Purpose: Green Fluorescent Protein is widely used as a cellular marker tool, but its potential influence on cells has been questioned. Although the potential off-target effects of GFP on tumor cells have been studied to some extent, the findings at the molecular level are insufficient to explain the effect of GFP expression on the tumorigenic capacity of cancer cells. Here, we aimed to investigate the effect of GFP expression on the tumorigenicity of PC3 prostate cancer cells.Using GFP-expressing and wild-type PC-3 cells, xenograft models were generated in athymic BALB/C mice. To identify differentially expressed proteins, the change in cells proteome was investigated by label-free quantification with nano‐high performance liquid chromatography to tandem mass spectrometry (nHPLC‐MS/MS). Proteins that showed significantly altered expression levels were evaluated using the bioinformatics tools.Unlike the wild-type PC-3 cells, GFP-expressing cells failed to develop tumor. Comparative proteome analysis of GFP-expressing cells with WT PC-3 cells revealed a total of 216 differentially regulated proteins, of which 98 were upregulated and 117 were downregulated.Upon GFP expression, differential changes in several pathways including the immune system, translational machinery, energy metabolism, elements of cytoskeletal and VEGF signaling pathway were observed. Therefore, care should be taken into account to prevent reporting deceitful mechanisms generated from studies utilizing GFP.Methods: Green Fluorescent Protein is widely used as a cellular marker tool, but its potential influence on cells has been questioned. Although the potential off-target effects of GFP on tumor cells have been studied to some extent, the findings at the molecular level are insufficient to explain the effect of GFP expression on the tumorigenic capacity of cancer cells. Here, we aimed to investigate the effect of GFP expression on the tumorigenicity of PC3 prostate cancer cells.Using GFP-expressing and wild-type PC-3 cells, xenograft models were generated in athymic BALB/C mice. To identify differentially expressed proteins, the change in cells proteome was investigated by label-free quantification with nano‐high performance liquid chromatography to tandem mass spectrometry (nHPLC‐MS/MS). Proteins that showed significantly altered expression levels were evaluated using the bioinformatics tools.Unlike the wild-type PC-3 cells, GFP-expressing cells failed to develop tumor. Comparative proteome analysis of GFP-expressing cells with WT PC-3 cells revealed a total of 216 differentially regulated proteins, of which 98 were upregulated and 117 were downregulated.Upon GFP expression, differential changes in several pathways including the immune system, translational machinery, energy metabolism, elements of cytoskeletal and VEGF signaling pathway were observed. Therefore, care should be taken into account to prevent reporting deceitful mechanisms generated from studies utilizing GFP.Results: Green Fluorescent Protein is widely used as a cellular marker tool, but its potential influence on cells has been questioned. Although the potential off-target effects of GFP on tumor cells have been studied to some extent, the findings at the molecular level are insufficient to explain the effect of GFP expression on the tumorigenic capacity of cancer cells. Here, we aimed to investigate the effect of GFP expression on the tumorigenicity of PC3 prostate cancer cells.Using GFP-expressing and wild-type PC-3 cells, xenograft models were generated in athymic BALB/C mice. To identify differentially expressed proteins, the change in cells proteome was investigated by label-free quantification with nano‐high performance liquid chromatography to tandem mass spectrometry (nHPLC‐MS/MS). Proteins that showed significantly altered expression levels were evaluated using the bioinformatics tools.Unlike the wild-type PC-3 cells, GFP-expressing cells failed to develop tumor. Comparative proteome analysis of GFP-expressing cells with WT PC-3 cells revealed a total of 216 differentially regulated proteins, of which 98 were upregulated and 117 were downregulated.Upon GFP expression, differential changes in several pathways including the immune system, translational machinery, energy metabolism, elements of cytoskeletal and VEGF signaling pathway were observed. Therefore, care should be taken into account to prevent reporting deceitful mechanisms generated from studies utilizing GFP.Conclusion: Green Fluorescent Protein is widely used as a cellular marker tool, but its potential influence on cells has been questioned. Although the potential off-target effects of GFP on tumor cells have been studied to some extent, the findings at the molecular level are insufficient to explain the effect of GFP expression on the tumorigenic capacity of cancer cells. Here, we aimed to investigate the effect of GFP expression on the tumorigenicity of PC3 prostate cancer cells.Using GFP-expressing and wild-type PC-3 cells, xenograft models were generated in athymic BALB/C mice. To identify differentially expressed proteins, the change in cells proteome was investigated by label-free quantification with nano‐high performance liquid chromatography to tandem mass spectrometry (nHPLC‐MS/MS). Proteins that showed significantly altered expression levels were evaluated using the bioinformatics tools.Unlike the wild-type PC-3 cells, GFP-expressing cells failed to develop tumor. Comparative proteome analysis of GFP-expressing cells with WT PC-3 cells revealed a total of 216 differentially regulated proteins, of which 98 were upregulated and 117 were downregulated.Upon GFP expression, differential changes in several pathways including the immune system, translational machinery, energy metabolism, elements of cytoskeletal and VEGF signaling pathway were observed. Therefore, care should be taken into account to prevent reporting deceitful mechanisms generated from studies utilizing GFP.Graphical Abstract. Attenuation of Tumorigenicity of PC-3 Cells after Stably Expressing GFP. Immune response, translational activity, energy metabolism, cytoskeletal components, and VEGF Signaling were regulated in GFP-expressing cells: Green Fluorescent Protein is widely used as a cellular marker tool, but its potential influence on cells has been questioned. Although the potential off-target effects of GFP on tumor cells have been studied to some extent, the findings at the molecular level are insufficient to explain the effect of GFP expression on the tumorigenic capacity of cancer cells. Here, we aimed to investigate the effect of GFP expression on the tumorigenicity of PC3 prostate cancer cells.Using GFP-expressing and wild-type PC-3 cells, xenograft models were generated in athymic BALB/C mice. To identify differentially expressed proteins, the change in cells proteome was investigated by label-free quantification with nano‐high performance liquid chromatography to tandem mass spectrometry (nHPLC‐MS/MS). Proteins that showed significantly altered expression levels were evaluated using the bioinformatics tools.Unlike the wild-type PC-3 cells, GFP-expressing cells failed to develop tumor. Comparative proteome analysis of GFP-expressing cells with WT PC-3 cells revealed a total of 216 differentially regulated proteins, of which 98 were upregulated and 117 were downregulated.Upon GFP expression, differential changes in several pathways including the immune system, translational machinery, energy metabolism, elements of cytoskeletal and VEGF signaling pathway were observed. Therefore, care should be taken into account to prevent reporting deceitful mechanisms generated from studies utilizing GFP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]