SUMMARYThe tumor suppressor maspin (mammary serpin) was originally identified as a component of human mammary epithelial cells that is downregulated as mammary tumor cells progress from the benign to the invasive and metastatic states. Maspin inhibits cellular invasion, motility, and proliferation, but its mechanism of action is currently unknown. Because the cellular machinery responsible for these processes is cytoplasmic, we have reexamined the tissue distribution and subcellular localization of maspin. We find that maspin, or a maspin-like protein, is present in many human organs, in which it localizes to epithelia. In cultured human mammary myoepithelial cells, maspin is predominantly a soluble cytoplasmic protein that associates with secretory vesicles and is present at the cell surface. In vitro assays show that the vesicle association is due to the existence of an uncleaved facultative secretion signal that allows small amounts of maspin to partition into the endoplasmic reticulum. These results demonstrate that maspin is more widespread than previously believed. The subcellular localization studies indicate that soluble intracellular and vesicleassociated maspin probably play an important role in controlling the invasion, motility, and proliferation of cells expressing it, whereas extracellular maspin may also regulate these processes in adjacent cells.

Levels of lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) and lysophosphatidylcholine (LPC) are elevated in the plasma and ascites of ovarian cancer patients, but not in most other tumor types. LPA increases cell proliferation, cell survival, resistance to cisplatin, cell shrinkage, and production of vascular endothelial growth factor, urokinase plasminogen activator, and LPA itself in ovarian cancer cells, but not in normal ovarian surface epithelial cells. PSP24 and members of the endothelial differentiation gene (EDG) family (EDG1, EDG2, EDG4, and EDG7) of G protein‐coupled receptors mediate LPA signaling. Ovarian cancer cell lines do not express EDG1 mRNA, have variable EDG2 mRNA and protein levels, and frequently exhibit elevated levels of EDG4 mRNA and protein, suggesting that EDG4 may contribute to the deleterious effects of LPA in ovarian cancer. In contrast, activation of the EDG2 LPA receptor on ovarian cancer cells may lead to apoptosis and counter the effects of other LPA receptors. Thus, the development of agonists and antagonists for the appropriate spectrum of LPA receptors may alter proliferation, apoptosis, or response to therapy of ovarian cancer cells. Indeed, over 60% of all current drugs target the G protein‐coupled family of receptors, making the LPA receptor family a “drugable” target. LPC, although not as thoroughly studied, increases cellular proliferation and mediates multiple other functions through unique signaling pathways.

No abstract

Lysophosphatidic acid (LPA), plasmalogen-glycerophosphate (alkenyl-GP) and, cyclic-phosphatidic acid (cyclic-PA) are naturally occurring phospholipid growth factors (PLGFs). PLGFs elicit diverse biological effects via the activation of G protein-coupled receptors in a variety of cell types. In NIH3T3 fibroblasts, LPA and alkenyl-GP both induced proliferation, whereas cyclic-PA was antiproliferative. LPA and alkenyl-GP decreased cAMP in a pertussis toxin-sensitive manner, whereas cyclic-PA caused cAMP to increase. LPA and alkenyl-GP both stimulated the activity of the mitogen-actived protein kinases extracellular signal regulated kinases 1 and 2 and c-Jun NH2-terminal kinase, whereas cyclic-PA did not. All three PLGFs induced the formation of stress fibers in NIH3T3 fibroblasts. To determine whether these lipids activated the same or different receptors, heterologous desensitization patterns were established among the three PLGFs by monitoring changes in intracellular Ca2+ in NIH3T3 fibroblasts. LPA cross-desensitized both the alkenyl-GP and cyclic-PA responses. Alkenyl-GP cross-desensitized the cyclic-PA response, but only partially desensitized the LPA response. Cyclic-PA only partially desensitized both the alkenyl-GP and LPA responses. We propose that pharmacologically distinct subsets of PLGF receptors exist that distinguish between cyclic-PA and alkenyl-GP, but are all activated by LPA. We provide evidence that the PSP24 receptor is selective for LPA and not activated by the other two PLGFs. RT-PCR and Northern blot analysis indicate the co-expression of mRNAs encoding the EDG-2, EDG-4, and PSP24 receptors in a variety of cell lines and tissues. However, the lack of mRNA expression for these three receptors in the LPA-responsive Rat-1 and Sp2-O-Ag14 cells suggests that a number of PLGF receptor subtypes remain unidentified.