suppress the antitumor response mounted by the immune system, but recent successes of therapies that are aimed toward de-repressing the tumor-imposed block on the immune system are evidence of the power of these mechanisms. Anti-PDL1 and anti-PD-1 clinical trials have shown promising effects in melanoma, renal, colorectal, and non-small cell lung cancer patients, and, for the first time ever in the development of immune therapy, a sizeable fraction of patients were observed who had a durable response that increased their life span.^{126, 127, 128, 129} Based on these early data, one can predict that success in cancer therapy will come from harnessing natural mechanisms that control cancer in general (e.g., an antitumor immune response) rather than from cancer-specific strategies. Empowering the immune system by targeting immune check point signaling and simultaneously attacking the cancer cells by inducing DICE may represent a viable combination of therapies both of which activate preexisting antitumor mechanisms.

Conclusions and Perspectives

Using CD95L for cancer therapy was never a viable option to treat cancer because of its devastating effects on the liver. Accumulating evidence now suggests that cancer cells can never lose CD95 or CD95L and if they do, they die. This provides an opportunity to use targeting either CD95 or CD95L to treat cancer. However, there are many open questions that need to be addressed first. Although excess of CD95L secreted by tumor cells may drive EMT and stemness and render tumor cells more motile and invasive, it is not clear whether targeting this secreted protein will be enough to block the tumor-promoting activities of CD95 and CD95L. In our hands, blocking the activity of extracellular CD95L has had no effect on cell viability.¹¹⁹ In addition, recent data suggest that both CD95L and CD95 are located in intracellular stores,¹¹⁹ hence they may exert their activity to protect cancer cells from DICE from within the cell. It may therefore be necessary to target the intracellular proteins or the mRNAs of CD95 and CD95L. This will require development of more efficient ways to deliver siRNAs to cells or the development of new technologies to eliminate genes from cells all together (i.e., using the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/Cas9 system).

Figure 1

The canonical apoptosis-inducing function of the CD95/CD95L system in killing cancer cells. Cancer cells that are recognized by CTLs in an antigen-specific way are being attacked by direct mechanisms: release of perforin/granzyme (shown as GrB) or use of CD95L to engage CD95 on the surface of cancer cells. Alternatively, indirect mechanisms are activated that result in upregulation of cytokines such as TNFα and INFγ, which in turn cause upregulation of CD95 and MHC-I (by IFNγ) or induction of cell death through cancer-expressed TNF receptors (by TNFα). Ag, antigen; CTL, cytotoxic lymphocyte; GrB, granzyme B; IFNγ, interferon γ; MHC-I, major histocompatibility complex I; TCR, T-cell receptor; TNFα, tumor necrosis factor α

Figure 2

Graphical summary of the role of CD95/CD95L in cancer. Together with the tumor-suppressing ability to trigger apoptosis in (apoptosis sensitive) cancer cells (1), CD95L has a range of tumor-promoting activities, some of which are indirect, such as the suppression of the immune response in the cancer micro-environment by either tumor-generated CD95L (2) or by CD95L expressed by endothelial cells (3), and some of which are direct, such as the promotion of tumor growth and invasiveness (4) or the acquisition of a CSC phenotype (5). Importantly, a low-baseline level of CD95/CD95L signaling is required for survival of cancer cells. Elimination of CD95/CD95L signaling leads to an irreversible and effective type of cell death, DICE, which predominantly affects CSCs (6). CSC, cancer stem cell, CTL; cytotoxic T lymphocyte; IL-10, interleukin 10; EMT, epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition; PGE2, prostaglandin E2; TIL, tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte; VEGF-A, vascular endothelial growth factor A. Stippled arrows indicate hypothetical interactions

Table 1

Tumor-promoting activities of CD95 and CD95L in clinical studies

Cancer type	Observation	Reference
Gynecological malignancies	aHigh serum CD95 was a negative prognostic marker for cervical, endometrial, and ovarian cancer	bKonno et al.¹³⁰
B-CLL	aHigh serum CD95 was a negative prognostic marker	Osorio et al.¹³¹
Bladder cancer	CD95L expression (PCR) higher in cancer	bMuschen et al.¹³²
	aSerum CD95L correlated with disease progression	Mizutani et al.¹³³
	aSerum CD95 and CD95L were negative prognostic indicators	Mizutani et al.¹³⁴
	A correlation existed between CD95L expression (IHC) and high tumor grade and stage	bChopin et al.¹³⁵
	Urine CD95 level was significantly higher in cases with recurrent disease	Yang et al.¹³⁶
Breast cancer	CD95L (IHC, PCR, WB) upregulated in cancer	bGutierrez et al.¹³⁷
	aCD95L (IHC) correlated with lymph nodes metastasis and larger tumor size	Mottolese et al.¹³⁸
	aCD95L/CD95 ratio >1 (PCR) correlated with worst prognosis	Reimer et al.¹³⁹
	CD95L expression (IHC, PCR, WB) higher in cancer	bMullauer et al.¹⁴⁰
	aSerum CD95L was a negative prognostic indicator	bBewick et al.¹⁴¹
	aCD95L (IHC) correlated with worse overall survival	Munakata et al.¹⁴²
Cervical cancer	Serum levels of CD95L higher in cancer and correlating with CD95L in tumors	bSong et al.¹⁴³
	CD95L expression (IHC) higher in cancer, correlating with disease progression	bWu et al.¹⁴⁴
Cervical squamous cell carcinoma	aCD95L overproduction (IHC) was more frequent in advanced-stage tumors and was inversely related to survival	bLerma et al.¹⁴⁵
Colon cancer	Metastasizing subpopulations of colorectal tumor cells express CD95L more frequently (RT-PCR) than the primary carcinomas	bMann et al.¹⁴⁶
	A positive linear correlation was found between CD95L expression (IHC) and tumor progression throughout the colorectal adenoma–carcinoma sequence	Belucco et al.¹⁴⁷
	High CD95L (IHC) expression correlated with lymph node involvement and distant metastases	bNozoe et al.¹⁴⁸
	CD95L expression (IHC) higher in cancer, correlating with disease progression	bZhang et al.¹⁴⁹
	Locally aggressive and metastatic human colon tumors express CD95L	Li et al.¹⁵⁰
	aHigh serum CD95L levels were associated with poor survival	Hoogwater et al.¹⁵¹
	CD95L expression (IHC) correlated with disease progression	Kykalos et al.¹⁵²
	CD95L expression (IHC) increased during cancer progression	Zheng et al.¹¹²
	aHigh CD95L expression (IHC) was significantly correlated with disease recurrence following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy	bSaigusa et al.¹⁵³
Esophageal squamous cell	CD95L expression (IHC) correlated with metastases but had no impact on survival	bShibakita et al.⁹⁴
carcinoma	aSerum CD95L was a negative prognostic indicator	bTsutsumi et al.¹⁵⁴
	aLonger disease-free survival for CD95L (IHC)-negative tumors	Kase et al.⁹⁷
Gastric cancer	Serum levels of CD95L higher in cancer	Ichikura et al.¹⁵⁵
	aCD95L-positivity (IHC) correlated with lymph node metastases and poor outcome	bNagashima et al.¹⁵⁶
	Upregulation of CD95L (IHC) correlated with the tumor progression	bOsaki et al.¹⁵⁷
	CD95L expression was significantly correlated with tumor size, invasive depth, and metastasis	bZheng et al.¹⁵⁸
	CD95L (IHC) upregulated in cancer	bNada et al.¹⁵⁹
Hepatocellular carcinoma	Serum levels of CD95L higher in cancer	Tanaka et al.¹⁶⁰
	Serum levels of CD95L higher in cancer	El Bassiouny et al.¹⁶¹
Large granular lymphocytic leukemia	Serum levels of CD95L higher in cancer	Tanaka et al.¹⁶⁰
Natural killer cell lymphoma	Ascites-derived ovarian cancer cells secrete soluble CD95L (WB)	bAbrahams et al.¹⁶²
Ovarian cancer	aCD95L (IHC)-positive cases showed a less favorable prognosis than those without CD95L expression	Munakata et al.¹⁶³
	High CD95L expression (WB) is found in tumor-derived membrane fragments and in endometrial cancer correlates with the stage of the disease	bTaylor et al.¹⁶⁴
	aPatients with a high post- and pre-operative CD95L serum expression ratio (ELISA) had worse prognosis to chemotherapy	Chaudhry et al.¹⁶⁵
Ovarian and endometrial cancer	Serum soluble CD95 and CD95L correlated with disease progression	bBellone et al.¹⁶⁶
Pancreatic cancer	Serum levels of CD95L higher in cancer	Hazar et al.¹⁶⁷
	CD95 expression (gene array and IHC) correlated with stemness and EMT markers and was also in metastatic versus primary pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma	Teodorczyk et al.⁸³
Pediatric ALL, B-cell NHL	aHigh CD95 (IHC) associated with lymph node metastasis and worse survival	Macher-Goeppinger et al.¹⁶⁸
Renal cancer	aHigh CD95/CD95L (IHC) neoplastic cells showed a more aggressive clinical behavior	Somma et al.¹⁶⁹
	aHigh CD95 (PCR) correlated with worse overall survival	Sejima et al.¹⁷⁰
Oral squamous cell carcinoma	aCD95-positive cancers (IHC) had a better response to chemotherapy and outcome	Muraki et al.¹⁷¹
	CD95L expression (IHC) increased in cancer especially in patients with lymph node metastases	bFang et al.¹⁷²
Testicular germ cell cancer	CD95L expression (PCR) higher in cancer	Hara et al.¹⁷³
	CD95L expression (IHC, PCR, WB) higher in cancer	bBaldini et al.¹⁷⁴
Thyroid cancer	CD95L (IHC) upregulated in cancer	Rzeszutko et al.¹⁷⁵
	aPatients with recurrence had higher levels of soluble CD95L expression	Owonikoko et al.¹⁷⁶

Abbreviations: ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia; CLL, chronic lymphocytic leukemia; ELISA, enzyme-linked immune assay; IHC, immunohistochemistry; NHL, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma; WB, western blotting

aCD95 or CD95L served as prognostic marker

bIn these reports, upregulation of CD95L in cancer was solely discussed in the context of the CD95L counterattack model

Table 2

Tumor-promoting activities of CD95 and CD95L in vitro and in mouse models

Cancer type	Observation	Reference
Multiple cancers	Stimulation of 22 breast, ovarian, lung, colon, renal, melanoma, or glioblastoma cancer cell lines through CD95 caused them to increase in motility and invasiveness by activating NF-κB and MAP kinase pathways and upregulation of uPA	Barnhart et al.⁶⁴
	Knockdown of either CD95 or CD95L resulted in reduced growth of ovarian, liver, colon, and breast cancer cell lines in vitro, and of ovarian cancer cell lines in xenografted mice	Chen et al.⁴⁴
	In lung cancer, GBM and hepatocellular carcinoma cell lines CD95L increased motility and cell growth through binding to c-Met	Lin et al.¹⁷⁷
	Knockdown of either CD95 or CD95L resulted in induction of cell death in 12 cancer cell lines representing ovarian, liver, breast, cervical, colon, renal cancer, neuroblastoma, or glioblastoma	Hadji et al.¹¹⁹
	Stimulation of CD95 on breast, ovarian, renal, colon cancer, and glioblastoma cell lines increases cancer stemness	Ceppi et al.¹¹⁵
Breast cancer	Stimulation of CD95 on triple-negative breast cancer cells by soluble CD95L resulted in Yes/Orai1/EGFR/PI3K-mediated migration	Malleter et al.⁸²
	Blockade of CD95 signaling in 4T1 cancer cells markedly reduced tumor growth, inhibited tumor metastasis in vivo, and prolonged survival of tumor-bearing mice	Liu et al.¹⁷⁸
Colon cancer	Expression of CD95L on colon cancer cells greatly increased their local growth and ability to metastasize to the liver	Li et al.¹⁵⁰
	CD95-driven liver metastasis of CD95-stimulated colon cancer cells is dependent on oncogenic Kras	Hoogwater et al.⁷⁰
	Radiofrequency ablation of colorectal liver metastases induced hypoxia, which caused autocrine activation of CD95-promoting local invasion and accelerated metastasis outgrowth	Nijkamp et al.⁷⁵
	CD95 triggering resulted in an increased metastatic ability and activation of EMT in cells resistant to oxaliplatin	Ametller et al.¹²⁵
	CD95 stimulation induced phosphorylation of phospholipase C-γ1 through the platelet-derived growth factor receptor-β, resulting in phosphatidylinositol (4,5)-bisphosphate (PIP2) hydrolysis, liberating cofilin from the plasma membrane to initiate cortical actin remodeling in turn increasing tumor cell invasion	Steller et al.⁸¹
Gastrointestinal cancer	CD95 stimulation induced ERK1/2-driven EMT and motility	Zheng et al.¹¹²
Hepatocellular carcinoma	Neutralizing CD95L in a transgenic model of hepatocellular carcinogenesis reduced both inflammation and tumor formation	Nakamoto et al.¹⁷⁹
	Mice with a point mutation in the CD95 DD expressed only on non-hematopoietic cells developed spontaneous liver cancer independent of the lack of apoptosis induction through CD95	Park et al.¹⁸⁰
	Mice with tissue-specific deletion of CD95 in hepatocytes showed a 50% reduce occurrence of DEN-induced liver cancer	Chen et al.⁴⁴
Histiocytic sarcoma	Cancer formed in the liver of mice engineered to express only soluble and lacking expression of membrane-bound CD95L	La et al.⁷⁸
Lung cancer	CD95 overexpressing Lewis lung carcinoma (3LL) cells grew faster in vivo in syngeneic mice when compared with control-transfected cells	Lee et al.⁶⁸
	CD95 ligation induced 3LL cells to produce the proinflammatory factor PGE2 by activating p38 contributing to CD95 ligation-induced chemoattraction of myeloid-derived suppressor cells	Zhang et al.⁶⁹
	CD95-mediated activation of NF-κB was found to contribute to the resistance of lung cancer to a EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor	Bivona et al.⁷⁹
Melanoma	Stimulation of B16 cells by exosome-derived CD95L in vitro activates NF-κB and ERK, and in vivo increases migration to the lung	Cai et al.¹⁸¹
Ovarian cancer	Mice lacking expression of CD95 in the surface epithelial cells of the ovaries barely developed cancer in a mouse model of endometrioid ovarian cancer driven by oncogenic Kras and deletion of pten	Chen et al.⁴⁴
	Tissue-specific deletion of CD95 in the ovaries resulted in an increase in inflammation in the ovaries and reduced tumor development in a model of low-grade ovarian cancer driven by oncogenic Kras and deletion of pten. All outgrowing cancer cells still expressed at least one allele of wt CD95	Hadji et al.¹¹⁹
Pancreatic cancer	Stimulation of TRAF2 overexpressing cells resulted in increased invasiveness by activating NF-κB and AP-1 resulting in upregulated uPA	Trauzold et al.⁷³
	Stimulation of CD95 on FADD knockdown cell lines mediated cell survival by recruiting calmodulin and Src resulting in activation of ERK	Yuan et al.⁷²
	CD95 was identified as upregulated on cancer stem cells driving cell cycle progression by using Sck. Invasiveness and tumor growth could be inhibited in vivo by blocking CD95L	Teodorczyk et al.⁸³
Thyroid cancer	Stimulation of CD95 induced cell growth through ERK, NF-κB, and AP-1	Mitsiades et al.¹⁸²

Footnotes

Edited by G Melino

Acknowledgments

SB and WP are supported in part by NIH/NCI training grant T32CA09560. PC is supported by a DOD postdoctoral fellowship W81XWH-13-1-0301. MEP is supported by R01 CA149356.

ALPSautoimmune lymphoproliferative syndrome

CTLcytotoxic lymphocyte

DENdiethylnitrosamine

CD95LCD95 ligand

CSCcancer stem cell

DDdeath domain

DICEdeath induced by CD95R/L elimination

DISCdeath-inducing signaling complex

EGFRepidermal growth factor receptor

EMTepithelial-to-mesenchymal transition

FADDFas-associated with a death domain

cFLIPcellular FLICE inhibitory protein

lprlymphoproliferation

gldgeneralized lymphoproliferative disease

mCD95Lmembrane-bound CD95L

MMPmatrix metalloproteinase

PDACpancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

PI3Kphosphoinositide-3 kinase

RIPreceptor interacting protein

sCD95Lsoluble CD95L

shRNAsmall hairpin RNA

siRNAsmall interfering RNA

TNFtumor necrosis factor

zVAD-fmkcarbobenzoxy-valyl-alanyl-aspartyl-[O-methyl]- fluoromethylketone

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

1. NagataSApoptosis by death factorCell199788355365[PubMed][Google Scholar]
2. KrammerPHCD95's deadly mission in the immune systemNature2000407789795[PubMed][Google Scholar]
3. PeterMEBarnhartBCAlgeciras-SchimnichAThe Cytokine Handbook: CD95L/FasL and its receptor CD95 (APO-1/Fas)Cytokine Handb20032885911[Google Scholar]
4. Watanabe-FukunagaRBrannanCICopelandNGJenkinsNANagataSLymphoproliferation disorder in mice explained by defects in Fas antigen that mediates apoptosisNature1992356314317[PubMed][Google Scholar]
5. TakahashiTTanakaMBrannanCIJenkinsNACopelandNGSudaTGeneralized lymphoproliferative disease in mice, caused by a point mutation in the Fas ligandCell199476969976[PubMed][Google Scholar]
6. AdachiMSuematsuSKondoTOgasawaraJTanakaTYoshidaNTargeted mutation in the Fas gene causes hyperplasia in peripheral lymphoid organs and liverNat Genet199511294300[PubMed][Google Scholar]
7. KarraySKressCCuvellierSHue-BeauvaisCDamotteDBabinetCComplete loss of Fas ligand gene causes massive lymphoproliferation and early death, indicating a residual activity of gld alleleJ Immunol200417221182125[PubMed][Google Scholar]
8. SenjuSNegishiIMotoyamaNWangFNakayamaKLucasPJFunctional significance of the Fas molecule in naive lymphocytesInt Immunol19968423431[PubMed][Google Scholar]
9. KimuraMMatsuzawaAAutoimmunity in mice bearing lprcg: a novel mutant geneInt Rev Immunol199411193210[PubMed][Google Scholar]
10. BidereNSuHCLenardoMJGenetic disorders of programmed cell death in the immune systemAnnu Rev Immunol200624321352[PubMed][Google Scholar]
11. SiegelRMFrederiksenJKZachariasDAChanFKJohnsonMLynchDFas preassociation required for apoptosis signaling and dominant inhibition by pathogenic mutationsScience200028823542357[PubMed][Google Scholar]
12. Algeciras-SchimnichAShenLBarnhartBCMurmannAEBurkhardtJKPeterMEMolecular ordering of the initial signaling events of CD95Mol Cell Biol200222207220[PubMed][Google Scholar]
13. PeterMEKrammerPHThe CD95(APO-1/Fas) DISC and beyondCell Death Differ2003102635[PubMed][Google Scholar]
14. MedemaJPScaffidiCKischkelFCShevchenkoAMannMKrammerPHFLICE is activated by association with the CD95 death-inducing signaling complex (DISC)EMBO J19971627942804[PubMed][Google Scholar]
15. KagiDLedermannBBurkiKSeilerPOdermattBOlsenKJCytotoxicity mediated by T cells and natural killer cells is greatly impaired in perforin-deficient miceNature19943693137[PubMed][Google Scholar]
16. BraunMYLowinBFrenchLAcha-OrbeaHTschoppJCytotoxic T cells deficient in both functional fas ligand and perforin show residual cytolytic activity yet lose their capacity to induce lethal acute graft-versus-host diseaseJ Exp Med1996183657661[PubMed][Google Scholar]
17. WinterHHuHMUrbaWJFoxBATumor regression after adoptive transfer of effector T cells is independent of perforin or Fas ligand (APO-1L/CD95L)J Immunol199916344624472[PubMed][Google Scholar]
18. QinZSchwartzkopffJPraderaFKammertoensTSeligerBPircherHA critical requirement of interferon gamma-mediated angiostasis for tumor rejection by CD8+ T cellsCancer Res20036340954100[PubMed][Google Scholar]
19. BohmWThomaSLeithauserFMollerPSchirmbeckRReimannJT cell-mediated, IFN-gamma-facilitated rejection of murine B16 melanomasJ Immunol1998161897908[PubMed][Google Scholar]
20. WiggintonJMGruysEGeiselhartLSubleskiJKomschliesKLParkJWIFN-gamma and Fas/FasL are required for the antitumor and antiangiogenic effects of IL-12/pulse IL-2 therapyJ Clin Invest20011085162[PubMed][Google Scholar]
21. KowalczykDWWlazloAPGiles-DavisWKammerARMukhopadhyaySErtlHCVaccine-induced CD8+ T cells eliminate tumors by a two-staged attackCancer Gene Ther200310870878[PubMed][Google Scholar]
22. BarthJrRJMuleJJSpiessPJRosenbergSAInterferon gamma and tumor necrosis factor have a role in tumor regressions mediated by murine CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytesJ Exp Med1991173647658[PubMed][Google Scholar]
23. Prevost-BlondelARothERosenthalFMPircherHCrucial role of TNF-alpha in CD8 T cell-mediated elimination of 3LL-A9 Lewis lung carcinoma cells in vivoJ Immunol200016436453651[PubMed][Google Scholar]
24. LowinBHahneMMattmannCTschoppJCytolytic T-cell cytotoxicity is mediated through perforin and Fas lytic pathwaysNature1994370650652[PubMed][Google Scholar]
25. KagiDVignauxFLedermannBBurkiKDepraetereVNagataSFas and perforin pathways as major mechanisms of T cell-mediated cytotoxicityScience1994265528530[PubMed][Google Scholar]
26. KojimaHShinoharaNHanaokaSSomeya-ShirotaYTakagakiYOhnoHTwo distinct pathways of specific killing revealed by perforin mutant cytotoxic T lymphocytesImmunity19941357364[PubMed][Google Scholar]
27. RouvierELucianiMFGolsteinPFas involvement in Ca(2+)-independent T cell-mediated cytotoxicityJ Exp Med1993177195200[PubMed][Google Scholar]
28. StalderTHahnSErbPFas antigen is the major target molecule for CD4+ T cell-mediated cytotoxicityJ Immunol199415211271133[PubMed][Google Scholar]
29. JuSTCuiHPankaDJEttingerRMarshak-RothsteinAParticipation of target Fas protein in apoptosis pathway induced by CD4+ Th1 and CD8+ cytotoxic T cellsProc Natl Acad Sci USA19949141854189[PubMed][Google Scholar]
30. HollerNZaruRMicheauOThomeMAttingerAValituttiSFas triggers an alternative, caspase-8-independent cell death pathway using the kinase RIP as effector moleculeNat Immunol20001489495[PubMed][Google Scholar]
31. KarlIJossberger-WernerMSchmidtNHornSGoebelerMLeverkusMTRAF2 inhibits TRAIL- and CD95L-induced apoptosis and necroptosisCell Death Dis20145e1444[PubMed][Google Scholar]
32. Algeciras-SchimnichAPietrasEMBarnhartBCLegembrePVijayanSHolbeckSLTwo CD95 tumor classes with different sensitivities to antitumor drugsProc Natl Acad Sci USA20031001144511450[PubMed][Google Scholar]
33. IvanovVNLopez BergamiPMaulitGSatoTASassoonDRonaiZFAP-1 association with Fas (Apo-1) inhibits Fas expression on the cell surfaceMol Cell Biol20032336233635[PubMed][Google Scholar]
34. IvanovVNRonaiZHeiTKOpposite roles of FAP-1 and dynamin in the regulation of Fas (CD95) translocation to the cell surface and susceptibility to Fas ligand-mediated apoptosisJ Biol Chem200628118401852[PubMed][Google Scholar]
35. IrmlerMThomeMHahneMSchneiderPHofmannKSteinerVInhibition of death receptor signals by cellular FLIPNature1997388190195[PubMed][Google Scholar]
36. TourneurLMistouSMichielsFMDevauchelleVReniaLFeunteunJLoss of FADD protein expression results in a biased Fas-signaling pathway and correlates with the development of tumoral status in thyroid follicular cellsOncogene20032227952804[PubMed][Google Scholar]
37. FuldaSKuferMUMeyerEvan ValenFDockhorn-DworniczakBDebatinKMSensitization for death receptor- or drug-induced apoptosis by re-expression of caspase-8 through demethylation or gene transferOncogene20012058655877[PubMed][Google Scholar]
38. TeitzTWeiTValentineMBVaninEFGrenetJValentineVACaspase 8 is deleted or silenced preferentially in childhood neuroblastomas with amplification of MYCNNat Med20006529535[PubMed][Google Scholar]
39. IgneyFHKrammerPHDeath and anti-death: tumour resistance to apoptosisNat Rev Cancer20022277288[PubMed][Google Scholar]
40. PeterMEBuddRCDesbaratsJHedrickSMHueberAONewellMKThe CD95 receptor: apoptosis revisitedCell2007129447450[PubMed][Google Scholar]
41. PeterMELegembrePBarnhartBCDoes CD95 have tumor promoting activitiesBiochim Biophys Acta200517552536[PubMed][Google Scholar]
42. Martin-VillalbaALlorens-BobadillaEWollnyDCD95 in cancer: tool or targetTrends Mol Med201319329335[PubMed][Google Scholar]
43. WajantHPfizenmaierKScheurichPNon-apoptotic Fas signalingCytokine Growth Factor Rev2003145366[PubMed][Google Scholar]
44. ChenLParkSMTumanovAVHauASawadaKFeigCCD95 promotes tumour growthNature2010465492496[PubMed][Google Scholar]
45. DesbaratsJNewellMKFas engagement accelerates liver regeneration after partial hepatectomyNat Med20006920923[PubMed][Google Scholar]
46. JaradGWangBKhanSDeVoreJMiaoHWuKFas activation induces renal tubular epithelial cell beta 8 integrin expression and function in the absence of apoptosisJ Biol Chem20022774782647833[PubMed][Google Scholar]
47. ReinehrRSommerfeldAHaussingerDCD95 ligand is a proliferative and antiapoptotic signal in quiescent hepatic stellate cellsGastroenterol200813414941506[Google Scholar]
48. DesbaratsJBirgeRBMimouni-RongyMWeinsteinDEPalermeJSNewellMKFas engagement induces neurite growth through ERK activation and p35 upregulationNat Cell Biol20035118125[PubMed][Google Scholar]
49. ZulianiCKleberSKlussmannSWengerTKenzelmannMSchreglmannNControl of neuronal branching by the death receptor CD95 (Fas/Apo-1)Cell Death Differ2006133140[PubMed][Google Scholar]
50. NagataSFas ligand-induced apoptosisAnnu Rev Genet1999332955[PubMed][Google Scholar]
51. StrasserAJostPJNagataSThe many roles of FAS receptor signaling in the immune systemImmunity200930180192[PubMed][Google Scholar]
52. OgasawaraJWatanabe-FukunagaRAdachiMMatsuzawaAKasugaiTKitamuraYLethal effect of the anti-Fas antibody in miceNature1993364806809[PubMed][Google Scholar]
53. IgneyFHBehrensCKKrammerPHTumor counterattack—concept and realityEur J Immunol200030725731[PubMed][Google Scholar]
54. ChappellDBRestifoNPT cell-tumor cell: a fatal interactionCancer Immunol Immunother1998476571[PubMed][Google Scholar]
55. O'ConnellJO'SullivanGCCollinsJKShanahanFThe Fas counterattack: Fas-mediated T cell killing by colon cancer cells expressing Fas ligandJ Exp Med199618410751082[PubMed][Google Scholar]
56. IgneyFHKrammerPHTumor counterattack: fact or fictionCancer Immunol Immunother20055411271136[PubMed][Google Scholar]
57. YuJSLeePKEhteshamMSamotoKBlackKLWheelerCJIntratumoral T cell subset ratios and Fas ligand expression on brain tumor endotheliumJ Neurooncol2003645561[PubMed][Google Scholar]
58. BajouKPengHLaugWEMaillardCNoelAFoidartJMPlasminogen activator inhibitor-1 protects endothelial cells from FasL-mediated apoptosisCancer Cell200814324334[PubMed][Google Scholar]
59. MotzGTSantoroSPWangLPGarrabrantTLastraRRHagemannISTumor endothelium FasL establishes a selective immune barrier promoting tolerance in tumorsNat Med201420607615[PubMed][Google Scholar]
60. AldersonMRArmitageRJMaraskovskyEToughTWRouxESchooleyKFas transduces activation signals in normal human T lymphocytesJ Exp Med199317822312235[PubMed][Google Scholar]
61. KennedyNJKataokaTTschoppJBuddRCCaspase activation is required for T cell proliferationJ Exp Med199919018911896[PubMed][Google Scholar]
62. AlamACohenLYAouadSSekalyRPEarly activation of caspases during T lymphocyte stimulation results in selective substrate cleavage in nonapoptotic cellsJ Exp Med199919018791890[PubMed][Google Scholar]
63. IchikawaKYoshida-KatoHOhtsukiMOhsumiJYamaguchiJTakahashiSA novel murine anti-human Fas mAb which mitigates lymphadenopathy without hepatotoxicityInt Immunol200012555562[PubMed][Google Scholar]
64. BarnhartBCLegembrePPietrasEBubiciCFranzosoGPeterMECD95 ligand induces motility and invasiveness of apoptosis-resistant tumor cellsEMBO J20042331753185[PubMed][Google Scholar]
65. LegembrePBarnhartBCZhengLVijayanSStrausSEPuckJInduction of apoptosis and activation of NF-kappaB by CD95 require different signalling thresholdsEMBO Rep2004510841089[PubMed][Google Scholar]
66. LegembrePBarnhartBCPeterMEThe Relevance of NF-kappaB for CD95 Signaling in Tumor CellsCell Cycle2004312351239[PubMed][Google Scholar]
67. LegembrePSchickelRBarnhartBCPeterMEIdentification of SNF1/AMP Kinase-related Kinase as an NF-{kappa}B-regulated Anti-apoptotic Kinase Involved in CD95-induced Motility and InvasivenessJ Biol Chem20042794674246747[PubMed][Google Scholar]
68. LeeJKSayersTJBackTCWiggintonJMWiltroutRHLack of FasL-mediated killing leads to in vivo tumor promotion in mouse Lewis lung cancerApoptosis20038151160[PubMed][Google Scholar]
69. ZhangYLiuQZhangMYuYLiuXCaoXFas signal promotes lung cancer growth by recruiting myeloid-derived suppressor cells via cancer cell-derived PGE2J Immunol200918238013808[PubMed][Google Scholar]
70. HoogwaterFJNijkampMWSmakmanNStellerEJEmminkBLWestendorpBFOncogenic K-Ras turns death receptors into metastasis-promoting receptors in human and mouse colorectal cancer cellsGastroenterol201013823572367[Google Scholar]
71. ParkSMChenLZhangMAshton-RickardtPTurnerJRPeterMECD95 is cytoprotective for intestinal epithelial cells in colitisInflamm Bowel Dis20101610631070[PubMed][Google Scholar]
72. YuanKJingGChenJLiuHZhangKLiYCalmodulin mediates Fas-induced FADD-independent survival signaling in pancreatic cancer cells via activation of Src-extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK)J Biol Chem20112862477624784[PubMed][Google Scholar]
73. TrauzoldARoderCSiposBKarstenKArltAJiangPCD95 and TRAF2 promote invasiveness of pancreatic cancer cellsFASEB J200519620622[PubMed][Google Scholar]
74. KleberSSancho-MartinezIWiestlerBBeiselAGieffersCHillOYes and PI3K Bind CD95 to Signal Invasion of GlioblastomaCancer Cell200813235248[PubMed][Google Scholar]
75. NijkampMWHoogwaterFJStellerEJWestendorpBFvan der MeulenMWRinkesIHCD95 is a key mediator of invasion and accelerated outgrowth of mouse colorectal liver metastases following radiofrequency ablationJ Hepatol20105310691077[PubMed][Google Scholar]
76. SchneiderPHollerNBodmerJLHahneMFreiKFontanaAConversion of membrane-bound Fas(CD95) ligand to its soluble form is associated with downregulation of its proapoptotic activity and loss of liver toxicityJ Exp Med199818712051213[PubMed][Google Scholar]
77. TanakaMItaiTAdachiMNagataSDownregulation of Fas ligand by sheddingNat Med199843136[PubMed][Google Scholar]
78. LaORTaiLLeeLKruseEAGrabowSFairlieWDMembrane-bound Fas ligand only is essential for Fas-induced apoptosisNature2009461659663[PubMed][Google Scholar]
79. BivonaTGHieronymusHParkerJChangKTaronMRosellRFAS and NF-kappaB signalling modulate dependence of lung cancers on mutant EGFRNature2011471523526[PubMed][Google Scholar]
80. TauzinSChaigne-DelalandeBSelvaEKhadraNDaburonSContin-BordesCThe naturally processed CD95L elicits a c-yes/calcium/PI3K-driven cell migration pathwayPLoS Biol20119e1001090[PubMed][Google Scholar]
81. StellerEJRitsmaLRaatsDAHoogwaterFJEmminkBLGovaertKMThe death receptor CD95 activates the cofilin pathway to stimulate tumour cell invasionEMBO Rep201112931937[PubMed][Google Scholar]
82. MalleterMTauzinSBessedeACastellanoRGoubardAGodeyFCD95L cell surface cleavage triggers a prometastatic signaling pathway in triple-negative breast cancerCancer Res20137367116721[PubMed][Google Scholar]
83. TeodorczykMKleberSWollnyDSefrinJPAykutBMateosACD95 promotes metastatic spread via Sck in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomaCell Death Differ2015e-pub ahead of print 23 January 2015; doi:[PubMed][Google Scholar]
84. DinulescuDMInceTAQuadeBJShaferSACrowleyDJacksTRole of K-ras and Pten in the development of mouse models of endometriosis and endometrioid ovarian cancerNat Med2005116370[PubMed][Google Scholar]
85. ChanKWLeePYLamAKLawSWongJSrivastavaGClinical relevance of Fas expression in oesophageal squamous cell carcinomaJ Clin Pathol200659101104[PubMed][Google Scholar]
86. KojimaYTsurumiHGotoNShimizuMKasaharaSYamadaTFas and Fas ligand expression on germinal center type-diffuse large B-cell lymphoma is associated with the clinical outcomeEur J Haematol200676465472[PubMed][Google Scholar]
87. YamanaKBilimVHaraNKasaharaTItoiTMaruyamaRPrognostic impact of FAS/CD95/APO-1 in urothelial cancers: decreased expression of Fas is associated with disease progressionBr J Cancer200593544551[PubMed][Google Scholar]
88. EserBSariICanozOAltuntasFCakmakEOzturkAPrognostic significance of Fas (CD95/APO-1) positivity in patients with primary nodal diffuse large B-cell lymphomaAm J Hematol200681307314[PubMed][Google Scholar]
89. ChatzitoliosAVenizelosITripsiannisGAnastassopoulosGPapadopoulosNPrognostic significance of CD95, P53, and BCL2 expression in extranodal non-Hodgkin's lymphomaAnn Hematol201089889896[PubMed][Google Scholar]
90. de Carvalho-NetoPBdos SantosMde CarvalhoMBMercanteAMdos SantosVPSeverinoPFAS/FASL expression profile as a prognostic marker in squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavityPLoS One20138e69024[PubMed][Google Scholar]
91. StraterJHinzUHaselCBhanotUMechtersheimerGLehnertTImpaired CD95 expression predisposes for recurrence in curatively resected colon carcinoma: clinical evidence for immunoselection and CD95L mediated control of minimal residual diseaseGut200554661665[PubMed][Google Scholar]
92. AsensioCZapataAGarcia-AhijadoJGilBSalvadoresPSchneiderJFas expression is associated with a better prognosis in laryngeal squamous cell carcinomaAnticancer Res20072740834086[PubMed][Google Scholar]
93. KoomagiRVolmMExpression of Fas (CD95/APO-1) and Fas ligand in lung cancer, its prognostic and predictive relevanceInt J Cancer199984239243[PubMed][Google Scholar]
94. ShibakitaMTachibanaMDharDKKotohTKinugasaSKubotaHPrognostic significance of Fas and Fas ligand expressions in human esophageal cancerClin Cancer Res1999524642469[PubMed][Google Scholar]
95. BaryshnikovAPolosukhinaERTupitsinNNGavrikovaNVAndreevaLZabotinaTNCD95 (FAS/APO-1) antigen is a new prognostic marker of blast cells of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia patientsAdv Exp Med Biol1999457251258[PubMed][Google Scholar]
96. UramotoHOsakiTInoueMTagaSTakenoyamaMHanagiriTFas expression in non-small cell lung cancer: its prognostic effect in completely resected stage III patientsEur J Cancer19993514621465[PubMed][Google Scholar]
97. KaseSOsakiMAdachiHKaibaraNItoHExpression of Fas and Fas ligand in esophageal tissue mucosa and carcinomasInt J Oncol200220291297[PubMed][Google Scholar]
98. VolmMKoomagiRMatternJEfferthTExpression profile of genes in non-small cell lung carcinomas from long-term surviving patientsClin Cancer Res2002818431848[PubMed][Google Scholar]
99. BernstorffWVGlickmanJNOdzeRDFarrayeFAJooHGGoedegebuurePSFas (CD95/APO-1) and Fas ligand expression in normal pancreas and pancreatic tumors. Implications for immune privilege and immune escapeCancer20029425522560[PubMed][Google Scholar]
100. FokkemaETimensWde VriesEGde JongSFidlerVMeijerCExpression and prognostic implications of apoptosis-related proteins in locally unresectable non-small cell lung cancersLung Cancer200652241247[PubMed][Google Scholar]
101. FathiMAmirghofranZShahriariMSoluble Fas and Fas ligand and prognosis in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemiaMed Onc20122920462052[Google Scholar]
102. Charafe-JauffretEGinestierCBirnbaumDBreast cancer stem cells: tools and models to rely onBMC Cancer20099202[PubMed][Google Scholar]
103. ReyaTMorrisonSJClarkeMFWeissmanILStem cells, cancer, and cancer stem cellsNature2001414105111[PubMed][Google Scholar]
104. CreightonCJLiXLandisMDixonJMNeumeisterVMSjolundAResidual breast cancers after conventional therapy display mesenchymal as well as tumor-initiating featuresProc Natl Acad Sci USA20091061382013825[PubMed][Google Scholar]
105. FrankNYSchattonTFrankMHThe therapeutic promise of the cancer stem cell conceptJ Clin Invest20101204150[PubMed][Google Scholar]
106. GuptaPBChafferCLWeinbergRACancer stem cells: mirage or realityNat Med20091510101012[PubMed][Google Scholar]
107. CorsiniNSSancho-MartinezILaudenklosSGlagowDKumarSLetellierEThe death receptor CD95 activates adult neural stem cells for working memory formation and brain repairCell Stem Cell20095178190[PubMed][Google Scholar]
108. RichardsMTanSPTanJHChanWKBongsoAThe transcriptome profile of human embryonic stem cells as defined by SAGEStem Cells2004225164[PubMed][Google Scholar]
109. ShellSParkSMRadjabiARSchickelRKistnerEOJewellDALet-7 expression defines two differentiation stages of cancerProc Natl Acad Sci USA20071041140011405[PubMed][Google Scholar]
110. HauACeppiPPeterMECD95 Is Part of a let-7/p53/miR-34 Regulatory NetworkPLoS One20127e49636[PubMed][Google Scholar]
111. ZhengHLiWWangYXieTCaiYWangZmiR-23a inhibits E-cadherin expression and is regulated by AP-1 and NFAT4 complex during Fas-induced EMT in gastrointestinal cancerCarcinogenesis201435173183[PubMed][Google Scholar]
112. ZhengHXCaiYDWangYDCuiXBXieTTLiWJFas signaling promotes motility and metastasis through epithelial-mesenchymal transition in gastrointestinal cancerOncogene20133211831192[PubMed][Google Scholar]
113. ZhengHLiWWangYLiuZCaiYXieTGlycogen synthase kinase-3 beta regulates Snail and beta-catenin expression during Fas-induced epithelial-mesenchymal transition in gastrointestinal cancerEur J Cancer20134927342746[PubMed][Google Scholar]
114. ManiSAGuoWLiaoMJEatonENAyyananAZhouAYThe epithelial-mesenchymal transition generates cells with properties of stem cellsCell2008133704715[PubMed][Google Scholar]
115. CeppiPHadjiAKohlhappFPattanayakAHauAXiaLCD95 and CD95L promote and protect cancer stem cellsNat Commun201455238[PubMed][Google Scholar]
116. ParkSMGaurABLengyelEPeterMEThe miR-200 family determines the epithelial phenotype of cancer cells by targeting the E-cadherin repressors, ZEB1 and ZEB2Genes Dev200822894907[PubMed][Google Scholar]
117. ShimonoYZabalaMChoRWLoboNDalerbaPQianDDownregulation of miRNA-200c links breast cancer stem cells with normal stem cellsCell2009138592603[PubMed][Google Scholar]
118. SchickelRParkSMMurmannAEPeterMEmir-200c regulates induction of apoptosis through CD95 by targeting FAP-1Mol Cell201038908915[PubMed][Google Scholar]
119. HadjiACeppiPMurmannAEBrockwaySPattanayakABhinderBDeath induced by CD95 or CD95 ligand eliminationCell Rep201410208222[PubMed][Google Scholar]
120. PeterMEDICE: A novel tumor surveillance mechanism - a new therapy for cancerCell Cycle20141313731378[PubMed][Google Scholar]
121. FriesenCFuldaSDebatinKMCytotoxic drugs and the CD95 pathwayLeukemia19991318541858[PubMed][Google Scholar]
122. KaufmannSHEarnshawWCInduction of apoptosis by cancer chemotherapyExp Cell Res20002564249[PubMed][Google Scholar]
123. YuFYaoHZhuPZhangXPanQGongClet-7 regulates self renewal and tumorigenicity of breast cancer cellsCell200713111091123[PubMed][Google Scholar]
124. VisvaderJELindemanGJCancer stem cells: current status and evolving complexitiesCell Stem Cell201210717728[PubMed][Google Scholar]
125. AmetllerEGarcia-RecioSCostamagnaDMayordomoCFernandez-NogueiraPCarboNTumor promoting effects of CD95 signaling in chemoresistant cellsMol Cancer20109161[PubMed][Google Scholar]
126. BrahmerJRTykodiSSChowLQHwuWJTopalianSLHwuPSafety and activity of anti-PD-L1 antibody in patients with advanced cancerN Engl J Med201236624552465[PubMed][Google Scholar]
127. TopalianSLHodiFSBrahmerJRGettingerSNSmithDCMcDermottDFSafety, activity, and immune correlates of anti-PD-1 antibody in cancerN Engl J Med201236624432454[PubMed][Google Scholar]
128. LipsonEJSharfmanWHDrakeCGWollnerITaubeJMAndersRADurable cancer regression off-treatment and effective reinduction therapy with an anti-PD-1 antibodyClin Cancer Res201319462468[PubMed][Google Scholar]
129. HamidORobertCDaudAHodiFSHwuWJKeffordRSafety and tumor responses with lambrolizumab (anti-PD-1) in melanomaN Engl J Med2013369134144[PubMed][Google Scholar]
130. KonnoRTakanoTSatoSYajimaASerum soluble fas level as a prognostic factor in patients with gynecological malignanciesClin Cancer Res2000635763580[PubMed][Google Scholar]
131. OsorioLMAguilar-SantelisesMDe SantiagoAHachiyaTMellstedtHJondalMIncreased serum levels of soluble Fas in progressive B-CLLEur J Haematol200166342346[PubMed][Google Scholar]
132. MuschenMMoersCWarskulatUNiederacherDBetzBEvenJCD95 ligand expression in dedifferentiated breast cancerJ Pathol1999189378386[PubMed][Google Scholar]
133. MizutaniYHongoFSatoNOgawaOYoshidaOMikiTSignificance of serum soluble Fas ligand in patients with bladder carcinomaCancer200192287293[PubMed][Google Scholar]
134. MizutaniYYoshidaOUkimuraOKawauchiABonavidaBMikiTPrognostic significance of a combination of soluble Fas and soluble Fas ligand in the serum of patients with Ta bladder cancerCancer Biother Radiopharm200217563567[PubMed][Google Scholar]
135. ChopinDBarei-MoniriRMaillePLe Frere-BeldaMAMuscatelli-GrouxBMerendinoNHuman urinary bladder transitional cell carcinomas acquire the functional Fas ligand during tumor progressionAm J Pathol200316211391149[PubMed][Google Scholar]
136. YangHLiHWangZGaoJGuoYIs urinary soluble Fas an independent predictor of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer? A prospective chart studyUrol Int201391456461[PubMed][Google Scholar]
137. GutierrezLSElizaMNiven-FairchildTNaftolinFMorGThe Fas/Fas-ligand system: a mechanism for immune evasion in human breast carcinomasBreast Cancer Res Treat199954245253[PubMed][Google Scholar]
138. MottoleseMBuglioniSBracalentiCCardarelliMACiaboccoLGiannarelliDPrognostic relevance of altered Fas (CD95)-system in human breast cancerInt J Cancer200089127132[PubMed][Google Scholar]
139. ReimerTHerrnringCKoczanDRichterDGerberBKabelitzDFasL:Fas ratio—a prognostic factor in breast carcinomasCancer Res200060822828[PubMed][Google Scholar]
140. MullauerLMosbergerIGruschMRudasMChottAFas ligand is expressed in normal breast epithelial cells and is frequently up-regulated in breast cancerJ Pathol20001902030[PubMed][Google Scholar]
141. BewickMConlonMParissentiAMLeeHZhangLGluckSSoluble Fas (CD95) is a prognostic factor in patients with metastatic breast cancer undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantationJ Hematother Stem Cell Res200110759768[PubMed][Google Scholar]
142. MunakataSWatanabeOOhashiKMorinoHExpression of Fas ligand and bcl-2 in cervical carcinoma and their prognostic significanceAm J Clin Pathol2005123879885[PubMed][Google Scholar]
143. SongEChenJOuyangNSuFWangMHeemannUSoluble Fas ligand released by colon adenocarcinoma cells induces host lymphocyte apoptosis: an active mode of immune evasion in colon cancerBr J Cancer20018510471054[PubMed][Google Scholar]
144. WuSFZhangJWQianWYYangYBLiuYDongYAltered expression of survivin, Fas and FasL contributed to cervical cancer development and metastasisEur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci20121620442050[PubMed][Google Scholar]
145. LermaERomeroMGallardoAPonsCMunozJFuentesJPrognostic significance of the Fas-receptor/Fas-ligand system in cervical squamous cell carcinomaVirchows Arch20084526574[PubMed][Google Scholar]
146. MannBGratchevABohmCHanskiMLFossHDDemelGFasL is more frequently expressed in liver metastases of colorectal cancer than in matched primary carcinomasBr J Cancer19997912621269[PubMed][Google Scholar]
147. BellucoCEspositoGBertorelleRAlaggioRGiacomelliLBianchiLCFas ligand is up-regulated during the colorectal adenoma-carcinoma sequenceEur J Surg Oncol200228120125[PubMed][Google Scholar]
148. NozoeTYasudaMHondaMInutsukaSKorenagaDFas ligand expression is correlated with metastasis in colorectal carcinomaOncology2003658388[PubMed][Google Scholar]
149. ZhangWDingEXWangQZhuDQHeJLiYLFas ligand expression in colon cancer: a possible mechanism of tumor immune privilegeWorld J Gastroenterol20051136323635[PubMed][Google Scholar]
150. LiHFanXStoicovCLiuJHZubairSTsaiEHuman and mouse colon cancer utilizes CD95 signaling for local growth and metastatic spread to liverGastroenterol2009137934944[Google Scholar]
151. HoogwaterFJSnoerenNNijkampMWGunningACvan HoudtWJde BruijnMTCirculating CD95-ligand as a potential prognostic marker for recurrence in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastasesAnticancer Res20113145074512[PubMed][Google Scholar]
152. KykalosSMathaiouSKarayiannakisAJPatsourasDLambropoulouMSimopoulosCTissue expression of the proteins fas and fas ligand in colorectal cancer and liver metastasesJ Gastrointest Cancer201243224228[PubMed][Google Scholar]
153. SaigusaSTanakaKOhiMToiyamaYYasudaHKitajimaTClinical implications of Fas/Fas ligand expression in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapyMol Clin Oncol20153151156[PubMed][Google Scholar]
154. TsutsumiSKuwanoHShimuraTMorinagaNMochikiEAsaoTCirculating soluble Fas ligand in patients with gastric carcinomaCancer20008925602564[PubMed][Google Scholar]
155. IchikuraTMajimaTUchidaTOkuraEOgawaTMochizukiHPlasma soluble Fas ligand concentration: decrease in elderly men and increase in patients with gastric carcinomaOncol Rep20018311314[PubMed][Google Scholar]
156. NagashimaHMoriMSadanagaNMashinoKYoshikawaYSugimachiKExpression of Fas ligand in gastric carcinoma relates to lymph node metastasisInt J Oncol20011811571162[PubMed][Google Scholar]
157. OsakiMKaseSKodaniIWatanabeMAdachiHItoHExpression of Fas and Fas ligand in human gastric adenomas and intestinal-type carcinomas: correlation with proliferation and apoptosisGastric Cancer20014198205[PubMed][Google Scholar]
158. ZhengHCSunJMWeiZLYangXFZhangYCXinYExpression of Fas ligand and caspase-3 contributes to formation of immune escape in gastric cancerWorld J Gastroenterol2003914151420[PubMed][Google Scholar]
159. NadaOAbdel-HamidMIsmailAEl ShabrawyLSidhomKFEl BadawyNMThe role of the tumor necrosis factor (TNF)—Fas L and HCV in the development of hepatocellular carcinomaJ Clin Virol200534140146[PubMed][Google Scholar]
160. TanakaMSudaTHazeKNakamuraNSatoKKimuraFFas ligand in human serumNat Med19962317322[PubMed][Google Scholar]
161. El BassiounyAEEl-BassiouniNENosseirMMZoheiryMMEl-AhwanyEGSalahFCirculating and hepatic Fas expression in HCV-induced chronic liver disease and hepatocellular carcinomaMedscape J Med200810130[PubMed][Google Scholar]
162. AbrahamsVMStraszewskiSLKamsteegMHanczarukBSchwartzPERutherfordTJEpithelial ovarian cancer cells secrete functional Fas ligandCancer Res20036355735581[PubMed][Google Scholar]
163. MunakataSEnomotoTTsujimotoMOtsukiYMiwaHKannoHExpressions of Fas ligand and other apoptosis-related genes and their prognostic significance in epithelial ovarian neoplasmsBr J Cancer20008214461452[PubMed][Google Scholar]
164. TaylorDDLyonsKSGercel-TaylorCShed membrane fragment-associated markers for endometrial and ovarian cancersGynecol Oncol200284443448[PubMed][Google Scholar]
165. ChaudhryPSrinivasanRPatelFDGopalanSMajumdarSSerum soluble Fas levels and prediction of response to platinum-based chemotherapy in epithelial ovarian cancerInt J Cancer200812217161721[PubMed][Google Scholar]
166. BelloneGSmirneCCarboneAMareschiKDugheraLFarinaECProduction and pro-apoptotic activity of soluble CD95 ligand in pancreatic carcinomaClin Cancer Res2000624482455[PubMed][Google Scholar]
167. HazarVBerberZPestereliECoskunMYesilipekAKarpuzogluGClinical importance of circulating and cellular expression levels of Fas and Fas ligand in pediatric patients with lymphoproliferative malignanciesPediatr Hematol Oncol200522247256[PubMed][Google Scholar]
168. Macher-GoeppingerSBermejoJLWagenerNHohenfellnerMHaferkampASchirmacherPExpression and prognostic relevance of the death receptor CD95 (Fas/APO1) in renal cell carcinomasCancer Lett2011301203211[PubMed][Google Scholar]
169. SommaPLo MuzioLMansuetoGDelfinoMFabbrociniGMascoloMSquamous cell carcinoma of the lower lip: FAS/FASL expression, lymphocyte subtypes and outcomeInt J Immunopathol Pharmacol2005185964[PubMed][Google Scholar]
170. SejimaTMorizaneSHinataNYaoAIsoyamaTSaitoMFas expression in renal cell carcinoma accurately predicts patient survival after radical nephrectomyUrol Int201288263270[PubMed][Google Scholar]
171. MurakiYTateishiASetaCFukudaJHanejiTOyaRFas antigen expression and outcome of oral squamous cell carcinomaInt J Oral Maxillofac Surg200029360365[PubMed][Google Scholar]
172. FangLSunLHuFFChenQEEffects of FasL expression in oral squamous cell cancerAsian Pac J Cancer Prev201314281285[PubMed][Google Scholar]
173. HaraSMiyakeHNakamuraIArakawaSKamidonoSHaraIIncreased Fas ligand expression in the tumor tissue and serum of patients with testicular germ cell tumors with seminomatous elementsUrology200158471476[PubMed][Google Scholar]
174. BaldiniEUlisseSMarchioniEDi BenedettoAGiovannettiGPetrangeliEExpression of Fas and Fas ligand in human testicular germ cell tumoursInt J Androl200932123130[PubMed][Google Scholar]
175. RzeszutkoMRzeszutkoWDziegielPBalcerzakWKaliszewskiKBolanowskiMExpression of FAS/APO 1/CD 95 in thyroid tumorsFolia Histochem Cytobiol2007458791[PubMed][Google Scholar]
176. OwonikokoTKHossainMSBhimaniCChenZKimSRamalingamSSSoluble FAS ligand as a biomarker of disease recurrence in differentiated thyroid cancerCancer201311915031511[PubMed][Google Scholar]
177. LinHCLaiPYLinYPHuangJYYangBCFas ligand enhances malignant behavior of tumor cells through interaction with Met, hepatocyte growth factor receptor, in lipid raftsJ Biol Chem20122872066420673[PubMed][Google Scholar]
178. LiuQTanQZhengYChenKQianCLiNBlockade of Fas signaling in breast cancer cells suppresses tumor growth and metastasis via disruption of Fas signaling-initiated cancer-related inflammationJ Biol Chem20142891152211535[PubMed][Google Scholar]
179. NakamotoYKanekoSFanHMomoiTTsutsuiHNakanishiKPrevention of hepatocellular carcinoma development associated with chronic hepatitis by anti-fas ligand antibody therapyJ Exp Med200219611051111[PubMed][Google Scholar]
180. ParkSMRajapakshaTWZhangMSattarHAFicheraAAshton-RickardtPGCD95 signaling deficient mice with a wild-type hematopoietic system are prone to hepatic neoplasiaApoptosis2008134151[PubMed][Google Scholar]
181. CaiZYangFYuLYuZJiangLWangQActivated T cell exosomes promote tumor invasion via Fas signaling pathwayJ Immunol201218859545961[PubMed][Google Scholar]
182. MitsiadesCSPoulakiVFanourakisGSozopoulosEMcMillinDWenZFas signaling in thyroid carcinomas is diverted from apoptosis to proliferationClin Cancer Res20061237053712[PubMed][Google Scholar]