Novel Functions of Endocytic Player Clathrin in Mitosis
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). -
Therapeutic Implications for Ovarian Cancer Emerging from the Tumor Cancer Genome Atlas
Review Article Therapeutic implications for ovarian cancer emerging from the Tumor Cancer Genome Atlas Claire Verschraegen, Karen Lounsbury, Alan Howe, Marc Greenblatt University of Vermont Cancer Center, Burlington, VT 05405, USA Correspondence to: Claire Verschraegen, MD. University of Vermont Cancer Center, 89 Beaumont Avenue, Given E 214, Burlington, VT 05405, USA. Email: [email protected] Abstract: With increasing insights into the molecular landscape of ovarian cancer, subtypes are emerging that might require differential targeted therapies. While the combination of a platinum and a taxane remains the standard of care, newer therapies, specifically targeted to molecular anomalies, are rapidly being tested in various cancers. A major effort to better understand ovarian cancer occurred through the Cancer Atlas Project. The Catalogue of Somatic Mutations in Cancer (COSMIC) is a database that collates mutation data and associated information extracted from the primary literature. The information from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC), which systematically analyzed hundreds of ovarian cancer, are included in COSMIC, sometimes with discordant results. In this manuscript, the published data (mainly from TCGA) on somatic high grade papillary serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) mutations has been used as the basis to propose a more granular approach to ovarian cancer treatment, already a reality for tumors such as lung and breast cancers. TP53 mutations are the most common molecular anomaly in HGSOC, and lead to genomic instability, perhaps through the FOXM1 node. Normalizing P53 has been a therapeutic challenge, and is being extensively studied. BRCAness is found an about 50% of HGSOC and can be targeted with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, such as olaparib, recently approved for ovarian cancer treatment. -
Supplementary Information Material and Methods
MCT-11-0474 BKM120: a potent and specific pan-PI3K inhibitor Supplementary Information Material and methods Chemicals The EGFR inhibitor NVP-AEE788 (Novartis), the Jak inhibitor I (Merck Calbiochem, #420099) and anisomycin (Alomone labs, # A-520) were prepared as 50 mM stock solutions in 100% DMSO. Doxorubicin (Adriablastin, Pfizer), EGF (Sigma Ref: E9644), PDGF (Sigma, Ref: P4306) and IL-4 (Sigma, Ref: I-4269) stock solutions were prepared as recommended by the manufacturer. For in vivo administration: Temodal (20 mg Temozolomide capsules, Essex Chemie AG, Luzern) was dissolved in 4 mL KZI/glucose (20/80, vol/vol); Taxotere was bought as 40 mg/mL solution (Sanofi Aventis, France), and prepared in KZI/glucose. Antibodies The primary antibodies used were as follows: anti-S473P-Akt (#9271), anti-T308P-Akt (#9276,), anti-S9P-GSK3β (#9336), anti-T389P-p70S6K (#9205), anti-YP/TP-Erk1/2 (#9101), anti-YP/TP-p38 (#9215), anti-YP/TP-JNK1/2 (#9101), anti-Y751P-PDGFR (#3161), anti- p21Cip1/Waf1 (#2946), anti-p27Kip1 (#2552) and anti-Ser15-p53 (#9284) antibodies were from Cell Signaling Technologies; anti-Akt (#05-591), anti-T32P-FKHRL1 (#06-952) and anti- PDGFR (#06-495) antibodies were from Upstate; anti-IGF-1R (#SC-713) and anti-EGFR (#SC-03) antibodies were from Santa Cruz; anti-GSK3α/β (#44610), anti-Y641P-Stat6 (#611566), anti-S1981P-ATM (#200-301), anti-T2609 DNA-PKcs (#GTX24194) and anti- 1 MCT-11-0474 BKM120: a potent and specific pan-PI3K inhibitor Y1316P-IGF-1R were from Bio-Source International, Becton-Dickinson, Rockland, GenTex and internal production, respectively. The 4G10 antibody was from Millipore (#05-321MG). -
Profiling Data
Compound Name DiscoveRx Gene Symbol Entrez Gene Percent Compound Symbol Control Concentration (nM) JNK-IN-8 AAK1 AAK1 69 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(E255K)-phosphorylated ABL1 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(F317I)-nonphosphorylated ABL1 87 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(F317I)-phosphorylated ABL1 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(F317L)-nonphosphorylated ABL1 65 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(F317L)-phosphorylated ABL1 61 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(H396P)-nonphosphorylated ABL1 42 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(H396P)-phosphorylated ABL1 60 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(M351T)-phosphorylated ABL1 81 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(Q252H)-nonphosphorylated ABL1 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(Q252H)-phosphorylated ABL1 56 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(T315I)-nonphosphorylated ABL1 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(T315I)-phosphorylated ABL1 92 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1(Y253F)-phosphorylated ABL1 71 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1-nonphosphorylated ABL1 97 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL1-phosphorylated ABL1 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 ABL2 ABL2 97 1000 JNK-IN-8 ACVR1 ACVR1 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 ACVR1B ACVR1B 88 1000 JNK-IN-8 ACVR2A ACVR2A 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 ACVR2B ACVR2B 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 ACVRL1 ACVRL1 96 1000 JNK-IN-8 ADCK3 CABC1 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 ADCK4 ADCK4 93 1000 JNK-IN-8 AKT1 AKT1 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 AKT2 AKT2 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 AKT3 AKT3 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 ALK ALK 85 1000 JNK-IN-8 AMPK-alpha1 PRKAA1 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 AMPK-alpha2 PRKAA2 84 1000 JNK-IN-8 ANKK1 ANKK1 75 1000 JNK-IN-8 ARK5 NUAK1 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 ASK1 MAP3K5 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 ASK2 MAP3K6 93 1000 JNK-IN-8 AURKA AURKA 100 1000 JNK-IN-8 AURKA AURKA 84 1000 JNK-IN-8 AURKB AURKB 83 1000 JNK-IN-8 AURKB AURKB 96 1000 JNK-IN-8 AURKC AURKC 95 1000 JNK-IN-8 -
Application of a MYC Degradation
SCIENCE SIGNALING | RESEARCH ARTICLE CANCER Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; Application of a MYC degradation screen identifies exclusive licensee American Association sensitivity to CDK9 inhibitors in KRAS-mutant for the Advancement of Science. No claim pancreatic cancer to original U.S. Devon R. Blake1, Angelina V. Vaseva2, Richard G. Hodge2, McKenzie P. Kline3, Thomas S. K. Gilbert1,4, Government Works Vikas Tyagi5, Daowei Huang5, Gabrielle C. Whiten5, Jacob E. Larson5, Xiaodong Wang2,5, Kenneth H. Pearce5, Laura E. Herring1,4, Lee M. Graves1,2,4, Stephen V. Frye2,5, Michael J. Emanuele1,2, Adrienne D. Cox1,2,6, Channing J. Der1,2* Stabilization of the MYC oncoprotein by KRAS signaling critically promotes the growth of pancreatic ductal adeno- carcinoma (PDAC). Thus, understanding how MYC protein stability is regulated may lead to effective therapies. Here, we used a previously developed, flow cytometry–based assay that screened a library of >800 protein kinase inhibitors and identified compounds that promoted either the stability or degradation of MYC in a KRAS-mutant PDAC cell line. We validated compounds that stabilized or destabilized MYC and then focused on one compound, Downloaded from UNC10112785, that induced the substantial loss of MYC protein in both two-dimensional (2D) and 3D cell cultures. We determined that this compound is a potent CDK9 inhibitor with a previously uncharacterized scaffold, caused MYC loss through both transcriptional and posttranslational mechanisms, and suppresses PDAC anchorage- dependent and anchorage-independent growth. We discovered that CDK9 enhanced MYC protein stability 62 through a previously unknown, KRAS-independent mechanism involving direct phosphorylation of MYC at Ser . -
The Number of Genes
Table S1. The numbers of KD genes in each KD time The number The number The number The number Cell lines of genes of genes of genes of genes (96h) (120h) (144h) PC3 3980 3822 128 1725 A549 3724 3724 0 0 MCF7 3688 3471 0 1837 HT29 3665 3665 0 0 A375 3826 3826 0 0 HA1E 3801 3801 0 0 VCAP 4134 34 4121 0 HCC515 3522 3522 0 0 Table S2. The predicted results in the PC3 cell line on the LINCS II data id target rank A07563059 ADRB2 48 A12896037 ADRA2C 91 A13021932 YES1 77 PPM1B;PPP1CC;PPP2CA; A13254067 584;1326;297;171;3335 PTPN1;PPP2R5A A16347691 GMNN 2219 PIK3CB;MTOR;PIK3CA;PIK A28467416 18;10;9;13;8 3CG;PIK3CD A28545468 EHMT2;MAOB 14;67 A29520968 HSPB1 1770 A48881734 EZH2 1596 A52922642 CACNA1C 201 A64553394 ADRB2 155 A65730376 DOT1L 3764 A82035391 JUN 378 A82156122 DPP4 771 HRH1;HTR2C;CHRM3;CH A82772293 2756;2354;2808;2367 RM1 A86248581 CDA 1785 A92800748 TEK 459 A93093700 LMNA 1399 K00152668 RARB 105 K01577834 ADORA2A 525 K01674964 HRH1;BLM 31;1314 K02314383 AR 132 K03194791 PDE4D 30 K03390685 MAP2K1 77 K06762493 GMNN;APEX1 1523;2360 K07106112 ERBB4;ERBB2;EGFR 497;60;23 K07310275 AKT1;MTOR;PIK3CA 13;12;1 K07753030 RGS4;BLM 3736;3080 K08109215 BRD2;BRD3;BRD4 1413;2786;3 K08248804 XIAP 88 K08586861 TBXA2R;MBNL1 297;3428 K08832567 GMNN;CA12 2544;50 LMNA;NFKB1;APEX1;EH K08976401 1322;341;3206;123 MT2 K09372874 IMPDH2 232 K09711437 PLA2G2A 59 K10859802 GPR119 214 K11267252 RET;ALK 395;760 K12609457 LMNA 907 K13094524 BRD4 7 K13662825 CDK4;CDK9;CDK5;CDK1 34;58;13;18 K14704277 LMNA;BLM 1697;1238 K14870255 AXL 1696 K15170068 MAN2B1 1756 K15179879 -
Lipid Metabolic Reprogramming: Role in Melanoma Progression and Therapeutic Perspectives
cancers Review Lipid metabolic Reprogramming: Role in Melanoma Progression and Therapeutic Perspectives 1, 1, 1 2 1 Laurence Pellerin y, Lorry Carrié y , Carine Dufau , Laurence Nieto , Bruno Ségui , 1,3 1, , 1, , Thierry Levade , Joëlle Riond * z and Nathalie Andrieu-Abadie * z 1 Centre de Recherches en Cancérologie de Toulouse, Equipe Labellisée Fondation ARC, Université Fédérale de Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées, Université Toulouse III Paul-Sabatier, Inserm 1037, 2 avenue Hubert Curien, tgrCS 53717, 31037 Toulouse CEDEX 1, France; [email protected] (L.P.); [email protected] (L.C.); [email protected] (C.D.); [email protected] (B.S.); [email protected] (T.L.) 2 Institut de Pharmacologie et de Biologie Structurale, CNRS, Université Toulouse III Paul-Sabatier, UMR 5089, 205 Route de Narbonne, 31400 Toulouse, France; [email protected] 3 Laboratoire de Biochimie Métabolique, CHU Toulouse, 31059 Toulouse, France * Correspondence: [email protected] (J.R.); [email protected] (N.A.-A.); Tel.: +33-582-7416-20 (J.R.) These authors contributed equally to this work. y These authors jointly supervised this work. z Received: 15 September 2020; Accepted: 23 October 2020; Published: 27 October 2020 Simple Summary: Melanoma is a devastating skin cancer characterized by an impressive metabolic plasticity. Melanoma cells are able to adapt to the tumor microenvironment by using a variety of fuels that contribute to tumor growth and progression. In this review, the authors summarize the contribution of the lipid metabolic network in melanoma plasticity and aggressiveness, with a particular attention to specific lipid classes such as glycerophospholipids, sphingolipids, sterols and eicosanoids. -
The CHEK2 Variant C.349A>G Is Associated with Prostate Cancer
cancers Article The CHEK2 Variant C.349A>G Is Associated with Prostate Cancer Risk and Carriers Share a Common Ancestor Andreia Brandão 1 , Paula Paulo 1, Sofia Maia 1, Manuela Pinheiro 1, Ana Peixoto 2, Marta Cardoso 1, Maria P. Silva 1, Catarina Santos 2, Rosalind A. Eeles 3,4 , Zsofia Kote-Jarai 3, 5,6 7, 8,9 10 Kenneth Muir , UKGPCS Collaborators y, Johanna Schleutker , Ying Wang , Nora Pashayan 11,12 , Jyotsna Batra 13,14, APCB BioResource 13,14, Henrik Grönberg 15, David E. Neal 16,17,18, Børge G. Nordestgaard 19,20 , Catherine M. Tangen 21, Melissa C. Southey 22,23,24, Alicja Wolk 25,26, Demetrius Albanes 27, Christopher A. Haiman 28, Ruth C. Travis 29, Janet L. Stanford 30,31, Lorelei A. Mucci 32, Catharine M. L. West 33, Sune F. Nielsen 19,20, Adam S. Kibel 34, Olivier Cussenot 35,36, Sonja I. Berndt 27, Stella Koutros 27, Karina Dalsgaard Sørensen 37,38 , Cezary Cybulski 39 , Eli Marie Grindedal 40, Jong Y. Park 41 , Sue A. Ingles 42, Christiane Maier 43, Robert J. Hamilton 44,45, Barry S. Rosenstein 46,47, 48,49,50 7, Ana Vega , The IMPACT Study Steering Committee and Collaborators z, Manolis Kogevinas 51,52,53,54, Fredrik Wiklund 15 , Kathryn L. Penney 55, Hermann Brenner 56,57,58 , Esther M. John 59, Radka Kaneva 60, Christopher J. Logothetis 61, Susan L. Neuhausen 62, Kim De Ruyck 63, Azad Razack 64, Lisa F. Newcomb 30,65, Canary PASS Investigators 30,65, Davor Lessel 66 , Nawaid Usmani 67,68, Frank Claessens 69, Manuela Gago-Dominguez 70,71 , Paul A. -
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. -
Ncomms4885.Pdf
ARTICLE Received 4 Feb 2014 | Accepted 14 Apr 2014 | Published 30 May 2014 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms4885 Microcephaly disease gene Wdr62 regulates mitotic progression of embryonic neural stem cells and brain size Jian-Fu Chen1,2, Ying Zhang1, Jonathan Wilde1, Kirk C. Hansen3, Fan Lai4 & Lee Niswander1 Human genetic studies have established a link between a class of centrosome proteins and microcephaly. Current studies of microcephaly focus on defective centrosome/spindle orientation. Mutations in WDR62 are associated with microcephaly and other cortical abnormalities in humans. Here we create a mouse model of Wdr62 deficiency and find that the mice exhibit reduced brain size due to decreased neural progenitor cells (NPCs). Wdr62 depleted cells show spindle instability, spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) activation, mitotic arrest and cell death. Mechanistically, Wdr62 associates and genetically interacts with Aurora A to regulate spindle formation, mitotic progression and brain size. Our results suggest that Wdr62 interacts with Aurora A to control mitotic progression, and loss of these interactions leads to mitotic delay and cell death of NPCs, which could be a potential cause of human microcephaly. 1 Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Children’s Hospital Colorado, Aurora, Colorado 80045, USA. 2 Department of Genetics, Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602, USA. 3 Biochemistry & Molecular Genetics, University of Colorado Denver, Aurora, Colorado 80045, USA. 4 The Wistar Institute, 3601 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to J-F.C. (email: [email protected]) or to L.N. -
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