Fig. 8

NIPSNAP1 promotes cancer growth in vivo. A–D Visual (A) and weight comparisons (B) of xenografts established over 4 weeks using HepG2 cells expressing sh-Ctrl versus sh-NIPSNAP1 (top) or pCDH versus pCDH-NIPSNAP1 (bottom). Tumor volumes were measured at the indicated time points (C) and with images showing representative in vivo luciferase imaging at 4 weeks (D) prior to humane sacrifice of the mice. E Western blotting analysis of lysates from the excised xenografts against NIPSNAP1, P27 and an actin loading control. F Photomicrographs of xenograft sections from A showing immunohistochemical (IHC) staining against Ki67, c-Myc, and K68 and K122 acetylated SOD2 (left). Stained sections were subjected to image analysis to calculate the relative proliferative index from Ki67 staining or alternatively the relative mean of integrated option density (IOD) (right). B, C and F is mean ± SD; n = 3 independent experiments, two-tailed Student’s t test, images in A, D and E represents three independent experiments (*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01, ***p < 0.001)