Fig. 8

Evaluation of ROCK2 as a prospective radiosensitizer in vitro using clinical samples and its association with DNA repair markers. a-i Immunofluorescence analysis shows co-expression of both RhoC and ROCK2 in the nuclear compartment of tumor sections (scale bar = 10 μm). a-ii Immunofluorescence analysis shows co-expression of both pH2Ax and ROCK2 in the nuclear compartment of tumor sections (scale bar = 10 μm). a-iii Immunofluorescence analysis shows co-expression of both RAD50 and ROCK2 in the nuclear compartment of tumor sections (scale bar = 10 μm). a-iv Immunofluorescence analysis shows co-expression of both MRE11 and ROCK2 in the nuclear compartment of tumor sections (scale bar = 10 μm). b(i-iii) Scatter plots depict the percentage of cells that showed nuclear expression of either ROCK2 or pH2Ax or both (R2 + pH2Ax). Similarly, cells were analyzed for nuclear expression of ROCK2-RAD50 and ROCK2-MRE11 as represented in the figure. c-i ROCK2_In was performed in cervical cancer biopsy derived tumor cells with a corresponding IgG_In control (n = 15 samples). Graphical representation of n = 11 samples with ROCK2_In resulted in increased cell death as compared to the control, is shown in the figure p < 0.0001. c-ii ROCK2_In performed in cervical cancer biopsy derived tumor cells along with Cisplatin (Cis) at 20 μM followed by irradiation showed an increased cell death. The graphical representation displays an increased cell death upon combinatorial treatment of cisplatin and ROCK2 as opposed to cisplatin alone (n = 5 samples)