Transforming growth factor  (TGF) plays a dual role in oncogenesis, acting as both a tumor suppressor and a tumor promoter. These disparate processes of suppression and promotion are mediated primarily by Smad and non-Smad signaling, respectively. A central issue in understanding the role of TGF in the progression of epithelial cancers is the elucidation of the mechanisms underlying activation of non-Smad signaling cascades. Because the potent lipid mediator sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) has been shown to transactivate the TGF receptor and activate Smad3, we examined its role in TGF activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1 and 2 (ERK1/2) and promotion of migration and invasion of esophageal cancer cells. Both S1P and TGF activate ERK1/2, but only TGF activates Smad3. Both ligands promoted ERK1/2-dependent migration and invasion. Furthermore, TGF rapidly increased S1P, which was required for TGF-induced ERK1/2 activation, as well as migration and invasion, since downregulation of sphingosine kinases, the enzymes that produce S1P, inhibited these responses. Finally, our data demonstrate that TGF activation of ERK1/2, as well as induction of migration and invasion, is mediated at least in part by ligation of the S1P receptor, S1PR 2 . Thus, these studies provide the first evidence that TGF activation of sphingosine kinases and formation of S1P contribute to non-Smad signaling and could be important for progression of esophageal cancer.
We have defined some of the mechanisms by which the kinase inhibitor lapatinib kills HCT116 cells. Lapatinib inhibited radiationinduced activation of ERBB1/2, extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2, and AKT, and radiosensitized HCT116 cells. Prolonged incubation of HCT116 cells with lapatinib caused cell killing followed by outgrowth of lapatinib-adapted cells. Adapted cells were resistant to serum starvation-induced cell killing and were cross-resistant to multiple therapeutic drugs. Lapatinib was competent to inhibit basal and epidermal growth factor (EGF)-stimulated ERBB1 phosphorylation in adapted cells. Coexpression of dominant-negative ERBB1 and dominant-negative ERBB2 inhibited basal and EGF-stimulated ERBB1 and ERBB2 phosphorylation in parental and adapted cells. However, in neither parental nor adapted cells did expression of dominantnegative ERBB1 and dominant-negative ERBB2 recapitulate the cell death-promoting effects of lapatinib. Adapted cells had increased expression of MCL-1, decreased expression of BAX, and decreased activation of BAX and BAK. Overexpression of BCL-XL protected parental cells from lapatinib toxicity. Knockdown of MCL-1 expression enhanced lapatinib toxicity in adapted cells that was reverted by knockdown of BAK expression. Inhibition of caspase function modestly reduced lapatinib toxicity in parental cells, whereas knockdown of apoptosisinducing factor expression suppressed lapatinib toxicity. Thus, in HCT116 cells, lapatinib adaptation can be mediated by altered expression of pro-and antiapoptotic proteins that maintain mitochondrial function.
Glucocorticoids (GCs) are common components of many chemotherapeutic regimens for lymphoid malignancies. GC-induced apoptosis involves an intrinsic mitochondria-dependent pathway. BIM (BCL-2-interacting mediator of cell death), a BCL-2 homology 3-only pro-apoptotic protein, is upregulated by dexamethasone (Dex) treatment in acute lymphoblastic leukemia cells and has an essential role in Dex-induced apoptosis. It has been indicated that Dex-induced BIM is regulated mainly by transcription, however, the molecular mechanisms including responsible transcription factors are unclear. In this study, we found that Dex treatment induced transcription factor Runx2 and c-Jun in parallel with BIM induction. Dex-induced BIM and apoptosis were decreased in cells harboring dominant-negative c-Jun and were increased in cells with c-Jun overexpression. Cells harboring short hairpin RNA for Runx2 also decreased BIM induction and apoptosis. On the Bim promoter, c-Jun bound to and activated the AP-1-binding site at about −2.7 kb from the transcription start site. Treatment with RU486, a GC receptor antagonist, blocked Dex-induced Runx2, c-Jun and BIM induction, as well as apoptosis. Furthermore, pretreatment with SB203580, a p38-mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) inhibitor, decreased Dex-induced Runx2, c-Jun and BIM, suggesting that p38-MAPK activation is upstream of the induction of these molecules. In conclusion, we identified the critical signaling pathway for GC-induced apoptosis, and targeting these molecules may be an alternative approach to overcome GC-resistance in leukemia treatment.
Paclitaxel (Taxol)-induced cell death requires the intrinsic cell death pathway, but the specific participants and the precise mechanisms are poorly understood. Previous studies indicate that a BH3-only protein BIM (BCL-2 Interacting Mediator of cell death) plays a role in paclitaxel-induced apoptosis. We show here that BIM is dispensable in apoptosis with paclitaxel treatment using bim−/− MEFs (mouse embryonic fibroblasts), the bim−/− mouse breast tumor model, and shRNA-mediated down-regulation of BIM in human breast cancer cells. In contrast, both bak −/− MEFs and human breast cancer cells in which BAK was down-regulated by shRNA were more resistant to paclitaxel. However, paclitaxel sensitivity was not affected in bax−/− MEFs or in human breast cancer cells in which BAX was down-regulated, suggesting that paclitaxel-induced apoptosis is BAK-dependent, but BAX-independent. In human breast cancer cells, paclitaxel treatment resulted in MCL-1 degradation which was prevented by a proteasome inhibitor, MG132. A Cdk inhibitor, roscovitine, blocked paclitaxel-induced MCL-1 degradation and apoptosis, suggesting that Cdk activation at mitotic arrest could induce subsequent MCL-1 degradation in a proteasome-dependent manner. BAK was associated with MCL-1 in untreated cells and became activated in concert with loss of MCL-1 expression and its release from the complex. Our data suggest that BAK is the mediator of paclitaxel-induced apoptosis and could be an alternative target for overcoming paclitaxel resistance.
Exposure of tumor cells to ionizing radiation causes compensatory activation of multiple intracellular survival signaling pathways to maintain viability. In human carcinoma cells, radiation exposure caused an initial rapid inhibition of protein tyrosine phosphatase function and the activation of ERBB receptors and downstream signaling pathways. Radiation-induced activation of extracellular regulated kinase (ERK)1/2 promoted the cleavage and release of paracrine ligands in carcinoma cells which caused re-activation of ERBB family receptors and intracellular signaling pathways. Blocking ERBB receptor phosphorylation or ERK1/2 pathway activity using small-molecule inhibitors of kinases for a short period of time following exposure (3 h) surprisingly protected tumor cells from the toxic effects of ionizing radiation. Prolonged exposure (48-72 h) of tumor cells to inhibition of ERBB receptor/ERK1/2 function enhanced radiosensitivity. In addition to ERBB receptor signaling, expression of activated forms of RAS family members and alterations in p53 mutational status are known to regulate radiosensitivity apparently independent of ERBB receptor function; however, changes in RAS or p53 mutational status, in isogenic HCT116 cells, were also noted to modulate the expression of ERBB receptors and ERBB receptor paracrine ligands. These alterations in receptor and ligand expression correlated with changes in the ability of HCT116 cells to activate ERK1/2 and AKT after irradiation, and to survive radiation exposure. Collectively, our data in multiple human carcinoma cell lines argues that tumor cells are dynamic and rapidly adapt to any single therapeutic challenge, for example, radiation and/or genetic manipulation e.g. loss of activated RAS function, to maintain tumor cell growth and viability.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.