DOCSLIB.ORG

Implications for Cell

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Implications for Cell ARTICLE Quantifying the strength of heterointeractions among receptor tyrosine kinases from different subfamilies: Implications for cell signaling Received for publication, March 30, 2020, and in revised form, May 20, 2020 Published, Papers in Press, May 27, 2020, DOI 10.1074/jbc.RA120.013639 Michael D. Paul1,2, Hana N. Grubb1 , and Kalina Hristova1,2,3,* From the 1Institute for NanoBioTechnology, 2Program in Molecular Biophysics, and 3Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA Edited by Alex Toker Receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) are single-pass membrane been shown to play important and diverse roles, such as amplifying proteins that control vital cell processes such as cell growth, sur- or inhibiting downstream signaling (28–34), increasing the signal vival, and differentiation. There is a growing body of evidence that diversity (35–38), or providing signaling back-up (27). RTKs from different subfamilies can interact and that these It is also becoming increasingly apparent that unliganded diverse interactions can have important biological consequences. RTK dimers can form in physiological contexts and can have However, these heterointeractions are often ignored, and their important effects, especially in disease (39–41). RTK overex- strengths are unknown. In this work, we studied the heterointer- pression has been linked to many cancers, as it promotes RTK actions of nine RTK pairs, epidermal growth factor receptor interactions even in the absence of ligand (17, 18). Interestingly, (EGFR)–EPH receptor A2 (EPHA2), EGFR–vascular endothelial some of these cancers are associated with not just increased growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2), EPHA2–VEGFR2, EPHA2– fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 (FGFR1), EPHA2–FGFR2, RTK expression, but loss of ligand as well. It can be expected EPHA2–FGFR3, VEGFR2–FGFR1, VEGFR2–FGFR2, and that such conditions (high RTK expression and no ligand) also VEGFR2–FGFR3, using a FRET-based method. Surprisingly, we favor the formation of heterodimers of unrelated RTKs, as found that RTK heterodimerization and homodimerization these RTKs typically do not share ligands. However, it is cur- strengths can be similar, underscoring the significance of RTK rently not clear how likely cross-subfamily heterointeractions heterointeractions in signaling. We discuss how these heteroin- are to occur, and it is thus difficult to say how significant a role teractions can contribute to the complexity of RTK signal trans- they play in RTK signaling. Indeed, heterointeraction strengths duction, and we highlight the utility of quantitative FRET for for RTKs from different subfamilies are unknown, as prior probing multiple interactions in the plasma membrane. work has had limited quantification capabilities. In this work, we study the heterointeractions of nine RTK pairs (EGFR–EPHA2, EGFR–VEGFR2, EPHA2–VEGFR2, The 58 human receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) are grouped EPHA2–FGFR1, EPHA2–FGFR2, EPHA2–FGFR3, VEGFR2– into 20 subfamilies based on the homology of their N-terminal FGFR1, VEGFR2–FGFR2, and VEGFR2–FGFR3) using a fluo- extracellular (EC) domains (1–4). They are single-pass membrane rescence-based method: fully quantified spectral imaging Förster receptors, which are activated upon dimerization and phosphoryla- resonance energy transfer (FSI-FRET). The FSI-FRET method tion of tyrosines in their C-terminal intracellular (IC) kinase reports on the occurrence of specific interactions and yields the domains (3, 5–8). Adaptor proteins bind to the phosphorylated strength of the interactions (1). We advance this FRET methodol- tyrosines, leading to the initiation of downstream signaling cascades ogy to also enable the determination of the oligomer size (e.g. that control cellular processes such as growth, motility, survival, dimer, trimer, tetramer) of the heterointeraction. For three of the – and differentiation (9 14). Moreover, RTKs are often dysregulated RTK pairs, we demonstrate that they form dimers in the absence – in many growth disorders and diseases, such as cancer (15 20). of ligand, and we quantify their heterodimerization strengths. Whereas RTKs are best known for forming signaling homo- Surprisingly, we find that the heterodimerization and homodime- dimers, they are also known to interact with many other binding rization strengths are similar. This suggests that the heterodimers partners, including other RTKs from the same subfamily, G pro- are likely to form under physiological and pathological condi- – – tein coupled receptors, and cell adhesion molecules (21 26). Fur- tions. Furthermore, we show that the presence of ligands modu- thermore, it is becoming clear that they are capable of interacting lates the abundance of the heterodimers. This work underscores with RTKs from unrelated subfamilies. A recent review of the liter- the significance of heterointeractions in RTK signaling and high- ature identified nearly 100 studies that support the idea that RTKs lights a method that can be used to study a multitude of interac- from different subfamilies can interact (27). Despite these studies, tions in the plasma membrane of live cells. heterodimerization across subfamilies has largely been ignored, both in conceptual models of RTK signaling and in the interpreta- Results tion of RTK signaling data. However, these heterodimers have Heterointeraction models In most cases, RTKs are thought to signal as homodimers * For correspondence: Kalina Hristova, [email protected]. (2, 3). Accordingly, if two different RTKs, X and Y, were to 7KLVLVDQ2SHQ$FFHVVDUWLFOHXQGHUWKH &&%<OLFHQVH J. Biol. Chem. (2020) 295(29) 9917–9933 9917 © 2020 Paul et al. Published under exclusive license by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc. RTK heterointeractions Figure 1. RTK models. Shown are cartoon representations of the different RTK interaction models (A–C) and RTK constructs used in the study (D) (not drawn to scale and not meant to represent a mechanism of dimerization (e.g. the TM domains might not be directly interacting)). A, heterodimer model. B, heterotrimer model. C, heterotetramer model. D, fluorescent proteins (a FRET pair) are attached to the C termini of the RTK constructs used in this work. interact, the obvious assumption is that they would form a het- association constants can be written in terms of the concentra- erodimer, XY. However, there is no experimental evidence that tions of the monomers and dimers. excludes the possibility of higher-order heterooligomers (e.g. ½ trimers, tetramers) forming. For example, as each RTK explores XX KX ¼ (Eq. 1) a monomer-dimer equilibrium, it is possible that a dimer, YY, ½X 2 and a monomer, X, interact to form a trimer, XYY. It is also ½ possible that two dimers interact to form a tetramer, XXYY. YY KY ¼ (Eq. 2) These cases are illustrated in Fig. 1. Here, we develop physical- ½Y 2 chemical models for these cases, which can be used to identify ½XY the model that best describes experimental data. K ¼ (Eq. 3) XY ½X ½Y Assuming that the total concentration of each RTK is Heterodimers (Fig. 1A) constant—an assumption that is valid for the conditions The heterodimer case has been considered previously by under which the FRET experiments are performed (43)— Del Piccolo et al.(42). Even in this simplest case, three then simple equations for mass conservation can be written coupled reactions are needed to describe the fact that both as follows. X and Y form homodimers, XX and YY, in addition to the ½¼ ½1 ½1½ heterodimer, XY. Xtotal X 2XX XY (Eq. 4) K ½¼ ½1 ½1½ ½X 1½X $X ½XX Ytotal Y 2YY XY (Eq. 5) K – ½Y 1½Y $Y ½YY By substituting in the values of KX and KY from Equations 1 2, the total concentrations can be written in terms of the mono- ½ ½KXY ½ X 1 Y $ XY mer and heterodimer concentrations as follows. À Reactions 1 3 ½ ½2 ½ ½¼Xtotal X 12KX X 1 XY (Eq. 6) Here, KX and KY are the homodimer association constants, ½¼½1 K ½21½ and KXY is the heterodimer association constant. These three Ytotal Y 2 Y Y XY (Eq. 7) 9918 J. Biol. Chem. (2020) 295(29) 9917–9933 RTK heterointeractions These are quadratic equations which can be solved for in The equations for mass conservation can be written as terms of the monomer concentration. follows. pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ½¼½1 ½1½ À11 1 À 8K ð½XY À ½ÞX Xtotal X 2XX XYY (Eq. 14) ½X ¼ X total (Eq. 8) 4KX ½ ½½ ½¼Ytotal Y 12YY12 XYY (Eq. 15) qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiÀÁ À 1 À ½À ½ 1 1 8KY XY Ytotal and these can be rewritten in terms of the association ½Y ¼ (Eq. 9) 4KY constants. ½ ½2 ½ Last, the concentration of the heterodimer can be written in ½¼Xtotal X 12KX X 1 XYY (Eq. 16) terms of the monomer concentrations and the heterodimer ½ 2 ½ association constant by rearranging Equation 3 as follows. ½¼Ytotal Y 12KY½Y 12 XYY (Eq. 17) ½½ ½XY¼KXY X Y (Eq. 10) These are quadratic equations which can be solved for in terms of [X] and [Y]. By substituting the values of [X] and [Y] from Equations 8 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi and 9 into Equation 10, we arrive at an equation where K À 1 À ð½À ½Þ XY ½¼ 1 1 8KX XYY Xtotal and[XY]aredefinedintermsof[X ], [Y ], K ,andK . X (Eq. 18) total total X Y 4KX As described previously (1, 6, 42, 44), quantitative FRET qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiÀÁ experiments can directly measure [Xtotal]and[Ytotal], and ½ À11 1 À 8KY 2 XYY À ½Ytotal the FRET efficiency. FRET efficiency is a function of [XY], as ½Y ¼ (Eq. 19) shown in Equation 32 (see “Materials and methods”).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Targeting FGFR/PDGFR/VEGFR Impairs Tumor Growth, Angiogenesis, and Metastasis by Effects on Tumor Cells, Endothelial Cells, and Pericytes in Pancreatic Cancer
    Published OnlineFirst September 1, 2011; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-11-0312 Molecular Cancer Preclinical Development Therapeutics Targeting FGFR/PDGFR/VEGFR Impairs Tumor Growth, Angiogenesis, and Metastasis by Effects on Tumor Cells, Endothelial Cells, and Pericytes in Pancreatic Cancer Johannes Taeger1, Christian Moser1, Claus Hellerbrand2, Maria E. Mycielska1, Gabriel Glockzin1, Hans J. Schlitt1, Edward K. Geissler1, Oliver Stoeltzing3, and Sven A. Lang1 Abstract Activation of receptor tyrosine kinases, such as fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR), platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR), and VEGF receptor (VEGFR), has been implicated in tumor progression and metastasis in human pancreatic cancer. In this study, we investigated the effects of TKI258, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor to FGFR, PDGFR, and VEGFR on pancreatic cancer cell lines (HPAF-II, BxPC-3, MiaPaCa2, and L3.6pl), endothelial cells, and vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMC). Results showed that treatment with TKI258 impaired activation of signaling intermediates in pancreatic cancer cells, endothelial cells, and VSMCs, even upon stimulation with FGF-1, FGF-2, VEGF-A, and PDGF-B. Furthermore, blockade of FGFR/PDGFR/VEGFR reduced survivin expression and improved activity of gemcitabine in MiaPaCa2 pancreatic cancer cells. In addition, motility of cancer cells, endothelial cells, and VSMCs was reduced upon treatment with TKI258. In vivo, therapy with TKI258 led to dose-dependent inhibition of subcutaneous (HPAF-II) and orthotopic (L3.6pl) tumor growth. Immunohistochemical analysis revealed effects on tumor cell proliferation [bromodeoxyuridine (BrdUrd)] and tumor vascularization (CD31). Moreover, lymph node metastases were significantly reduced in the orthotopic tumor model when treatment was initiated early with TKI258 (30 mg/kg/d).
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Signaling Pathways in the Development and Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma
    Oncogene (2010) 29, 4989–5005 & 2010 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved 0950-9232/10 www.nature.com/onc REVIEW The role of signaling pathways in the development and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma S Whittaker1,2, R Marais3 and AX Zhu4 1Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; 2The Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA, USA; 3Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK and 4Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a highly prevalent, malignancy in adults (Pons-Renedo and Llovet, 2003). treatment-resistant malignancy with a multifaceted mole- For the vast majority of patients, HCC is a late cular pathogenesis. Current evidence indicates that during complication of chronic liver disease, and as such, is hepatocarcinogenesis, two main pathogenic mechanisms often associated with cirrhosis. The main risk factors for prevail: (1) cirrhosis associated with hepatic regeneration the development of HCC include infection with hepatitis after tissue damage caused by hepatitis infection, toxins B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV). Hepatitis (for example, alcohol or aflatoxin) or metabolic influ- infection is believed to be the main etiologic factor in ences, and (2) mutations occurring in single or multiple 480% of cases (Anzola, 2004). Other risk factors oncogenes or tumor suppressor genes. Both mechanisms include excessive alcohol consumption, nonalcoholic have been linked with alterations in several important steatohepatitis, autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cellular signaling pathways. These pathways are of cirrhosis, exposure to environmental carcinogens (parti- interest from a therapeutic perspective, because targeting cularly aflatoxin B) and the presence of various genetic them may help to reverse, delay or prevent tumorigenesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Structural and Mechanistic Insights Into VEGF Receptor 3 Ligand Binding and Activation
    Structural and mechanistic insights into VEGF receptor 3 ligand binding and activation Veli-Matti Leppänena,1, Denis Tvorogova,1, Kaisa Kiskob, Andrea E. Protab, Michael Jeltscha, Andrey Anisimova, Sandra Markovic-Muellerb, Edward Stuttfeldb,c, Kenneth N. Goldied, Kurt Ballmer-Hoferb, and Kari Alitaloa,2 aWihuri Research Institute and Translational Cancer Biology Program, Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland and Helsinki University Central Hospital, Biomedicum Helsinki, University of Helsinki, 00014 Helsinki, Finland; bLaboratory of Biomolecular Research, Paul Scherrer Institute, CH-5232 Villigen PSI, Switzerland; cStructural Biology and Biophysics, Biozentrum, University of Basel, CH-4056 Basel, Switzerland; and dCenter for Cellular Imaging and NanoAnalytics, Biozentrum, University of Basel, CH-4056 Basel, Switzerland Edited by Napoleone Ferrara, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA, and approved June 26, 2013 (received for review January 23, 2013) Vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGFs) and their receptors binding, VEGFRs use predominantly D2, with D3 providing ad- (VEGFRs) are key drivers of blood and lymph vessel formation in ditional binding affinity (16–18). In addition, D1 is required for development, but also in several pathological processes. VEGF-C VEGFR-3 ligand binding, but the exact role of this domain re- signaling through VEGFR-3 promotes lymphangiogenesis, which is mains elusive (19, 20). VEGFRs and the closely related type III a clinically relevant target for treating lymphatic insufficiency and RTKs are activated by ligand-induced dimerization of the extra- for blocking tumor angiogenesis and metastasis. The extracellular cellular domain, followed by tyrosine autophosphorylation of the domain of VEGFRs consists of seven Ig homology domains; intracellular kinase domain to generate downstream signaling domains 1–3 (D1-3) are responsible for ligand binding, and the (21).
    [Show full text]
  • (VEGF) Receptor Gene, KDR, in Hematopoietic Cells and Inhibitory Effect of VEGF on Apoptotic Cell Death Caused by Ionizing Radiation
    ICANCERRESEARCH55. 5687-5692. December I, 9951 Expression of the Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Receptor Gene, KDR, in Hematopoietic Cells and Inhibitory Effect of VEGF on Apoptotic Cell Death Caused by Ionizing Radiation Osamu Katoh,' Hiroshi Tauchi, Kuniko Kawaishi, Akiro Kimura, and Yukio Satow Departments of Environment and Mutation 10. K., K. K., A. K., I'. S.J and Radiation Biology (H. TI, Research Institute for Radiation Biology and Medicine, Hiroshima University, Kasumi 1-2-3, Minami-ku, Hiroshima-shi 734, Japan ABSTRACT growth factors regulating hematopoiesis, including megakaryocyto poiesis. Several tyrosine kinase genes including KDR, FMS, KIT, and Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) has been identified as a TIE were detected by RT-PCR using degenerated primers correspond peptide growth factor specific for vascular endothelial cells. In this study, ing to the catalytic domains of the tyrosine kinase family (2, 3, 9, 10). we demonstrated the expression of the KDR gene transcript, which en We also report here mRNA expression of the FLT-1 and VEGF genes codes a cell surface receptor for VEGF, in normal human hematopoietic stem cells, megakaryocytes, and platelets as well as in human leukemia cell (1 1, 12) in human leukemia cell lines, hematopoietic stem cells, and lines, HEL and CMKS6. Moreover, we showed the expression of VEGF megakaryocytes. The KDR gene product and the FLT-1 gene product gene transcript in these normal fresh cells and cell lines To elucidate belong to the VEGF receptor family (9, 13, 14). biological functions of VEGF on hematopoiesis, we determined whether VEGF has been identified as a peptide growth factor specific for this growth factor has mitogenic activity to hematopoietic cells or the vascular endothelial cells ( 11).
    [Show full text]
  • A Selective Inhibitor of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-2 Tyrosine Kinase That Suppresses Tumor Angiogenesis and Growth
    Molecular Cancer Therapeutics 1639 KRN633: A selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 tyrosine kinase that suppresses tumor angiogenesis and growth Kazuhide Nakamura,1 Atsushi Yamamoto,1 permeability. These data suggest that KRN633 might be Masaru Kamishohara,1 Kazumi Takahashi,1 useful in the treatment of solid tumors and other diseases Eri Taguchi,1 Toru Miura,1 Kazuo Kubo,1 that depend on pathologic angiogenesis. [Mol Cancer Ther Masabumi Shibuya,2 and Toshiyuki Isoe1 2004;3(12):1639–49] 1Pharmaceutical Development Laboratories, Kirin Brewery Co. Ltd., Takasaki, Gunma and 2Division of Genetics, Institute of Medical Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan Introduction The formation of new blood vessels (angiogenesis) is es- sential for tumor progression and metastasis (1). This Abstract process is strictly controlled by positive angiogenic factors Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and its receptor and negative regulators; therefore, tumors without an VEGFR-2 play a central role in angiogenesis, which is angiogenic phenotype cannot grow beyond a certain size necessary for solid tumors to expand and metastasize. and remain in a state of dormancy. However, once tumors Specific inhibitors of VEGFR-2 tyrosine kinase are therefore become capable of angiogenesis due to somatic mutations thought to be useful for treating cancer. We showed that that alter the balance between angiogenic factors and neg- the quinazoline urea derivative KRN633 inhibited tyrosine ative regulators, they can grow rapidly and metastasize (2). Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is the an- phosphorylation of VEGFR-2 (IC50 = 1.16 nmol/L) in human umbilical vein endothelial cells. Selectivity profiling giogenic factor that is most closely associated with ag- with recombinant tyrosine kinases showed that KRN633 gressive disease in numerous solid tumors.
    [Show full text]
  • And Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor (VEGFR)
    molecules Review Molecular Targeting of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor (VEGFR) Nichole E. M. Kaufman 1, Simran Dhingra 1 , Seetharama D. Jois 2,* and Maria da Graça H. Vicente 1,* 1 Department of Chemistry, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA; [email protected] (N.E.M.K.); [email protected] (S.D.) 2 School of Basic Pharmaceutical and Toxicological Sciences, College of Pharmacy, University of Louisiana at Monroe, Monroe, LA 71201, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] (S.D.J.); [email protected] (M.d.G.H.V.); Tel.: +1-225-578-7405 (M.d.G.H.V.); Fax: +1-225-578-3458 (M.d.G.H.V.) Abstract: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) are two extensively studied membrane-bound receptor tyrosine kinase proteins that are frequently overexpressed in many cancers. As a result, these receptor families constitute attractive targets for imaging and therapeutic applications in the detection and treatment of cancer. This review explores the dynamic structure and structure-function relationships of these two growth factor receptors and their significance as it relates to theranostics of cancer, followed by some of the common inhibition modalities frequently employed to target EGFR and VEGFR, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), antibodies, nanobodies, and peptides. A summary of the recent advances Citation: Kaufman, N.E.M.; Dhingra, in molecular imaging techniques, including positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon S.; Jois, S.D.; Vicente, M.d.G.H. emission computerized tomography (SPECT), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance Molecular Targeting of Epidermal imaging (MRI), and optical imaging (OI), and in particular, near-IR fluorescence imaging using Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) and tetrapyrrolic-based fluorophores, concludes this review.
    [Show full text]
  • Diagnostic Value of VEGF-A, VEGFR-1 and VEGFR-2 in Feline Mammary Carcinoma
    cancers Article Diagnostic Value of VEGF-A, VEGFR-1 and VEGFR-2 in Feline Mammary Carcinoma Catarina Nascimento 1 , Andreia Gameiro 1, João Ferreira 2, Jorge Correia 1 and Fernando Ferreira 1,* 1 CIISA—Centro de Investigação Interdisciplinar em Sanidade Animal, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Universidade de Lisboa, Avenida da Universidade Técnica, 1300-477 Lisboa, Portugal; [email protected] (C.N.); [email protected] (A.G.); [email protected] (J.C.) 2 Instituto de Medicina Molecular, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, 1649-028 Lisboa, Portugal; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +351-21-365-2800 (ext. 431234) Simple Summary: Feline mammary carcinoma (FMC) is the third most common neoplasia in the cat, showing a highly malignant behavior, with both HER2-positive and triple negative (TN) subtypes presenting worse prognosis than luminal A and B subtypes. Furthermore, FMC has become a reliable cancer model for the study of human breast cancer, due to the similarities of clinicopathological, histopathological, and epidemiological features among the two species. Therefore, the identification of novel diagnostic biomarkers and therapeutic targets is needed to improve the clinical outcome of these patients. The aim of this study was to assess the potential of the VEGF-A/VEGFRs pathway, in order to validate future diagnostic and checkpoint-blocking therapies. Results showed that serum VEGF-A, VEGFR-1, and VEGFR-2 levels were significantly higher in cats with HER2-positive and TN normal-like tumors, presenting a positive association with its tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes expres- sion, suggesting that these molecules may serve as promising non-invasive diagnostic biomarkers for these subtypes.
    [Show full text]
  • Implications for Combining Anti–VEGF and Anti–EGFR Agents
    Subject Review The Role of VEGF and EGFR Inhibition: Implications for Combining Anti–VEGF and Anti–EGFR Agents Josep Tabernero Medical Oncology Service, Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain Abstract faceted approach involving targeted inhibition of multiple Multiple cellular pathways influence the growth and signaling pathways may be more effective than inhibition of metastatic potential of tumors. This creates a single target and may help overcome tumor resistance by heterogeneity, redundancy, and the potential for tumors blocking potential ‘‘escape routes.’’ to bypass signaling pathway blockade, resulting in Two key elements in the growth and dissemination of tumors primary or acquired resistance. Combining therapies that are the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and the inhibit different signaling pathways has the potential to epidermal growth factor (EGF) receptor (EGFR). The VEGF be more effective than inhibition of a single pathway and and EGFR pathways are closely related, sharing common down- to overcome tumor resistance. Vascular endothelial stream signaling pathways (1). Furthermore, EGF, a key EGFR growth factor (VEGF) and epidermal growth factor ligand, is one of the many growth factors that drive VEGF receptor (EGFR) inhibitors have become key therapies in expression (2). VEGF and EGFR play important roles in tumor several tumor types. Close relationships between these growth and progression through the exertion of both indirect and factors exist: VEGF signaling is up-regulated by EGFR direct effects on tumor cells (1). Biological agents targeting the expression and, conversely, VEGF up-regulation VEGF and EGFR pathways have shown clinical benefit in independent of EGFR signaling seems to contribute to several human cancers, either alone or in combination with resistance to EGFR inhibition.
    [Show full text]
  • Blockade of Epha Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Activation Inhibits Vascular Endothelial Cell Growth Factor-Induced Angiogenesis
    2 Vol. 1, 2–11, November 2002 Molecular Cancer Research Blockade of EphA Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Activation Inhibits Vascular Endothelial Cell Growth Factor-Induced Angiogenesis Nikki Cheng,1 Dana M. Brantley,2 Hua Liu,3,4 Qin Lin,2 Miriam Enriquez,4 Nick Gale,5 George Yancopoulos,5 Douglas Pat Cerretti,3 Thomas O. Daniel,3,4 and Jin Chen1,2,6 Departments of 1Cancer Biology, 2Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, 4Division of Nephrology, and 6Cell Biology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN; 3Immunex Corporation, Seattle, WA; and 5Regeneron Inc., Tarrytown, NY Abstract endothelial cell proliferation, migration, and assembly, as well Angiogenesis is a multistep process involving a diverse as recruitment of perivascular cells and extracellular matrix array of molecular signals. Ligands for receptor tyrosine remodeling. Three families of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) kinases (RTKs) have emerged as critical mediators of have emerged as critical mediators of angiogenesis; these are the angiogenesis. Three families of ligands, vascular endo- vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), Tie, and Eph RTK thelial cell growth factors (VEGFs), angiopoietins, and families (1, 2). VEGF (VEGF-A/VEGF165) is a potent angio- ephrins, act via RTKs expressed in endothelial cells. genic factor in both embryonic development and in adult disease Recent evidence indicates that VEGF cooperates with states, such as cancer. VEGF and its RTKs, Flt-1/VEGFR1 and angiopoietins to regulate vascular remodeling and Flk-1/KDR/VEGFR2, are required for the development and angiogenesis in both embryogenesis and tumor remodeling of blood vessels during embryogenesis (3–8). neovascularization. However, the relationship between Moreover, VEGF signaling plays a crucial role in pathogenic VEGF and ephrins remains unclear.
    [Show full text]
  • VEGF Receptor Protein–Tyrosine Kinases: Structure and Regulation
    Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 375 (2008) 287–291 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ybbrc Mini Review VEGF receptor protein–tyrosine kinases: Structure and regulation Robert Roskoski Jr. * Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research, 3754 Brevard Road, Suite 116A, Box 19, Horse Shoe, NC 28742, USA article info abstract Article history: The human VEGF family consists of VEGF (VEGF-A), VEGF-B, VEGF-C, VEGF-D, and placental growth factor Received 6 July 2008 (PlGF). The VEGF family of receptors consists of three protein–tyrosine kinases (VEGFR1, VEGFR2, and Available online 3 August 2008 VEGFR3) and two non-protein kinase co-receptors (neuropilin-1 and neuropilin-2). These components participate in new blood vessel formation from angioblasts (vasculogenesis) and new blood vessel forma- tion from pre-existing vasculature (angiogenesis). Interaction between VEGFR1 and VEGFR2 or VEGFR2 Keywords: and VEGFR3 alters receptor tyrosine phosphorylation. Angiogenesis Ó 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Flt-1 Flk-1/KDR Lymphangiogenesis Protein–tyrosine kinase Vasculogenesis . VEGF is one of the key regulators of angiogenesis, vasculogene- minal tail (Fig. 1 and Table 1). These enzymes catalyze the sis, and developmental hematopoiesis [1]. VEGF is a mitogen and following reaction: survival factor for vascular endothelial cells while also promoting MgATP1À protein-OH Protein-OPO2À MgADP Hþ vascular endothelial cell and monocyte motility. VEGF-B also pro- þ ! 3 þ þ motes angiogenesis in an ill-defined manner. VEGF-C participates where -OH is a tyrosyl hydroxyl group. Moreover, there are two in lymphangiogenesis during embryogenesis and in the mainte- non-enzymatic VEGF family co-receptors (neuropilin-1 and neuro- nance of differentiated lymphatic endothelium in adults.
    [Show full text]
  • HER2/Neu: an Increasingly Important Therapeutic Target
    Clinical Trial Outcomes NELSON HER2/neu: an increasingly important therapeutic target. Part 1 4 Clinical Trial Outcomes HER2/neu: an increasingly important therapeutic target. Part 1: basic biology & therapeutic armamentarium Clin. Invest. This is the first of a comprehensive three-part review of the foundation for and Edward L Nelson therapeutic targeting of HER2/neu. No biological molecule in oncology has been more University of California, Irvine, extensively or more successfully targeted than HER2/neu. This review will summarize School of Medicine; Division of Hematology/Oncology; Department the pertinent biology of HER2/neu and the EGF receptor family to which it belongs, of Medicine; Department of Molecular with attention to the biological foundation for the design and clinical development Biology & Biochemistry; Sprague Hall, of the entire range of HER2/neu-targeted therapies, including efforts to mitigate Irvine, CA 92697, USA resistance mechanisms. In conjunction with the subsequent two parts (HER2/neu tissue [email protected] expression and current HER2/neu-targeted therapeutics), this comprehensive survey will identify opportunities and promising areas for future evaluation of HER2/neu- targeted therapies, highlighting the importance of HER2/neu as an increasingly important therapeutic target. Keywords: c-erbB2 • EGF receptor • EGFR • EGFR ligand • expression modulation • HER2/neu • monoclonal antibody • signaling network • targeted therapeutic • tyrosine kinase inhibitor • vaccine The history of the molecule known as c-erbB2 = neu, c-erbB3 = EGFR-3, and HER2/neu dates back to the earliest stud- eventually, c-erbB4 = EGFR-4) were estab- 10.4155/CLI.14.57 ies of virus-associated oncogenes. In 1979, lished [13] . The fact that the neu molecule studies of avian erythroblastosis virus iden- and coding sequence was originally identi- tified two putative viral oncogenes, v-erbA fied in the rat species and only recently has and v-erbB [1–3] .
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) and VEGF Receptor
    Pharmacological Research 120 (2017) 116–132 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Pharmacological Research j ournal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/yphrs Invited Review Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and VEGF receptor inhibitors in the treatment of renal cell carcinomas ∗ Robert Roskoski Jr. Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research, 3754 Brevard Road, Suite 116, Box 19, Horse Shoe, NC 28742-8814, United States a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: One Von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) tumor suppressor gene is lost in most renal cell carcinomas while the Received 14 March 2017 nondeleted allele exhibits hypermethylation-induced inactivation or inactivating somatic mutations. As Accepted 15 March 2017 a result of these genetic modifications, there is an increased production of VEGF-A and pro-angiogenic Available online 19 March 2017 growth factors in this disorder. The important role of angiogenesis in the pathogenesis of renal cell carcinomas and other tumors has focused the attention of investigators on the biology of VEGFs and Chemical compounds studied in this article: VEGFR1–3 and to the development of inhibitors of the intricate and multifaceted angiogenic pathways. Axitinib: (PubMED CID: 6450551) VEGFR1–3 contain an extracellular segment with seven immunoglobulin-like domains, a transmembrane Bevacizumab: (PubMED CID: 24801580) segment, a juxtamembrane segment, a protein kinase domain with an insert of about 70 amino acid Pozantinib: (PubMED CID: 25102847) residues, and a C-terminal tail. VEGF-A stimulates the activation of preformed VEGFR2 dimers by the Lenvatinib: (PubMED CID: 9823820) Pazopanib (PubMED CID: 10113978) auto-phosphorylation of activation segment tyrosines followed by the phosphorylation of additional Sorafenib: (PubMED CID: 216239) protein-tyrosines that recruit phosphotyrosine binding proteins thereby leading to signalling by the Sunitinib: (PubMed CID: 5329102) ERK1/2, AKT, Src, and p38 MAP kinase pathways.
    [Show full text]