EGFR has been intensively studied in cancer and treatments have been developed to inhibit EGFR signaling. Sialylation of EGFR is known to block dimerization of the tyrosine receptor and down regulate signaling. I just read this paper:
What I don't understand is that the authors seem to say that increasing sialylation might be a good thing to prevent cancer progression since it inhibits EGFR dimerization. However, wouldn't this go against almost 50 or 60 years of research that suggest that increased levels of sialic acid are one of the well known hallmarks of cancer that aid in its progression and metastasis? What could explain this apparent discrepancy?
EGFR sialylation and cancer progression
No replies to this topic