Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2023 Oct 5;18(10):e0292434. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0292434

Tumor suppressor p73 induces apoptosis of murine peritoneal cell after exposure to hydatid cyst antigens; a possibly survival mechanism of cystic echinococcosis in vivo mice model

Ehsan Ahmadpour 1, Adel Spotin 2, Ata Moghimi 3, Firooz Shahrivar 1, Farhad Jadidi-Niaragh 3, Farnaz Hajizadeh 2, Sirous Mehrani 1, Komeil Mazhab-Jafari 4,5,*
Editor: Asif Ali6
PMCID: PMC10553360  PMID: 37796859

Abstract

Cystic echinococcosis (CE) is a life-threatening helminthic disease caused by the Echinococcus granulosus sensulato complex. Previous evidence indicates that the host’s innate immune responses against CE can combat and regulate the growth rate and mortality of hydatid cyst in the host’s internal organs. However, the survival mechanisms of CE are not yet fully elucidated in the human body. In the present study, the apoptotic effects of fertile and infertile hydatid fluid (HF) were tested on murine peritoneal cells in vivo mice model. Mice were divided into five groups including; control group, fertile HF-treated peritoneal cells, infertile HF-treated peritoneal cells, protoscolices (PSCs)-treated peritoneal cells and HF+PSCs-treated peritoneal cells group. Mice groups were intraperitoneally inoculated with PBS, HF, and/or PSCs. Afterwards, peritoneal cells were isolated and mRNA expression of STAT3, caspase-3, p73 and Smac genes were evaluated by quantitative Real-time PCR. After 48 hours of exposure, the protein levels of Smac and STAT3 was determined by western blotting technique. After 6 hours of exposure, Caspase-3 activity was also measured by fluorometric assay. The intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) production was examined in all groups. The mRNA expression levels of p73, caspase-3 and also Caspase-3 activity in HF+PSCs-treated peritoneal cells were higher than in the test and control groups (Pv<0.05), while the mRNA expression level of anti-apoptotic STAT3 and Smac genes in HF+PSC-treated peritoneal cells were lower than in the other groups (Pv<0.05). As well, the level of intracellular ROS in the fertile HCF-treated peritoneal cells, infertile HCF-treated peritoneal cells, PSC-treated peritoneal cells and HF+PSC-treated peritoneal cells groups were significantly higher than in the control group (Pv<0.05).Current findings indicates that oxidative stress and p73 can trigger the apoptosis of murine peritoneal cells through modulator of HF-treated PSCs that is likely one of the hydatid cyst survival mechanisms in vivo mice model.

1. Introduction

Echinococcus granulosus (E. granulosus) is one of the well-known species of the cestoda that causes cystic echinococcosis (CE)/hydatidosis. Its distribution in the world depends on environmental and anthropogenic factors [1,2]. The prevalence of CE is about 1-200/100,000 in the world, according to the official data, the most affected areas are Mediterranean countries, Russia and China [3,4]. The life cycle of this parasite is such that the canids plays the definitive host role, and human as an accidental dead-end host is infected due to consumption of contaminated vegetables by egg, direct contact with canids and putting contaminated hands in the mouth [5,6]. Echinococcus eggs contain an embryo called an oncosphere or six-hooked embryo [7]. The main target organs of hydatid cysts are in the liver parts (most hepatic cysts are located in the right lobe), lung and other unusual places, such as bone, brain, spleen, kidney, etc [8,9]. Recent immunological findings have revealed new aspects about the innate immune responses (apoptosis, inflammasome and toll-like receptors) generated during the establishment of CE; however, many escaping mechanisms of parasite in the hydatid cyst-host cross-talk have not been fully investigated in vivo model yet [10].

Aforementioned mechanism, apoptosis, referred to as programmed cell death, is a regulated form of cell death that involves distinct biochemical and morphological changes. Apoptosis has different pathways and can be activated intrinsically and extrinsically, both of these pathways end with caspase-3 activation [11]. In the intrinsic pathway, which is called the mitochondria pathway, different types of proteins play reciprocate roles in inducing and down regulating of apoptosis. For example, Bax proteins, p53 family and caspase family have auxiliary roles and STAT3, Bcl-2, and Smac have inhibitory roles. These molecules affect each other in different ways and can have positive and negative regulatory effects on the function [1214]. Apoptosis of E. granulosus protoscolices (PSCs) was first identified more than a decade ago by a group of researchers from Chile [15]. The p53 family of transcription factors comprises three proteins: p53, p63 and p73 [16]. According to some evidence, we hypothesis that tumor suppressor p73 possibly induces apoptosis by activation of intrinsic (mitochondrial) apoptotic pathway [17]. However, the mechanism of p53-dependent apoptosis has not fully yet been understood in HF-treated peritoneal cells. In the present study, the oxidative stress and apoptotic effects of fertile and infertile hydatid fluid (HF) were tested on murine peritoneal cells in vivo mice model.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Mice and ethics statement

In this study, 25 healthy non-infected female mice, aged 6–8 weeks, were purchased from Biology Supply Center at Pasteur research Institute (Tehran, Iran). Mice were housed inside cages with free access to the standard pellet animal diet and water. The study was approved by the Scientific Research Ethical Committee, Abadan University of Medical Sciences (IR.ABADANUMS.REC.1398.030). Also, animal handling and all procedures were done in accordance with the international ethical guidelines.

2.2 Preparation of PSCs and hydatid layer

The hydatid liver cysts of sheep were collected from a slaughterhouse in Abadan and transferred to the parasitology laboratory of Abadan University of Medical Sciences. The contents of the cysts were aspirated by a sterile syringe, shed in a sterile glass cylinder, and settled for 2–3 minutes. Next, the supernatant was discarded, and the precipitate was washed three times with phosphate buffer (pH 7.2). The viability of PSCs was evaluated by using trypan blue stain under an optical microscope. After 5 min, dead PSCs were blue color, while the living ones were colorless. The suspension, with at least 90% of PSCs being alive, was transferred to a dark container and kept at 4°C.

2.3 Immunization and challenge

Mice were intraperitoneally administrated by hydatid fluid (HF) and PSCs using previously described method [18,19]. In short, mice were divided into five groups (each group number; five mice) including; control group (saline normal), fertile HCF-treated peritoneal cell, infertile HCF-treated peritoneal cell, PSCs-treated peritoneal cell and HF+PSCs-treated peritoneal cell group. Subsequently, animals were injected intraperitoneally with either 0.2 mL of hydatid fluid (2000 PSCs) in experimental and saline for control groups. At 48 hours post-infection, the mice were euthanized with an overdose of ketamine/xylazine, subsequently peritoneal cells were isolated by centrifugation at 2000 g for 15 min at 4°C.

2.4. RNA extraction, cDNA synthesis, and quantitative real-time PCR

To evaluate the mRNA expression levels of STAT-3, p73, caspase-3 and Smac genes, isolated peritoneal cells were subjected to RNA isolation using TRIzol solution (YTA, Tehran, Iran) [20]. The quantity and quality of the isolated RNA was then assessed by a Nanodrop 2000c spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific, USA). The process of cDNA synthesis was performed using cDNA Synthesis Kit (YTA, Tehran, Iran), according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

Subsequently, relative mRNA expression levels of STAT3, p73, caspase-3 and Smac genes in peritoneal cells were evaluated by quantitative real-time-PCR (qRT-PCR) technique. qRT-PCR was carried out in a final volume of 20 μL containing 0.2 μM of each primer set (Table 1), 9 μL of SYBR green reagent (YTA, Iran), 1 μL of cDNA template and 8 μL of nuclease-free water. The PCR reaction was carried out by an initial denaturation step at 95° C for 3 minutes, and the 45 cycles of 95° C for 10 seconds, 58° C for 30 seconds and 72° C for 20 seconds (Livak and Schmittgen 2001). Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) expression levels were considered as an internal control (housekeeping gene) for data normalization.

Table 1. Set of specific gene primers used in Real-time PCR.

Gene Primer Product length Accession Number
P73 F:5′ -AGAGCATGTGACCGACATTGTT-3′ 103 bp XM_006538722.5
R: 5′ -TTCTACACGGATGAGGTGGCT-3′
Smac/Diablo F: 5′ -AGGAGGAAGATGAGGTGTGG -3′ 248/127 bp XM_036165411.1
R: 5′ -TCAGCAGCCATCTCTGAAAG-3′
STAT3 F: 5′ -GGGCCATCCTAAGCACAAAG-3′ 113 bp XM_011248846.4
R: 5′ - GGTCTTGCCACTGATGTCCTT-3′
Caspase-3 F: 5′- TGTCATCTCGCTCTGGTACG - 3′ 201 bp XM_017312543.3
R: 5′- AAATGACCCCTTCATCACCA- 3′
GAPDH F:5′ - CCTCGTCCCGTAGACAAAA - 3′ 102 bp NG_148718.1
R: 5′ - AATCTCCACTTTGCCACTG - 3′

Abbreviations: R, common reverse primer; F. forward primer; bp, base pair; RT PCR, real time PCR,.

2.5. Immunoblotting analysis

To evaluate the protein levels of STAT3 and Smac, mouse peritoneal cells were subjected to western blot analysis. For this case, cells were homogenized in a 500 μL RIPA buffer containing protease inhibitor cocktail by a homogenizer after incubation for 30 min at 4°C, followed by centrifugation at 12000 × g for 10 min. subsequently protein concentrations were quantified using Bradford method. Before running samples in 10% SDS polyacrilamide gel, protein samples were boiled at 95°C for 5 minutes and 20 μg of protein/ sample was loaded in each well. Afterwards, protein bands were transferred to PVDF membrane and blocked using 1% milk/TBS for 1 hour at room temperature. Desired proteins were probed in 1% milk/TBS supplemented by specific primary antibodies of STAT3 (sc-8019, 1:300), Smac (sc-136071, 1:300) and β-actin (sc-47778, 1:300) over night at 4°C. Next day, after several washing steps, specific horseradish peroxidase (HRP) conjugated secondary antibody were probed (sc-516102, 1:1000 for STAT3 and Smac and sc-2357, 1:1000 for β-actin) and incubated 2 hour at room temperature. The protein bands were visualized using a chemiluminescence detection kit (ECL, Bio-Rad) and radiographic film (Kodak, USA). The density of bands was measured by ImageJ software. β-actin was used as a loading control.

2.6. DCFH-DA assay

The level of ROS was quantified using the fluorescent probe 2′, 7′- dichlorofluorescein-diacetate (DCFH-DA), according to the method of Driver et al., with a slight modification [21]. Homogenates from each group were diluted in ice-cold’s buffer to obtain a concentration of 5 mg tissue/mL. The homogenates were pipetted into 96-well plates and allowed to warm up to room temperature for 5 min. 10μM of DCFH-DA was added to each well, and the plates were incubated for 15 min at room temperature to allow the DCFH-DA to be incorporated into any membrane-bound vesicles. The converted DCF product was measured using the multiple readers with a fluorescence spectrophotometer, excitation at 485 nm and emission at 530 nm. The measured fluorescence values were expressed as a percentage of the fluorescence with respect to those of the exercised control.

2.7. Detection of Caspase-3 activity

Caspase-3 activity was determined by the Caspase-3/CPP32 Fluorimetry Assay Kit (K105) (BioVision Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA) as manufacturer’s manual. The assay was based on detection of cleavage of substrate DEVD-AFCA (AFC: 7-amino-4-trifluoromethyl coumarin). Activity was measured by a Fluorimetry (Jasco, FP-6200, Japan), as enzyme activity converts a blue emission (λmax = 400 nm) to a yellow-green color (λ = 505nm), which can be measured using a fluorimetry or a fluorescence microtiter plate reader.

2.8. Statistical analysis

Data analyzes were carried out by GraphPad Prism version 8.0.1 Software (GraphPad Software Inc., La Jolla, CA, USA). The analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the independent t test were used to compare the differences between the study groups.

3. Results

The results of Caspase-3/CPP32 fluorometric assay indicated that the Caspase-3 activity in HF+PSCs-treated peritoneal cells was significantly higher than that of fertile HF-treated peritoneal cell (Pv<0.05), infertile HF-treated peritoneal cell, PSCs-treated peritoneal cell and control group, respectively (Fig 1). Based on the results of the qRT-PCR assay, significant changes were observed in the expression of apoptotic genes compared with control group.

Fig 1. Evaluation of Caspase-3 activity in cell extracts.

Fig 1

Caspase-3 activity in fertile HF, infertile HF, PSCs, PSCs+HF and cell control (from left to right). Bar graph indicates the mean±SEM. Increase in Caspase-3 activity was determined by comparing fluorescence of 7-amino-4-trifluoromethyl coumarin in control.

The highest mRNA expression levels of p73 and caspase-3 genes were observed in the peritoneal cell exposed to PSCs+HF, PSCs, fertile HF, infertile HF groups compared with control group, respectively (Pv<0.05) (Fig 2A and 2B). While the mRNA expression levels of STAT3 and Smac genes in the HF+PSCs-treated peritoneal cell group was significantly lower than that in the control groups (Pv<0.05) (Fig 2B and 2C).

Fig 2. Relative fold change of caspase-3, p73, Smac and STAT3 in hydatid fluid groups in comparison to the control group.

Fig 2

Results are expressed as mean and SD. P-value was determined using unpaired two-tailed t-test (*Pv<0.05, ** Pv<0.01, *** Pv<0.001, **** Pv<0.0001).

Western blot analysis indicated that the expression of Smac protein was significantly decreased in the PSCs+HF, PSCs, fertile HF groups compared to infertile HF and control group (Fig 3A and 3B) (Pv<0.05), as well expression of STAT3 protein was significantly decreased in the PSCs+HF and PSCs groups compared to control group (Pv<0.05) (Fig 3B).

Fig 3. Immunoblotting of STAT3 and Smac in peritoneal cell among different groups (A), Quantitation of Immunoblotting of Smac (B) and STAT3 (C).

Fig 3

As shown in Fig 4, level of intracellular ROS (the intensity of DCF fluorescent) in the PSCs+HF and PSCs groups (Pv<0.01) were significantly higher than those in the control group (Fig 4B).

Fig 4. Effects of inflammation on the peritoneal cells reactive oxygen species (ROS) production.

Fig 4

Fluorescent microscopic images of PI & DCF-stained (Left) Quantified PI & DCF fluorescence (Right).

4. Discussion

E. granulosus has significant defense mechanisms against the host’s immune response, which permits the survival of hydatid cyst in the host body [22]. Hydatid cyst can live in the human body for up to 53 years [23]. The identification of innate signaling pathways for Echinococcus persistence in the host target cells provides a promising way to implement the appropriate preventive strategies for hydatidosis [24]. However, little is known about innate immune responses between host and parasite cross-talk in CE patients in vivo model.

Apoptotic effects of HF antigens and PSCs have been previously studied on various cancer lines, macrophages and T lymphocytes, suggesting that hydatid cyst metabolites, particularly fertile cyst components, have the ability to induce apoptosis via both internal (mitochondrial) and external (death receptor) pathways [23,25]. Among the known signaling pathways, apoptotic bifunctional effects in the relationship between host’s lymphocytes and PSCs of CE have already been reported by Spotin et al., by assessing the suppression and survival mechanisms of the hydatid cyst [26].

Current results showed that apoptosis can be induced by activating of caspase-3 in murine peritoneal cells after exposure to HF-treated PSCs through tumor suppressor p73 and ROS. It has been previously verified that hydatid fluid toxins have lytic effects on mouse peritoneal macrophages [23].

This study shows that both Caspase-3 activity and caspase-3 mRNA expression were significantly higher in fertile HF-treated peritoneal cells compared to infertile HF-treated peritoneal cells and control cells, while the expression level of STAT3 and Smac genes as anti-apoptotic molecules was reduced in the fertile HF treated peritoneal cells relative to the infertile HF-treated peritoneal cells and control. Similarly, Mokhtari Amirmajdi et al., showed that the Caspase-3 activity and the ratio of Bax/Bcl-2 mRNA expression were higher in PSCs-treated lymphocytes relative to infertile fluid-treated lymphocytes and control group which exhibited apoptosis could be as a possible mechanism by which E. granulosus overwhelms host defenses [23]. Interestingly, Spotin et al., showed that mRNA expression of apoptosis-inducing ligands (TRAIL and Fas-L) increases in germinal layer of infertile cysts compared to fertile cyst and healthy tissue [27].

Analysis of DNA fragmentation and caspase-3 activity in germinal layer showed higher levels of apoptosis in infertile cysts compared to fertile cysts, suggesting that apoptosis is a possible mechanism of infertility in hydatid cysts [15]. Depending on the cellular pathway, the p53 tumor suppressor interferes with multiple pathways, including cell cycle arrest, cellular senescence, and triggering of apoptosis dependent to the intrinsic pathway [28,29]. On the other hand, the role of the p53 gene family in the CE patients and parasite relationship has not yet fully understood. The results of the current study indicate that p73 can trigger the Caspase-3 activity of murine peritoneal cells through modulator of HF-treated PSCs by downregulating of Smac and STAT3 genes.

A similar study showed that p53 level increases in human lung adenocarcinoma (A549) cell lines exposured to hydatid cyst fluid compared to human healthy lung epithelial (BEAS-2B) but hydatid cyst fluid did not directly cause cell death [30]. Likewise, the tumor suppressor p53 induces apoptosis of host’s lymphocytes experimentally infected by Leishmania major, by activation of Bax and caspase-3 [17].

In this study, the intracellular ROS level in the HF+PSCs-treated peritoneal cells were significantly higher than in the control group, indicating that ROS likely induces peritoneal cell apoptosis through mitochondrial damage, ASK1 activation, and/or PARP activation to escape the host’s immune responses [31]. Based on recent studies, the potential role of TLR2/TL4 polymorphism has been presented as a predisposing factor in patients with recurrent hydatidosis (RH) [32,33]. Moradkhani et al., (2019) have shown that the homozygous mutant-type TLR2 Gln/Gln (A/A) is associated with the occurrence of RH and conferred a 9 fold risk for susceptibility [32]. Noori et al., (2018) have also demonstrated that the heterozygous mutant-type TLR4 Asp299Gly genotype has a tendency to be associated with the occurrence of RH and conferred a 3-fold risk for susceptibility [33].

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, the oxidative stress and tumor suppressor p73 induces apoptosis of host’s peritoneal cells experimentally infected with HF and/or PSCs, by activation of Caspase-3, which can potentially be addressed as an ancillary role of the survival mechanism of hydatid cyst in CE patients. These results can enhance our knowledge on the design and implementation of anti-apoptotic treatments that can inhibit the growth of hydatid cyst in infected patients. Apoptosis of murine peritoneal cells through modulator of HF-treated PSCs should be a possible survival mechanism in CE in vivo model.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. This is the original Western blot image of B- actine.

(JPG)

S2 Fig. This is the original Western blot image of Smac.

(JPG)

S3 Fig. This is the original Western blot image of STAT3.

(JPG)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.

Funding Statement

The research project has been funded and approved by the code "98u-265" by the Abadan University of Medical Sciences, Abadan, Iran. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Woolsey ID, Miller AL. Echinococcus granulosus sensu lato and Echinococcus multilocularis: A review. Res Vet Sci. 2021;135:517–22. Epub 20201119. doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2020.11.010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Bosco A, Alves LC, Cociancic P, Amadesi A, Pepe P, Morgoglione ME, et al. Epidemiology and spatial distribution of Echinococcus granulosus in sheep and goats slaughtered in a hyperendemic European Mediterranean area. Parasites & Vectors. 2021;14(1):1–8. doi: 10.1186/s13071-021-04934-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Nunnari G, Pinzone MR, Gruttadauria S, Celesia BM, Madeddu G, Malaguarnera G, et al. Hepatic echinococcosis: clinical and therapeutic aspects. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18(13):1448–58. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i13.1448 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Paul S, Mandal S, Upadhyaya M, Pramanik SR, Biswas SC, Biswas RR. Primary pelvic hydatid cyst in a postmenopausal female: a surgical challenge. Autops Case Rep. 2017;7(2):49–54. Epub doi: 10.4322/acr.2017.012 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Eckert J, Deplazes P. Biological, epidemiological, and clinical aspects of echinococcosis, a zoonosis of increasing concern. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2004;17(1):107–35. doi: 10.1128/CMR.17.1.107-135.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Eckert J, Deplazes P. Biological, epidemiological, and clinical aspects of echinococcosis, a zoonosis of increasing concern. Clinical microbiology reviews. 2004;17(1):107–35. doi: 10.1128/CMR.17.1.107-135.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.John DT PW. Markell & Voge’s Medical Parasitology-10th Sea Ed. 10 ed. Singapore: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2020. July 23, 2020. 211 p. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Sachar S, Goyal S, Goyal S, Sangwan S. Uncommon locations and presentations of hydatid cyst. Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2014;4(3):447–52. doi: 10.4103/2141-9248.133476 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Kern P. Echinococcus granulosus infection: clinical presentation, medical treatment and outcome. Langenbeck’s Archives of Surgery. 2003;388:413–20. doi: 10.1007/s00423-003-0418-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Bakhtiar NM, Spotin A, Mahami-Oskouei M, Ahmadpour E, Rostami A. Recent advances on innate immune pathways related to host-parasite cross-talk in cystic and alveolar echinococcosis. Parasit Vectors. 2020;13(1):232. Epub 20200506. doi: 10.1186/s13071-020-04103-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Lossi L. The concept of intrinsic versus extrinsic apoptosis. Biochemical Journal. 2022;479(3):357–84. doi: 10.1042/BCJ20210854 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Kalkavan H, Green DR. MOMP, cell suicide as a BCL-2 family business. Cell Death & Differentiation. 2018;25(1):46–55. doi: 10.1038/cdd.2017.179 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Bhattacharya S, Ray RM, Johnson LR. STAT3-mediated transcription of Bcl-2, Mcl-1 and c-IAP2 prevents apoptosis in polyamine-depleted cells. Biochemical Journal. 2005;392(2):335–44. doi: 10.1042/BJ20050465 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Jan R. Understanding apoptosis and apoptotic pathways targeted cancer therapeutics. Advanced pharmaceutical bulletin. 2019;9(2):205. doi: 10.15171/apb.2019.024 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Paredes R, Jimenez V, Cabrera G, Iragüen D, Galanti N. Apoptosis as a possible mechanism of infertility in Echinococcus granulosus hydatid cysts. Journal of cellular biochemistry. 2007;100(5):1200–9. doi: 10.1002/jcb.21108 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Zawacka-Pankau JE. The role of p53 family in cancer. MDPI; 2022. p. 823. doi: 10.3390/cancers14030823 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Moshrefi M, Spotin A, Kafil HS, Mahami-Oskouei M, Baradaran B, Ahmadpour E, et al. Tumor suppressor p53 induces apoptosis of host lymphocytes experimentally infected by Leishmania major, by activation of Bax and caspase-3: a possible survival mechanism for the parasite. Parasitology Research. 2017;116:2159–66. doi: 10.1007/s00436-017-5517-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Hashemi Tabar G, Razmi GR. Antibody response against hydatid fluid, protoscolex and whole body of Echinococcus granulosus antigens in lambs. Iranian Journal of Veterinary Research. 2009;10(3):283–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Yin S, Chen X, Zhang J, Xu F, Fang H, Hou J, et al. The effect of Echinococcus granulosus on spleen cells and TGF‐β expression in the peripheral blood of BALB/c mice. Parasite Immunol. 2017;39(3):e12415. doi: 10.1111/pim.12415 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Nazdikbin Yamchi N, Ahmadian S, Mobarak H, Amjadi F, Beheshti R, Tamadon A, et al. Amniotic fluid-derived exosomes attenuated fibrotic changes in POI rats through modulation of the TGF-β/Smads signaling pathway. J Ovarian Res. 2023;16(1):118. doi: 10.1186/s13048-023-01214-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Driver AS, Kodavanti PRS, Mundy WR. Age-related changes in reactive oxygen species production in rat brain homogenates. Neurotoxicology and teratology. 2000;22(2):175–81. doi: 10.1016/s0892-0362(99)00069-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Riganò R, Profumo E, Bruschi F, Carulli G, Azzarà A, Ioppolo S, et al. Modulation of human immune response by Echinococcus granulosus antigen B and its possible role in evading host defenses. Infect Immun. 2001;69(1):288–96. doi: 10.1128/IAI.69.1.288-296.2001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Mokhtari Amirmajdi M, Sankian M, Eftekharzadeh Mashhadi I, Varasteh A, Vahedi F, Sadrizadeh A, et al. Apoptosis of human lymphocytes after exposure to hydatid fluid. Iran J Parasitol. 2011;6(2):9–16. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Gregory D, Olivier M. Subversion of host cell signalling by the protozoan parasite Leishmania. Parasitology. 2005;130(S1):S27–S35. doi: 10.1017/S0031182005008139 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Daneshpour S, Kefayat AH, Mofid MR, Rostami Rad S, Yousofi Darani H. Effect of Hydatid Cyst Fluid Antigens on Induction of Apoptosis on Breast Cancer Cells. Adv Biomed Res. 2019;8:27. Epub 20190410. doi: 10.4103/abr.abr_220_18 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Spotin A, Majdi MM, Sankian M, Varasteh A. The study of apoptotic bifunctional effects in relationship between host and parasite in cystic echinococcosis: a new approach to suppression and survival of hydatid cyst. Parasitol Res. 2012;110(5):1979–84. Epub 20111214. doi: 10.1007/s00436-011-2726-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Spotin A, Mokhtari Amirmajdi M, Sankian M, Varasteh A, Shamsian AA, Vahedi F. Expression of apoptosis inducing-ligands, TRAIL and Fas-L in hydatid cyst germinal layer and normal tissue. Journal of Ardabil University of Medical Sciences. 2012;12(1):7–15. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Chen J. The Cell-Cycle Arrest and Apoptotic Functions of p53 in Tumor Initiation and Progression. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2016;6(3):a026104. Epub doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a026104 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Vogelstein B, Lane D, Levine AJ. Surfing the p53 network. Nature. 2000;408(6810):307–10. doi: 10.1038/35042675 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Baysal İ, Örsten S. [Evaluation of the Effect of Hydatid Cyst Fluid on the Apoptosis Pathway in BEAS-2B and A549 Cell Lines]. Mikrobiyol Bul. 2021;55(2):248–55. doi: 10.5578/mb.20219910 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Villalpando-Rodriguez GE, Gibson SB. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) regulates different types of cell death by acting as a rheostat. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity. 2021;2021. doi: 10.1155/2021/9912436 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Moradkhani MA, Spotin A, Mahami-Oskouei M, Ahmadpour E, Lotfinezhad M, Noori J, et al. A clinical association between Toll-like receptor 2 Arg753Gln polymorphism with recurrent cystic echinococcosis in postsurgery patients: A case control study. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019;66:101336. doi: 10.1016/j.cimid.2019.101336 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Noori J, Spotin A, Ahmadpour E, Mahami-Oskouei M, Sadeghi-Bazargani H, Kazemi T, et al. The potential role of toll-like receptor 4 Asp299Gly polymorphism and its association with recurrent cystic echinococcosis in postoperative patients. Parasitol Res. 2018;117(6):1717–27. doi: 10.1007/s00436-018-5850-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Muhammad Mazhar Ayaz

26 Jun 2023

PONE-D-23-17969Tumor suppressor p73 induces apoptosis of murine peritoneal cell after exposure to hydatid cyst antigens; a possibly survival mechanism of cystic echinococcosis in vivo mice modelPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Mazhab-jafari,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 10 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Muhammad Mazhar Ayaz, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. To comply with PLOS ONE submissions requirements, in your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the experiments involving animals and ensure you have included details on (1) methods of sacrifice, (2) methods of anesthesia and/or analgesia, and (3) efforts to alleviate suffering.

3. We noticed you have some minor occurrence of overlapping text with the following previous publication(s), which needs to be addressed:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00436-017-5517-8

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001706X21003806?via%3Dihub

In your revision ensure you cite all your sources (including your own works), and quote or rephrase any duplicated text outside the methods section. Further consideration is dependent on these concerns being addressed.

4. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service.  

Whilst you may use any professional scientific editing service of your choice, PLOS has partnered with both American Journal Experts (AJE) and Editage to provide discounted services to PLOS authors. Both organizations have experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. To take advantage of our partnership with AJE, visit the AJE website (http://learn.aje.com/plos/) for a 15% discount off AJE services. To take advantage of our partnership with Editage, visit the Editage website (www.editage.com) and enter referral code PLOSEDIT for a 15% discount off Editage services.  If the PLOS editorial team finds any language issues in text that either AJE or Editage has edited, the service provider will re-edit the text for free.

Upon resubmission, please provide the following: 

● The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

● A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

● A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file)

5. Please note that funding information should not appear in any section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript.

  "Funding and ethics approval: The research project has been funded and approved by the code "98u-265" and with the ethics code "IR.ABADANUMS.REC.1398.030" at the Abadan University of Medical Sciences, Abadan, Iran."

6. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

"Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

7. Please amend the manuscript submission data (via Edit Submission) to include author Farnaz Hajizadeh.

8. Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please delete it from any other section. 

9. PLOS ONE now requires that authors provide the original uncropped and unadjusted images underlying all blot or gel results reported in a submission’s figures or Supporting Information files. This policy and the journal’s other requirements for blot/gel reporting and figure preparation are described in detail at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-preparing-figures-from-image-files. When you submit your revised manuscript, please ensure that your figures adhere fully to these guidelines and provide the original underlying images for all blot or gel data reported in your submission. See the following link for instructions on providing the original image data: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-original-images-for-blots-and-gels. 

  

In your cover letter, please note whether your blot/gel image data are in Supporting Information or posted at a public data repository, provide the repository URL if relevant, and provide specific details as to which raw blot/gel images, if any, are not available. Email us at plosone@plos.org if you have any questions.

10. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: • The sections " RNA extraction and cDNA synthesis" and "Real-time PCR" could be merged and presented in one section.

• In table 1 please mention the accession number of each gene.

• In the sentence "After the end of the blocking time, the paper is incubated with the primary antibody mixed and diluted with the blocking solution to a certain amount of β-actin primary antibody (sc-47778, 1:300) for 16 to 18 hours." please mention the specification of all primary antibody which used in this study?

• In the section "Detection of Caspase-3 activity" please mention the method of total protein extraction. Furthermore, How did the authors evaluate the concentration of extracted proteins?

• Figure 1 should be edited the y-axis label. I think the relative caspase 3 activity was proper.

Reviewer #2: This manuscript entitled “Tumor suppressor p73 induces apoptosis of murine peritoneal cell after exposure to hydatid cyst antigens model'' presents a possibly survival mechanism of cystic echinococcosis in vivo mice model. Importantly, this MS highlights oxidative stress and p73can trigger the apoptosis of murine peritoneal cells through modulator of HF-treated PSCs that is likely one of the hydatid cyst survival mechanisms in vivo mice. As a result, it is a well-organized MS. However, before any proceeding some improvements should be addressed into new version.

Comments

Some parts of the article should be revised in terms of English and grammar.

Abstract:

The term “in vivo” should be “italic” entire paper

It seems that “Some paraphrasing” should be done. E.g. line 41: “Mice groups were intraperitoneally inoculated with HF and PSC”

Line 53: “PSC stathis likely” corrected to “PSCs that is likely

Keywords: the “Hydatidosis” changed to “cystic echinococcosis”

“Introduction”

Line 60” the “causescystic” corrected to “causes cystic”

Line 81” After repeating echinococcus once, it should be abbreviated to “ E. granulosus “ in the rest of article.

-Head and sub-heads of MS should be numbered.

- Results and discussion should be written separately.

In addition to apoptosis, it is suggested that in the discussion section, the role of innate immunity of TLR 2 and 4 in the survival of the Hydatid cyst in the human body be investigated based recent published articles:

1- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00436-018-5850-6

2- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S014795711930133X

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Saeid Afshar

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2023 Oct 5;18(10):e0292434. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0292434.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


14 Aug 2023

Answers to comments of Reviewers

We would like to thank you very much for the very thoughtful review that helped us greatly to revise the manuscript and to improve its quality.

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: Yes

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Answer: Thank you for your attention. The manuscript was checked again for grammar and spelling.

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1:

• The sections "RNA extraction and cDNA synthesis" and "Real-time PCR" could be merged and presented in one section.

Answer: We thank the honorable reviewer for their valuable input and suggestion. Sections were merged based on the reviewer's comment.

• In Table 1 please mention the accession number of each gene.

Answer: Thank you for your attention. The accession numbers were added.

• In the sentence "After the end of the blocking time, the paper is incubated with the primary antibody mixed and diluted with the blocking solution to a certain amount of β-actin primary antibody (sc-47778, 1:300) for 16 to 18 hours." please mention the specification of all primary antibody which used in this study?

Answer: Thank you for your suggestion. This section was revised and it was added.

• In the section "Detection of Caspase-3 activity" please mention the method of total protein extraction. Furthermore, How did the authors evaluate the concentration of extracted proteins?

Answer: For detection of Caspase-3 activity, about 10 peritoneal cells were re-suspended with 50 μl of chilled Cell Lysis Buffer (provided in the kit) and incubated on ice for 10 minute. Then the protein extracted from these cells was evaluated according the kit instruction.

• Figure 1 should be edited the y-axis label. I think the relative caspase 3 activity was proper.

Answer: Thank you for your attention. It was edited.

Reviewer #2:

This manuscript entitled “Tumor suppressor p73 induces apoptosis of murine peritoneal cell after exposure to hydatid cyst antigens model'' presents a possibly survival mechanism of cystic echinococcosis in vivo mice model. Importantly, this MS highlights oxidative stress and p73can trigger the apoptosis of murine peritoneal cells through modulator of HF-treated PSCs that is likely one of the hydatid cyst survival mechanisms in vivo mice. As a result, it is a well-organized MS. However, before any proceeding some improvements should be addressed into new version.

Comments

Some parts of the article should be revised in terms of English and grammar.

Abstract:

The term “in vivo” should be “italic” entire paper

Answer: It was done and highlighted into new version.

It seems that “Some paraphrasing” should be done. E.g. line 41: “Mice groups were intraperitoneally inoculated with HF and PSC”

Answer: It was done and highlighted into new version.

Line 53: “PSC stathis likely” corrected to “PSCs that is likely

Answer: It was done and highlighted into new version.

Keywords: the “Hydatidosis” changed to “cystic echinococcosis”

Answer: It was done and highlighted into new version.

“Introduction”

Line 60” the “causescystic” corrected to “causes cystic”

Answer: It was done and highlighted into new version.

Line 81” After repeating echinococcus once, it should be abbreviated to “ E. granulosus “ in the rest of article.

Answer: It was done and highlighted into new version.

-Head and sub-heads of MS should be numbered.

Answer: It was done.

- Results and discussion should be written separately.

Answer: It was done.

In addition to apoptosis, it is suggested that in the discussion section, the role of innate immunity of TLR 2 and 4 in the survival of the Hydatid cyst in the human body be investigated based recent published articles:

1-https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00436-018-5850-6

2- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S014795711930133X

Answer: It was done and highlighted into new version.

________________________________________

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: SaeidAfshar

Reviewer #2: No

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.doc

Decision Letter 1

Asif Ali

21 Sep 2023

Tumor suppressor p73 induces apoptosis of murine peritoneal cell after exposure to hydatid cyst antigens; a possibly survival mechanism of cystic echinococcosis in vivo mice model

PONE-D-23-17969R1

Dear Dr. Mazhab-jafari,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Asif Ali, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Asif Ali

25 Sep 2023

PONE-D-23-17969R1

Tumor suppressor p73 induces apoptosis of murine peritoneal cell after exposure to hydatid cyst antigens; a possibly survival mechanism of cystic echinococcosis in vivo mice model

Dear Dr. Mazhab-jafari:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Asif Ali

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. This is the original Western blot image of B- actine.

    (JPG)

    S2 Fig. This is the original Western blot image of Smac.

    (JPG)

    S3 Fig. This is the original Western blot image of STAT3.

    (JPG)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.doc

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES