Necroptosis Molecular Mechanisms: Recent findings Regarding Novel Necroptosis Regulators Jinho Seo1,Youngwoonam2, Seongmi Kim2,Doo-Byoungoh1,3 and Jaewhan Song 2
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Aurora Kinase a in Gastrointestinal Cancers: Time to Target Ahmed Katsha1, Abbes Belkhiri1, Laura Goff3 and Wael El-Rifai1,2,4*
Katsha et al. Molecular Cancer (2015) 14:106 DOI 10.1186/s12943-015-0375-4 REVIEW Open Access Aurora kinase A in gastrointestinal cancers: time to target Ahmed Katsha1, Abbes Belkhiri1, Laura Goff3 and Wael El-Rifai1,2,4* Abstract Gastrointestinal (GI) cancers are a major cause of cancer-related deaths. During the last two decades, several studies have shown amplification and overexpression of Aurora kinase A (AURKA) in several GI malignancies. These studies demonstrated that AURKA not only plays a role in regulating cell cycle and mitosis, but also regulates a number of key oncogenic signaling pathways. Although AURKA inhibitors have moved to phase III clinical trials in lymphomas, there has been slower progress in GI cancers and solid tumors. Ongoing clinical trials testing AURKA inhibitors as a single agent or in combination with conventional chemotherapies are expected to provide important clinical information for targeting AURKA in GI cancers. It is, therefore, imperative to consider investigations of molecular determinants of response and resistance to this class of inhibitors. This will improve evaluation of the efficacy of these drugs and establish biomarker based strategies for enrollment into clinical trials, which hold the future direction for personalized cancer therapy. In this review, we will discuss the available data on AURKA in GI cancers. We will also summarize the major AURKA inhibitors that have been developed and tested in pre-clinical and clinical settings. Keywords: Aurora kinases, Therapy, AURKA inhibitors, MNL8237, Alisertib, Gastrointestinal, Cancer, Signaling pathways Introduction stage [9-11]. Furthermore, AURKA is critical for Mitotic kinases are the main proteins that coordinate ac- bipolar-spindle assembly where it interacts with Ran- curate mitotic processing [1]. -
RASSF1A Interacts with and Activates the Mitotic Kinase Aurora-A
Oncogene (2008) 27, 6175–6186 & 2008 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved 0950-9232/08 $32.00 www.nature.com/onc ORIGINAL ARTICLE RASSF1A interacts with and activates the mitotic kinase Aurora-A L Liu1, C Guo1, R Dammann2, S Tommasi1 and GP Pfeifer1 1Division of Biology, Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA and 2Institute of Genetics, University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany The RAS association domain family 1A (RASSF1A) gene tumorigenesis and carcinogen-induced tumorigenesis is located at chromosome 3p21.3 within a specific area of (Tommasi et al., 2005; van der Weyden et al., 2005), common heterozygous and homozygous deletions. RASS- supporting the notion that RASSF1A is a bona fide F1A frequently undergoes promoter methylation-asso- tumor suppressor. However, it is not fully understood ciated inactivation in human cancers. Rassf1aÀ/À mice how RASSF1A is involved in tumor suppression. are prone to both spontaneous and carcinogen-induced The biochemical function of the RASSF1A protein is tumorigenesis, supporting the notion that RASSF1A is a largely unknown. The homology of RASSF1A with the tumor suppressor. However, it is not fully understood how mammalian Ras effector novel Ras effector (NORE)1 RASSF1A is involved in tumor suppression pathways. suggests that the RASSF1A gene product may function Here we show that overexpression of RASSF1A inhibits in signal transduction pathways involving Ras-like centrosome separation. RASSF1A interacts with Aurora-A, proteins. However, recent data indicate that RASSF1A a mitotic kinase. Surprisingly, knockdown of RASS- itself binds to RAS only weakly and that binding to F1A by siRNA led to reduced activation of Aurora-A, RAS may require heterodimerization of RASSF1A and whereas overexpression of RASSF1A resulted in in- NORE1 (Ortiz-Vega et al., 2002). -
Casein Kinase 1 Isoforms in Degenerative Disorders
CASEIN KINASE 1 ISOFORMS IN DEGENERATIVE DISORDERS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Theresa Joseph Kannanayakal, M.Sc., M.S. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2004 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Jeff A. Kuret, Adviser Professor John D. Oberdick Professor Dale D. Vandre Adviser Professor Mike X. Zhu Biophysics Graduate Program ABSTRACT Casein Kinase 1 (CK1) enzyme is one of the largest family of Serine/Threonine protein kinases. CK1 has a wide distribution spanning many eukaryotic families. In cells, its kinase activity has been found in various sub-cellular compartments enabling it to phosphorylate many proteins involved in cellular maintenance and disease pathogenesis. Tau is one such substrate whose hyperphosphorylation results in degeneration of neurons in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). AD is a slow neuroprogessive disorder histopathologically characterized by Granulovacuolar degeneration bodies (GVBs) and intraneuronal accumulation of tau in Neurofibrillary Tangles (NFTs). The level of CK1 isoforms, CK1α, CK1δ and CK1ε has been shown to be elevated in AD. Previous studies of the correlation of CK1δ with lesions had demonstrated its importance in tau hyperphosphorylation. Hence we investigated distribution of CK1α and CK1ε with the lesions to understand if they would play role in tau hyperphosphorylation similar to CK1δ. The kinase results were also compared with lesion correlation studies of peptidyl cis/trans prolyl isomerase (Pin1) and caspase-3. Our results showed that among the enzymes investigated, CK1 isoforms have the greatest extent of colocalization with the lesions. We have also investigated the distribution of CK1α with different stages of NFTs that follow AD progression. -
Protein Kinases Phosphorylation/Dephosphorylation Protein Phosphorylation Is One of the Most Important Mechanisms of Cellular Re
Protein Kinases Phosphorylation/dephosphorylation Protein phosphorylation is one of the most important mechanisms of cellular responses to growth, stress metabolic and hormonal environmental changes. Most mammalian protein kinases have highly a homologous 30 to 32 kDa catalytic domain. • Most common method of reversible modification - activation and localization • Up to 1/3 of cellular proteins can be phosphorylated • Leads to a very fast response to cellular stress, hormonal changes, learning processes, transcription regulation .... • Different than allosteric or Michealis Menten regulation Protein Kinome To date – 518 human kinases known • 50 kinase families between yeast, invertebrate and mammaliane kinomes • 518 human PKs, most (478) belong to single super family whose catalytic domain are homologous. • Kinase dendrogram displays relative similarities based on catalytic domains. • AGC (PKA, PKG, PKC) • CAMK (Casein kinase 1) • CMGC (CDC, MAPK, GSK3, CLK) • STE (Sterile 7, 11 & 20 kinases) • TK (Tryosine kinases memb and cyto) • TKL (Tyrosine kinase-like) • Phosphorylation stabilized thermodynamically - only half available energy used in adding phosphoryl to protein - change in free energy forces phosphorylation reaction in one direction • Phosphatases reverse direction • The rate of reaction of most phosphatases are 1000 times faster • Phosphorylation occurs on Ser/The or Tyr • What differences occur due to the addition of a phosphoryl group? • Regulation of protein phosphorylation varies depending on protein - some turned on or off -
Mtor REGULATES AURORA a VIA ENHANCING PROTEIN STABILITY
mTOR REGULATES AURORA A VIA ENHANCING PROTEIN STABILITY Li Fan Submitted to the faculty of the University Graduate School in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indiana University December 2013 Accepted by the Graduate Faculty, of Indiana University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Lawrence A. Quilliam, Ph.D., Chair Doctoral Committee Simon J. Atkinson, Ph.D. Mark G. Goebl, Ph.D. October 22, 2013 Maureen A. Harrington, Ph.D. Ronald C. Wek, Ph.D. ii © 2013 Li Fan iii DEDICATION I dedicate this thesis to my family: to my parents, Xiu Zhu Fan and Shu Qin Yang, who have been loving, supporting, and encouraging me from the beginning of my life; to my husband Fei Huang, who provided unconditional support and encouragement through these years; to my son, David Yan Huang, who has made my life highly enjoyable and meaningful. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I sincerely thank my mentor Dr. Lawrence Quilliam for his guidance, motivation, support, and encouragement during my dissertation work. His passion for science and the scientific and organizational skills I have learned from Dr. Quilliam made it possible for me to achieve this accomplishment. Many thanks to Drs. Ron Wek, Mark Goebl, Maureen Harrington, and Simon Atkinson for serving on my committee and providing constructive suggestions and technical advice during my Ph.D. program. I have had a pleasurable experience working with all the people in our laboratory. Thanks Drs. Justin Babcock and Sirisha Asuri, and Mr. -
Supplementary Table 1. in Vitro Side Effect Profiling Study for LDN/OSU-0212320. Neurotransmitter Related Steroids
Supplementary Table 1. In vitro side effect profiling study for LDN/OSU-0212320. Percent Inhibition Receptor 10 µM Neurotransmitter Related Adenosine, Non-selective 7.29% Adrenergic, Alpha 1, Non-selective 24.98% Adrenergic, Alpha 2, Non-selective 27.18% Adrenergic, Beta, Non-selective -20.94% Dopamine Transporter 8.69% Dopamine, D1 (h) 8.48% Dopamine, D2s (h) 4.06% GABA A, Agonist Site -16.15% GABA A, BDZ, alpha 1 site 12.73% GABA-B 13.60% Glutamate, AMPA Site (Ionotropic) 12.06% Glutamate, Kainate Site (Ionotropic) -1.03% Glutamate, NMDA Agonist Site (Ionotropic) 0.12% Glutamate, NMDA, Glycine (Stry-insens Site) 9.84% (Ionotropic) Glycine, Strychnine-sensitive 0.99% Histamine, H1 -5.54% Histamine, H2 16.54% Histamine, H3 4.80% Melatonin, Non-selective -5.54% Muscarinic, M1 (hr) -1.88% Muscarinic, M2 (h) 0.82% Muscarinic, Non-selective, Central 29.04% Muscarinic, Non-selective, Peripheral 0.29% Nicotinic, Neuronal (-BnTx insensitive) 7.85% Norepinephrine Transporter 2.87% Opioid, Non-selective -0.09% Opioid, Orphanin, ORL1 (h) 11.55% Serotonin Transporter -3.02% Serotonin, Non-selective 26.33% Sigma, Non-Selective 10.19% Steroids Estrogen 11.16% 1 Percent Inhibition Receptor 10 µM Testosterone (cytosolic) (h) 12.50% Ion Channels Calcium Channel, Type L (Dihydropyridine Site) 43.18% Calcium Channel, Type N 4.15% Potassium Channel, ATP-Sensitive -4.05% Potassium Channel, Ca2+ Act., VI 17.80% Potassium Channel, I(Kr) (hERG) (h) -6.44% Sodium, Site 2 -0.39% Second Messengers Nitric Oxide, NOS (Neuronal-Binding) -17.09% Prostaglandins Leukotriene, -
The Role of Casein Kinase 1 in Meiosis
e & Ch m rom ro o d s n o y m S Zhao and Liang, J Down Syndr Chr Abnorm 2016, 2:1 e n A Journal of Down Syndrome & w b o n DOI: 10.4172/2472-1115.1000106 D o f r m o l ISSN: 2472-1115a a l i n t r i e u s o J Chromosome Abnormalities Review Article Open Access The Role of Casein Kinase 1 in Meiosis Yue-Fang Zhao and Cheng-Guang Liang* The Key Laboratory of National Education Ministry for Mammalian Reproductive Biology and Biotechnology, The Research Center for Laboratory Animal Science, College of Life Science, Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia, People’s Republic of China Abstract The casein kinase 1 (CK1) belongs to the serine/threonine protein kinases. CK1 members, which commonly exist in all eukaryotes, are involved in the regulation of many cellular processes linked to cell cycle progression, spindle- dynamics, and chromosome segregation. Additionally, CK1 regulate key signaling pathways such as Wnt (Wingless/ Int-1), Hh (Hedgehog), and Hippo, known to be critically involved in tumor progression. Considering the importance of CK1 for accurate cell division and regulation of tumor suppressor functions, it is not surprising scientific effort has enormously increased. In mammals, CK1 regulate the transition from interphase to metaphase in mitosis. In budding yeast and fission yeast, CK1 phosphorylate Rec8 subunits of cohesin complex and regulate chromosome segregation in meiosis. During meiosis, two rounds of chromosome segregation after a single round of DNA replication produce haploid gametes from diploid precursors. Any mistake in chromosome segregation may result in aneuploidy, which in meiosis are one of the main causes of infertility, abortion and many genetic diseases in humans. -
Covalent Aurora a Regulation by the Metabolic Integrator Coenzyme A
bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/469585; this version posted November 14, 2018. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-ND 4.0 International license. Covalent Aurora A regulation by the metabolic integrator coenzyme A Yugo Tsuchiya1#, Dominic P Byrne2#, Selena G Burgess3#, Jenny Bormann4, Jovana Bakovic1, Yueyan Huang1, Alexander Zhyvoloup1, Sew Peak-Chew5, Trang Tran6, Fiona Bellany6, Alethea Tabor6, AW Edith Chan7, Lalitha Guruprasad8, Oleg Garifulin9, Valeriy Filonenko9, Samantha Ferries10, Claire E Eyers10, John Carroll4^, Mark Skehel5, Richard Bayliss3*, Patrick A Eyers2* and Ivan Gout1,9* 1Department of Structural and Molecular Biology, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK 2Department of Biochemistry, Institute of Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZB, UK 3School of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Astbury Centre for Structural and Molecular Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK 4Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK 5MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge CB2 0QH, UK 6Department of Chemistry, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK 7Wolfson Institute for Biomedical Research, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK 8School of Chemistry, University of Hyderabad, Hyderabad 500 046, India 9Department of Cell -
Kinase-Targeted Cancer Therapies: Progress, Challenges and Future Directions Khushwant S
Bhullar et al. Molecular Cancer (2018) 17:48 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12943-018-0804-2 REVIEW Open Access Kinase-targeted cancer therapies: progress, challenges and future directions Khushwant S. Bhullar1, Naiara Orrego Lagarón2, Eileen M. McGowan3, Indu Parmar4, Amitabh Jha5, Basil P. Hubbard1 and H. P. Vasantha Rupasinghe6,7* Abstract The human genome encodes 538 protein kinases that transfer a γ-phosphate group from ATP to serine, threonine, or tyrosine residues. Many of these kinases are associated with human cancer initiation and progression. The recent development of small-molecule kinase inhibitors for the treatment of diverse types of cancer has proven successful in clinical therapy. Significantly, protein kinases are the second most targeted group of drug targets, after the G-protein- coupled receptors. Since the development of the first protein kinase inhibitor, in the early 1980s, 37 kinase inhibitors have received FDA approval for treatment of malignancies such as breast and lung cancer. Furthermore, about 150 kinase-targeted drugs are in clinical phase trials, and many kinase-specific inhibitors are in the preclinical stage of drug development. Nevertheless, many factors confound the clinical efficacy of these molecules. Specific tumor genetics, tumor microenvironment, drug resistance, and pharmacogenomics determine how useful a compound will be in the treatment of a given cancer. This review provides an overview of kinase-targeted drug discovery and development in relation to oncology and highlights the challenges and future potential for kinase-targeted cancer therapies. Keywords: Kinases, Kinase inhibition, Small-molecule drugs, Cancer, Oncology Background Recent advances in our understanding of the fundamen- Kinases are enzymes that transfer a phosphate group to a tal molecular mechanisms underlying cancer cell signaling protein while phosphatases remove a phosphate group have elucidated a crucial role for kinases in the carcino- from protein. -
Cell Cycle Genes 243831 at MAPK6
Identificación de vulnerabilidades en tumores sólidos: ¿aportes hacia una medicina personalizada? Alberto Ocana Albacete University Hospital Salamanca May 19th, 2016 WHAT IS PERSONALIZED MEDICINE? Molecular alteration------------targeted agents---------companion diagnostic Drugs with companion diagnostic Ocana A et al, Oncotarget 2016 Meta-analyses companion vs non-companion diagnostics PFS OS Meta-analyses of toxicities • Methods to identify oncogenic and non-oncogenic vulnerabilities • How to evaluate novel agents against them Our personal experience Synthetic Lethality Interactions Ocana A and Pandiella A, Personalized therapies in the cancr omics era. Mol Cancer 2010 Summary Mutation and copy number analyses Phospho-kinase profiling Transcriptomic analyses Synthetic Lethality Interactions- Evaluation of new drugs “Academic iniciatives: Drug developer” software as a tool Mutation and copy number analyses No very useful if not linked with a functional evaluation in a specific genetic context A somatic cancer driver event may depend on the constellation of polymorphisms already present in an individual’s germline . (Germline variants single nucleotide polymorphisms, SNPs). But it can be useful for: Clonal evolution of tumors Heterogeneity of tumors Monitor response to treatments and identify mechanism of resistance Single cell sequencing Circulating tumor DNA As a part of a global study; pathway level alterations Example: Evaluation of mutations in ER using circulating DNA in patients treated with palbociclib + hormonotherapy Phospho-kinase -
Figure S1. Reverse Transcription‑Quantitative PCR Analysis of ETV5 Mrna Expression Levels in Parental and ETV5 Stable Transfectants
Figure S1. Reverse transcription‑quantitative PCR analysis of ETV5 mRNA expression levels in parental and ETV5 stable transfectants. (A) Hec1a and Hec1a‑ETV5 EC cell lines; (B) Ishikawa and Ishikawa‑ETV5 EC cell lines. **P<0.005, unpaired Student's t‑test. EC, endometrial cancer; ETV5, ETS variant transcription factor 5. Figure S2. Survival analysis of sample clusters 1‑4. Kaplan Meier graphs for (A) recurrence‑free and (B) overall survival. Survival curves were constructed using the Kaplan‑Meier method, and differences between sample cluster curves were analyzed by log‑rank test. Figure S3. ROC analysis of hub genes. For each gene, ROC curve (left) and mRNA expression levels (right) in control (n=35) and tumor (n=545) samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas Uterine Corpus Endometrioid Cancer cohort are shown. mRNA levels are expressed as Log2(x+1), where ‘x’ is the RSEM normalized expression value. ROC, receiver operating characteristic. Table SI. Clinicopathological characteristics of the GSE17025 dataset. Characteristic n % Atrophic endometrium 12 (postmenopausal) (Control group) Tumor stage I 91 100 Histology Endometrioid adenocarcinoma 79 86.81 Papillary serous 12 13.19 Histological grade Grade 1 30 32.97 Grade 2 36 39.56 Grade 3 25 27.47 Myometrial invasiona Superficial (<50%) 67 74.44 Deep (>50%) 23 25.56 aMyometrial invasion information was available for 90 of 91 tumor samples. Table SII. Clinicopathological characteristics of The Cancer Genome Atlas Uterine Corpus Endometrioid Cancer dataset. Characteristic n % Solid tissue normal 16 Tumor samples Stagea I 226 68.278 II 19 5.740 III 70 21.148 IV 16 4.834 Histology Endometrioid 271 81.381 Mixed 10 3.003 Serous 52 15.616 Histological grade Grade 1 78 23.423 Grade 2 91 27.327 Grade 3 164 49.249 Molecular subtypeb POLE 17 7.328 MSI 65 28.017 CN Low 90 38.793 CN High 60 25.862 CN, copy number; MSI, microsatellite instability; POLE, DNA polymerase ε. -
Proteomic Characterization of the Angiogenesis Inhibitor SU6668 Reveals Multiple Impacts on Cellular Kinase Signaling
Research Article Proteomic Characterization of the Angiogenesis Inhibitor SU6668 Reveals Multiple Impacts on Cellular Kinase Signaling Klaus Godl,1 Oliver J. Gruss,2 Jan Eickhoff,1 Josef Wissing,1,3 Stephanie Blencke,1 Martina Weber,1 Heidrun Degen,1 Dirk Brehmer,1 La´szlo´O˝rfi,4 Zolta´n Horva´th,4 Gyo¨rgy Ke´ri,4 Stefan Mu¨ller,1 Matt Cotten,1 Axel Ullrich,5,6 and Henrik Daub1 1Axxima Pharmaceuticals AG, Munich, Germany; 2ZMBH, Heidelberg, Germany; 3Department of Cell Biology, GBF, Braunschweig, Germany; 4Vichem Chemie Ltd., Budapest, Hungary; 5Department of Molecular Biology, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Martinsried, Germany; and 6Centre for Molecular Medicine, Agency for Science, Technology, and Research, Proteos, Singapore Abstract activation of its cognate receptor on endothelial cells is particularly important for angiogenesis early in tumor develop- Knowledge about molecular drug action is critical for the h development of protein kinase inhibitors for cancer therapy. ment, whereas PDGFR signaling in pericytes plays a critical role Here, we establish a chemical proteomic approach to profile for the maintenance of established blood vessels in late-stage the anticancer drug SU6668, which was originally designed as tumors (3). Moreover, fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR)– a selective inhibitor of receptor tyrosine kinases involved in mediated VEGF biosynthesis in endothelial cells has been tumor vascularization. By employing immobilized SU6668 for reported as an autocrine mechanism that further augments the affinity capture of cellular drug targets in combination angiogenesis (4). with mass spectrometry, we identified previously unknown The knowledge about RTK function in the process of tumor vascularization has provided rationales for the development of targets of SU6668 including Aurora kinases and TANK-binding antiangiogenic small molecule drugs such as the indolinone kinase 1.