Membrane-permeable compounds that reversibly inhibit a particular step in gene expression are highly useful tools for cell biological and biochemical/structural studies. In comparison with other gene expression steps where multiple small molecule effectors are available, very few compounds have been described that act as general inhibitors of pre-mRNA splicing. Here we report construction and validation of a set of mammalian cell lines suitable for the identification of small molecule inhibitors of pre-mRNA splicing. Using these cell lines, we identified the natural product isoginkgetin as a general inhibitor of both the major and minor spliceosomes. Isoginkgetin inhibits splicing both in vivo and in vitro at similar micromolar concentrations. It appears to do so by preventing stable recruitment of the U4/U5/U6 tri-small nuclear ribonucleoprotein, resulting in accumulation of the prespliceosomal A complex. Like two other recently reported general pre-mRNA splicing inhibitors, isoginkgetin has been previously described as an anti-tumor agent. Our results suggest that splicing inhibition is the mechanistic basis of the anti-tumor activity of isoginkgetin. Thus, pre-mRNA splicing inhibitors may represent a novel avenue for development of new anti-cancer agents.
Membrane-permeable compounds that reversibly inhibit a particular step in gene expression are highly useful tools for cell biological and biochemical/structural studies. In comparison with other gene expression steps where multiple small molecule effectors are available, very few compounds have been described that act as general inhibitors of pre-mRNA splicing. Here we report construction and validation of a set of mammalian cell lines suitable for the identification of small molecule inhibitors of pre-mRNA splicing. Using these cell lines, we identified the natural product isoginkgetin as a general inhibitor of both the major and minor spliceosomes. Isoginkgetin inhibits splicing both in vivo and in vitro at similar micromolar concentrations. It appears to do so by preventing stable recruitment of the U4/U5/U6 tri-small nuclear ribonucleoprotein, resulting in accumulation of the prespliceosomal A complex. Like two other recently reported general pre-mRNA splicing inhibitors, isoginkgetin has been previously described as an anti-tumor agent. Our results suggest that splicing inhibition is the mechanistic basis of the anti-tumor activity of isoginkgetin. Thus, pre-mRNA splicing inhibitors may represent a novel avenue for development of new anti-cancer agents.
The removal of introns from nascent transcripts by the process of pre-mRNA
(precursor to messenger RNA) splicing is an essential step in eukaryotic gene
expression. Splicing is mediated by the spliceosome, a highly dynamic,
multimegadalton machine composed of five small stable nuclear RNAs
(snRNAs)2 and more
than 100 polypeptides (reviewed in Ref.
1). Within the spliceosome,
intron excision occurs in two chemical steps: 1) 5′ splice site cleavage
accompanied by lariat formation at the branch point adenosine and 2) 3′
splice site cleavage accompanied by exon ligation. Both of these steps are
readily observable in in vitro reactions containing crude nuclear
extract and ATP as an energy source. In such reactions, spliceosome assembly
occurs in a distinctly stepwise fashion. First, the pre-mRNA substrate is
coated with a heterogeneous mixture of RNA-binding proteins (referred to as H
complex). Interaction of U1 snRNP (U1 snRNA and its associated proteins) with
the 5′ splice site and recognition of the branch point adenosine by U2
snRNP generates an early commitment complex (E or CC complex). A subsequent
ATP-dependent step stabilizes the U2 snRNP-branch point interaction, resulting
in formation of the prespliceosome (A complex). Entry of the U4/U5/U6
tri-snRNP to form B complex is followed by multiple structural rearrangements,
which produce the catalytically active C complex, wherein the two chemical
steps of splicing occur. Finally, the ligated exon and lariat products are
released, and the remaining spliceosome components are disassembled.In the more than two decades since its initial description
(2,
3), a wealth of information has
been gleaned regarding the parts list of the spliceosome, its gross
assembly/disassembly pathway, certain key local structural interactions, and
the activities of individual components. However, in comparison with other
macromolecular machines, such as the ribosome and RNA polymerase II, our
understanding of the spliceosome's inner workings and its detailed structure
is still in its infancy. Mechanistic understanding of other macromolecular
complexes has been greatly enhanced by the availability of multiple small
molecule inhibitors impeding their functional cycles at different points
(4,
5). Such small molecules have
been likened to wrenches that can be thrown into the works to freeze cellular
machines in specific conformations, making them more amenable to biochemical
and structural investigation
(4). Although a set of such
wrenches that inhibit splicing in vitro or inhibit specific or
alternative splicing events in vivo is being generated
(4,
6–10),
there is currently a paucity of small molecules that affect general pre-mRNA
splicing in vivo.In this paper, we describe a cell-based assay to screen for general
splicing inhibitors. This assay takes advantage of the observation that some
amount of unspliced pre-mRNA can escape from the nucleus and become available
for translation in the cytoplasm
(11,
12). By screening for an
increase in reporter protein expression from a mammalian pre-mRNA designed
such that only the unspliced version generates active protein, we were able to
identify a compound that acts as a general inhibitor of splicing both in
vivo and in vitro. This inhibitor is the naturally occurring
biflavonoidisoginkgetin. In in vitro reactions, isoginkgetin causes
accumulation of the prespliceosomal A complex. Like two other compounds
recently described as in vivo splicing inhibitors
(13,
14), isoginkgetin is a known
anti-tumor agent (15). Our
results suggest that the mechanistic basis of the anti-tumor activity of
isoginkgetin is its inhibition of pre-mRNA splicing.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
Plasmids—Reporter construct I was created by replacing the
Renilla luciferase gene in plasmid triose-phosphate isomerase
(TPI)/Renilla luciferase 5′ intron (pSHM06T)
(16) with the firefly
luc2 gene from plasmid pGL4.10 (Promega). Construct II is identical
to construct I except that site-directed mutagenesis was used to remove an
in-frame stop codon in the intron and add a G at position 6 in TPI exon 7.
Construct III was generated by site-directed mutagenesis of II to inactivate
the 5′ splice site. Constructs I, II, and III were subcloned into vector
pcDNA5/FRT for integration into the flp recombinase target (FRT)
sequence in HEK293 cells (described below).Cell Culture and Generation of Stable Cell Lines—Cells were
grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine
serum and antibiotics (Invitrogen), as indicated below. Trypan blue
(Invitrogen) and Alamar blue (BIOSOURCE) assays were done according to
standard protocols. To generate a host cell line containing an integrated FRT
site, HEK293 cells (ATCC) were transfected with ScaI-linearized
pFRT/lacZeo (Invitrogen) using FuGENE 6 (Roche Applied Science) as
per the Flp-In™ system manual (Invitrogen). Stable integrants were
selected with 100 μg/ml zeocin. Southern blotting and β-galactosidase
assays identified cell clones with integrants expressing intermediate levels
of the LacZ-Zeo fusion. Two such clones (293F1 and 293F2) were subsequently
co-transfected with one of the three reporter plasmids and pOG44 (Invitrogen),
which encodes Flp recombinase. Successful targeting of the reporter plasmid to
the FRT site was selected by treatment with 100 μg/ml hygromycin.Luciferase Assays and RNA Isolation—Cells were grown in
24-well, 6-well, or 6-cm dishes and treated with DMSO or DMSO plus
isoginkgetin, as indicated in the figure legends. Luciferase assays
(luciferase assay system; Promega) were performed using a TD-20/20 Luminometer
(Turner Systems). Protein concentrations were determined for lysates using the
DC protein assay (Bio-Rad). Total RNA was isolated using TRI Reagent
(Molecular Research Corp.) and DNase-treated (Promega) according to the
manufacturers' protocols. When a sample was to be used both for monitoring
luciferase activity and for preparing RNA, cells were harvested in ice-cold
1× phosphate-buffered saline; 25% was diluted 2-fold with 2×
passive lysis buffer (Promega) and used for luciferase assays, and the
remainder was added to 5.5 volumes of TRI Reagent for RNA isolation.Reverse Transcription (RT)-PCR—RT-PCR was carried out using
the SuperScript III one-step RT-PCR kit (Invitrogen). For qualitative
experiments, 60 ng of DNase-treated total RNA was used per 25-μl reaction,
run on 2% agarose gels, and stained with ethidium bromide. For
semiquantitative RT-PCR (using [α-32P]dATP), different
amounts of DNase-treated total RNA (0.1–100 ng) were used, depending on
the transcript being amplified. Reactions were performed with at least two
concentrations of RNA to ensure that they were within the linear range. When
the amplification product crossed an intron-exon boundary, primers amplifying
U6 snRNA, an unspliced polymerase III transcript, were included as a control.
Primer sequences are listed in supplemental Table 1.High Throughput Screening—All high throughput screening was
performed at the Broad Institute in association with the Chemical Biology
Program.Cells were plated in 384-well plates at cell densities ranging from 1500 to
9000 cells/well. Plating ∼4000 cells/well gave the least variability in
luciferase activity while maximizing the signal difference between cell lines
II and III. Cells were plated in a 30-μl total volume using a Multidrop 384
or a Multidrop Micro (Thermo Scientific) liquid handler. To test sensitivity
to DMSO (the carrier for the compound libraries), cell lines II and III were
incubated overnight in growth media containing 0–1% DMSO. Concentrations
up to 1% DMSO did not cause significant changes in signal intensity or
reproducibility for any of the cell lines.For high throughput screening, cell lines II and III were plated on day 0
in growth medium in white, opaque bottom 384-well plates (Nunc) at a density
of 3000–6000 cells/30 μl. On day 1, 100 nl of test compounds or DMSO
was pin-transferred using a CyBio robot with a 384-well pin array to duplicate
plates. On day 2, ∼24 h after the pin transfer, luciferase activities were
read using the Steady-Glo Luciferase Assay System (Promega) according to the
manufacturer's protocol. Briefly, 30 μl of the combined cell lysis and
assay reagent buffer were added directly to the well using a Matrix Wellmate
(Thermo Scientific). After agitating plates for 10 min, luciferase readings
were collected using an EnVision plate reader (PerkinElmer Life Sciences).
Data analysis was performed as described
(17) to determine
Z-scores and assess reproducibility of compound effects. For follow
up experiments, cells were grown in 24-well, 6-well, or 6-cm dishes and
treated with DMSO or DMSO plus isoginkgetin, as described above.Isoginkgetin—Screening and initial follow up experiments
were carried out with isoginkgetin obtained from MicroSource. Isoginkgetin for
subsequent experiments was purchased from Gaia Corp. To validate their
identity and purity, all samples were subjected to C18 reverse phase high
pressure liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis. One sample from
Gaia that exhibited no activity in cellular assays proved <50% pure,
whereas a second sample that proved >99% pure by high pressure liquid
chromatography-mass spectrometry did exhibit the expected activity.In Vitro Splicing Reactions—Uniformly 32P-labeled
adenovirus major late (AdML), TPI (exon 6-intron 6-exon 7), and β-globin
(exon 1-intron 1-exon 2) pre-mRNA splicing substrates were generated by T7
run-off transcription of plasmids pHMS81, pMJM542, and pMJM540 and
gel-purified as previously described
(18). HeLa cell nuclear
extract was prepared as previously described
(19–21).
Splicing reactions containing ∼20 nm pre-mRNA, 30% nuclear
extract, 20 mm additional potassium chloride, 2.5 mm
magnesium chloride, 10 mm creatine phosphate, 0.5 mm
dithiothreitol, 0.4 units/μl RNasin, 40 mm Tris-HCl (pH 8), 0.5
mm ATP, and 1% (v/v) DMSO or isoginkgetin dissolved in DMSO were
incubated for the indicated times (0–90 min) at 30° C. Native
splicing complexes were separated on 4% nondenaturing gels as described
previously (21,
22). Splicing efficiencies
were assessed by separating purified RNAs on 15% denaturing polyacrylamide
gels. To estimate the IC50 of isoginkgetin, nonlinear regression
analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism version 5.0a for Macintosh.A, schematic representations of reporter constructs (post genomic
integration) and the transcripts and proteins generated from each construct
with and without splicing. Heavy solid and dotted lines
represent exon and intron sequences, respectively. B, RT-PCR analysis
of total RNA isolated from the indicated cell lines plus PCR of plasmid I
pcDNA5/FRT (size control for unspliced transcripts). C, luciferase
activity/μg of protein for the same cell lines as in B (error
bars, ±S.D., n ≥ 3 for each cell line; *, significant
difference, p < 0.01; Student's t test (two-tailed with
unequal variance)).
RESULTS
Development of Cell Lines for in Vivo Screening—To generate
constructs appropriate for in vivo screening, we created a splicing
reporter consisting of the humanTPI gene exon 6-intron 6-exon 7 cassette
(16) upstream of the firefly
luciferase open reading frame (Fig.
1, positive control; construct I). In this construct,
the start codon is in the first exon, and active luciferase is generated only
from spliced mRNA. In order to generate the screening reporter (construct II),
we removed all in frame stop codons from the intron and added one base at the
beginning of the second exon, such that the luciferase open reading frame is
out of frame with the start codon in the spliced mRNA but is in frame when the
intron is retained. We also created a mutant reporter (construct III)
identical to the screening reporter except for a 5′ splice site point
mutation predicted to abolish splicing (U to A at position 2 in the intron).
All three reporters were subcloned downstream of the cytomegalovirus promoter
in plasmid pcDNA5/FRT. This plasmid also contains an FRT site.
FIGURE 1.
A, schematic representations of reporter constructs (post genomic
integration) and the transcripts and proteins generated from each construct
with and without splicing. Heavy solid and dotted lines
represent exon and intron sequences, respectively. B, RT-PCR analysis
of total RNA isolated from the indicated cell lines plus PCR of plasmid I
pcDNA5/FRT (size control for unspliced transcripts). C, luciferase
activity/μg of protein for the same cell lines as in B (error
bars, ±S.D., n ≥ 3 for each cell line; *, significant
difference, p < 0.01; Student's t test (two-tailed with
unequal variance)).
Stable cell lines expressing each reporter were generated using the Flp/FRT
recombinase system. To do so, we clonally selected HEK293 cell lines stably
transfected with a plasmid containing a FRT site at a single position in a
transcriptionally active portion of the genome, as confirmed by LacZ
expression (see “Experimental Procedures”). Independent
co-transfection of two of these cell lines (293F1 and 293F2) with the reporter
constructs and a plasmid encoding Flp recombinase generated the screening cell
lines (293F1-I, -II, and -III and 293F2-I, -II, and -III). RT-PCR analysis of
total RNA from each cell line confirmed that transcripts from constructs I and
II were spliced, whereas those from construct III were not (see
Fig. 1 for the
293F1-based lines; 293F2-based lines, data not shown). Consistent with this,
luciferase activity levels were high in the positive control cells (I), low in
the splicing reporter cells (II), and intermediate in the mutant reporter
cells (III) (Fig. 1).
Since the three reporters behaved identically in both the 293F1 and 293F2
backgrounds, the two cell line sets were used interchangeably.High Throughput Screening of Compound Libraries—Paired cell
lines containing either reporter II or III were used to screen for small
molecules that specifically inhibited splicing. We expected that such
inhibitors would increase the luciferase activity from reporter II but would
have little or no effect on reporter III. Comparison of compound effects on
reporters II and III allowed us to discriminate between effects on splicing
and other potential means of increased protein expression (e.g.
increased cell proliferation, transcription, translation, etc.). The 6-fold
difference between the luciferase activities of reporters II and III under the
screening conditions (0.3% DMSO) provided a sufficient window for compound
identification.For high throughput screening, cells were grown in 384-well plates, exposed
in duplicate to compounds dissolved in DMSO or an equivalent volume of DMSO
alone for 24 h, after which luciferase activities were measured. Each
luciferase value was expressed as the number of S.D. values from the mean (the
Z-score) of control DMSO-treated cells
(17). A composite
Z-score was derived by combining the vectors of each replicate's
Z-score for every given compound/cell line pair. This score allows
easy comparison of effects upon two separate biological systems that have
differently distributed spreads of average values (in this case, the average
luciferase activity of cells expressing construct II versus those
expressing construct III)
(17). For each compound deemed
to have a reproducible effect (i.e. its duplicates matched in
direction and degree), the composite Z-score for reporter II was
plotted against the composite Z-score for reporter III
(Fig. 2).
FIGURE 2.
Plot of composite Light gray squares (n
= 3172) represent values from control DMSO-treated wells. Dark gray
diamonds (n = 9729) represent values from compound-treated
wells. Only results with |reproducibility| ≥ 0.7 are shown.
The structure of isoginkgetin is also indicated.
Approximately 8000 compounds were screened from natural product and
synthetic libraries, some at multiple concentrations (15–100
μm). Of these, about half were known bioactives from
commercially available NINDS, SpecPlus, and Biomol collections, and the
remainder were the products of multiple diversity-oriented synthesis
endeavors. A complete list of compounds screened and the scores each yielded
in our assay can be found on the World Wide Web via ChemBank. The vast
majority of compounds fell either within the noise range as defined by DMSO
treatment (|composite Z-score| ≤ 2.5) or on the line
defined by x = y (i.e. affecting reporters II and
III similarly). As expected, compounds such as the transcription inhibitor
actinomycin D and the translation inhibitor cycloheximide decreased luciferase
activity of both reporters II and III, thus yielding negative composite
Z-scores for both.A limited number of compounds yielded a positive composite Z-score
≥3 for one reporter while having a negligible effect on the other
(Table 1). Among this set, one
compound stood out strikingly as having a very large positive effect on
luciferase activity in cells expressing construct II (composite
Z-score = 27.9) but no significant effect in cells expressing
construct III (composite Z-score = –2.5). This compound is the
biflavonoidisoginkgetin, a natural product found in a variety of plant
species, including Ginkgo biloba.
TABLE 1
Compounds with reproducible differential effects on reporters II and
III
Compound name
ChemBank
IDa
Composite
Z-scorebII
Composite Z-score III
ReproducibilitycII
Reproducibility III
Isoginkgetin
2060300
27.9
-2.5
0.9996
-0.9978
Piceatannol
648
9.1
3.7
0.9996
0.9966
Forskolin
424
7.7
0.6
0.9965
0.9395
SB-203580
1907775
6.6
-0.7
0.9963
-0.9580
PK04_097119
2141419
5.4
0.8
0.9963
0.9781
Resveratrol 4′-methyl ether
2060112
3.4
9.8
0.9606
0.9481
Cosmosiin
3055391
2.0
5.3
0.9225
0.9978
Bisacodyl
982
1.8
5.1
0.9694
0.9998
PK04_100001
3052787
1.6
5.0
1.0000
0.9976
PK04_102320
3414053
1.2
6.5
0.8535
0.9973
Genistein
3103903
-2.8
7.5
-0.9412
0.9367
ChemBank ID is the unique identifier for screening compounds within the
ChemBank data base.
The composite Z-score is a normalized value representing the
number of S.D. values away from the empirically determined and mathematically
defined mean of mock-treated cells.
Reproducibility is defined as the cosine of the angle between the vector
(ZScoreA, ZScoreB) and the imaginary line defined by ZScoreA = ZScoreB; it
ranges from -1 to +1.
Compounds with reproducible differential effects on reporters II and
IIIChemBank ID is the unique identifier for screening compounds within the
ChemBank data base.The composite Z-score is a normalized value representing the
number of S.D. values away from the empirically determined and mathematically
defined mean of mock-treated cells.Reproducibility is defined as the cosine of the angle between the vector
(ZScoreA, ZScoreB) and the imaginary line defined by ZScoreA = ZScoreB; it
ranges from -1 to +1.Validation and Characterization of Isoginkgetin as an in Vivo Splicing
Inhibitor—To confirm the isoginkgetin results from the screen,
cells containing reporters I, II, and III as well as the parental cell line
without a reporter were treated with 33 μm isoginkgetin (the
screening concentration) dissolved in DMSO or with DMSO alone. Luciferase
activity of reporter II increased significantly (∼4-fold) with
isoginkgetin treatment, whereas that of reporter III increased only modestly
(∼1.8-fold) (Fig.
3). As observed in the screen, the effect on reporter
III was not statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). Consistent with
an inhibition of splicing, a marked decrease (∼5-fold) in luciferase
activity was observed upon isoginkgetin treatment of cells expressing reporter
I.
FIGURE 3.
Isoginkgetin inhibits splicing of reporter transcripts A, luciferase activity of indicated cells treated with
DMSO (light bars) or 33 μm isoginkgetin (dark
bars) overnight (error bars, ±S.D., n ≥ 3; *,
significant difference, p < 0.05; Student's t test
(two-tailed with unequal variance)). B, RT-PCR of total RNA isolated
from the indicated cell lines treated with DMSO or 33 μm
isoginkgetin overnight. Sizes of unspliced and spliced products are indicated.
C, semiquantitative RT-PCR of total RNA isolated from 293F-II cells
treated with DMSO or 33 μm isoginkgetin for the length of time
indicated. D, luciferase activity versus time for 293F-I
(circles, dashed line) and 293F-II (triangles, solid line)
cells treated with isoginkgetin relative to the luciferase activity of the
same cells treated with DMSO alone for the same period of time. E,
RT-PCR of total RNA isolated from 293F-II cells treated with DMSO and 0, 10,
33, or 100μm isoginkgetin for 0, 4, or 21 h. Multiplexed RT-PCR
of U6 snRNA served as a nonspliced control. RLU, relative luciferase
units.
Plot of composite Light gray squares (n
= 3172) represent values from control DMSO-treated wells. Dark gray
diamonds (n = 9729) represent values from compound-treated
wells. Only results with |reproducibility| ≥ 0.7 are shown.
The structure of isoginkgetin is also indicated.To verify that the observed changes in luciferase activity were due to
inhibition of splicing, we performed RT-PCR analysis of total RNA extracted
from isoginkgetin- and DMSO-treated cells. This analysis confirmed that
overnight exposure to 33 μm isoginkgetin was sufficient to shift
the predominant species generated from constructs I and II from spliced mRNA
to unspliced pre-mRNA (Fig.
3). Semiquantitative RT-PCR revealed that this shift
toward accumulation of unspliced pre-mRNA was detectable within 3 h of
isoginkgetin addition (Fig.
3). Consistent with this, luciferase activity from
reporter I began to decrease, and that from reporter II began to increase
within a similar time frame (Fig.
3). The effect of isoginkgetin treatment was also
concentration-dependent, since treatment with 100 μm
isoginkgetin led to a greater increase in pre-mRNA accumulation within 4 h
than did treatment with either 10 or 33 μm isoginkgetin
(Fig. 3).To test whether the effect of isoginkgetin on splicing was specific to our
reporter system or more general, we analyzed several endogenous transcripts,
including those encoding β-tubulin, actin, DNAJB1, TPI,
glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase, and RIOK3. All of these transcripts
exhibited pre-mRNA accumulation (2–20-fold) upon treatment with
isoginkgetin (Fig. 4, , and data not shown). We also monitored NOL1 intron 7,
a known substrate for the minor spliceosome
(23). As observed for other
endogenous transcripts, isoginkgetin treatment led to an increase in the
amount of unspliced NOL1 intron 7 (Fig.
4). Taken together, these results indicate that
isoginkgetin is a general inhibitor of splicing that targets both the major
and minor spliceosomes.
FIGURE 4.
Isoginkgetin treatment leads to the accumulation of endogenous
pre-mRNAs. To determine pre-mRNA accumulation, intron inclusion was
assessed using primers that crossed exon-intron boundaries (supplemental Table
1); multiplexed RT-PCR of U6 snRNA served as a nonspliced control. A,
RT-PCR of total RNA isolated from 293F-II cells treated with DMSO and 0, 10,
33, or 100 μm isoginkgetin for 21 h to monitor single introns
within the β-tubulin, actin, and DNAJB1 transcripts. B, RT-PCR
of total RNA isolated from 293F-II cells treated with DMSO or 100
μm isoginkgetin for 21 h to monitor multiple introns within the
endogenous TPI gene. C, RT-PCR of total RNA isolated from 293F-II
cells treated with DMSO and 0, 10 or 33 μm isoginkgetin for 0,
4, or 21 h to monitor an intron that is a substrate for the minor
spliceosome.
As expected for a general inhibitor of an essential step in gene
expression, treatment of cells with isoginkgetin at concentrations inhibitory
for splicing resulted in growth arrest
(Fig. 5). Trypan blue
and Alamar blue analyses suggested that this growth arrest was not accompanied
by a loss of cell viability (data not shown). Consistent with this, removal of
isoginkgetin after 24 h restored both expression of luciferase from reporter I
and cellular proliferation (Fig. 5,
). Thus, isoginkgetin appears to be a
reversible inhibitor of pre-mRNA splicing.
FIGURE 5.
Isoginkgetin inhibits cell proliferation in a reversible fashion.
A, cell growth upon treatment with DMSO (squares, dashed
line) or 33 μm isoginkgetin (triangles, solid
line). B, luciferase activity of 293F-I cells exposed to fresh
medium after 24 h treatment with 33 μm isoginkgetin. C,
cell growth in fresh medium after an 18-h exposure to DMSO (squares,
dashed line) or 33 μm isoginkgetin (triangles, solid
line).
Isoginkgetin inhibits splicing of reporter transcripts A, luciferase activity of indicated cells treated with
DMSO (light bars) or 33 μm isoginkgetin (dark
bars) overnight (error bars, ±S.D., n ≥ 3; *,
significant difference, p < 0.05; Student's t test
(two-tailed with unequal variance)). B, RT-PCR of total RNA isolated
from the indicated cell lines treated with DMSO or 33 μm
isoginkgetin overnight. Sizes of unspliced and spliced products are indicated.
C, semiquantitative RT-PCR of total RNA isolated from 293F-II cells
treated with DMSO or 33 μm isoginkgetin for the length of time
indicated. D, luciferase activity versus time for 293F-I
(circles, dashed line) and 293F-II (triangles, solid line)
cells treated with isoginkgetin relative to the luciferase activity of the
same cells treated with DMSO alone for the same period of time. E,
RT-PCR of total RNA isolated from 293F-II cells treated with DMSO and 0, 10,
33, or 100μm isoginkgetin for 0, 4, or 21 h. Multiplexed RT-PCR
of U6 snRNA served as a nonspliced control. RLU, relative luciferase
units.Isoginkgetin treatment leads to the accumulation of endogenous
pre-mRNAs. To determine pre-mRNA accumulation, intron inclusion was
assessed using primers that crossed exon-intron boundaries (supplemental Table
1); multiplexed RT-PCR of U6 snRNA served as a nonspliced control. A,
RT-PCR of total RNA isolated from 293F-II cells treated with DMSO and 0, 10,
33, or 100 μm isoginkgetin for 21 h to monitor single introns
within the β-tubulin, actin, and DNAJB1 transcripts. B, RT-PCR
of total RNA isolated from 293F-II cells treated with DMSO or 100
μm isoginkgetin for 21 h to monitor multiple introns within the
endogenous TPI gene. C, RT-PCR of total RNA isolated from 293F-II
cells treated with DMSO and 0, 10 or 33 μm isoginkgetin for 0,
4, or 21 h to monitor an intron that is a substrate for the minor
spliceosome.Isoginkgetin Inhibits Splicing in Vitro—To determine whether
isoginkgetin could inhibit splicing in vitro, we performed splicing
assays in HeLa cell nuclear extract using multiple RNA substrates. For these
assays, isoginkgetin was diluted in DMSO, which itself did not affect splicing
efficiency at concentrations of ≤2% (data not shown). Radiolabeled
pre-mRNAs were spliced for 60 min in standard reactions supplemented with
0–100 μm isoginkgetin (≤1% v/v). Splicing of AdML,
β-globin, and TPI (exon 6-intron 6-exon 7, equivalent to the in
vivo splicing reporter) transcripts was inhibited by isoginkgetin in a
dose-dependent manner. For all three constructs, splicing was completely
inhibited by 50 μm isoginkgetin, with an IC50 of
∼30 μm (Fig.
6). This in vitro splicing inhibition was
reproducible with several different HeLa nuclear extract preparations, and
preincubation of the extracts with the compound was not required for
inhibition (data not shown). Thus, as observed in vivo, isoginkgetin
is a general inhibitor of splicing in vitro.
FIGURE 6.
Isoginkgetin inhibits splicing of multiple substrates A, denaturing gels
showing concentration dependence of isoginkgetin-mediated inhibition of in
vitro splicing of the indicated pre-mRNA substrates AdML (i),
TPI (ii), and β-globin (iii). B, native gel of
splicing reactions with or without 70 μm isoginkgetin, DMSO, and
ATP. Lanes 6–11 show a time course of splicing complex
formation; positions of complexes are indicated to the right. C,
native gel of splicing reactions (60 min) with or without 70 μm
isoginkgetin and ATP.
Isoginkgetin Arrests Spliceosome Assembly and Sequesters Pre-mRNA in
Complex A—To ascertain the stage at which splicing is inhibited,
splicing reactions containing AdML pre-mRNA ±70 μm
isoginkgetin were subjected to native gel electrophoresis. In the absence of
isoginkgetin, progression through H/E, A, B, and C complexes was readily
detectable over a 60-min time course (Fig.
6, lanes 6–11). Reactions lacking ATP
instead accumulated a complex, probably E, having a slightly lower mobility
than A complex (Fig.
6, lane 3, ATP– complex)
(22,
24). This same complex was
observable in reactions containing isoginkgetin but lacking ATP
(Fig. 6). In
reactions containing both isoginkgetin and ATP, little or no complex
comigrating with B or C could be observed. Rather, these reactions accumulated
a little or no complex with mobility identical to that of A complex
(Fig. 6, lanes
1 and 5) (data not shown). Thus, it appears that isoginkgetin
blocks the A to B transition, resulting in sequestration of the pre-mRNA in a
prespliceosome.
DISCUSSION
In comparison with other steps in gene expression, there is currently a
paucity of small molecule modulators of pre-mRNA processing. Such modulators,
particularly if their action is reversible, can be incredibly useful tools for
both cell biological and biochemical analyses. Here we describe the
development of a set of stable mammalian cell lines that we successfully
employed in a high throughput screen to identify a new general inhibitor of
pre-mRNA splicing. Our design principle was that inhibition of splicing should
lead to a readily detectable positive readout, in our case an increase in
luciferase activity. This design is similar to one previously employed in
budding yeast, where a rise in copper resistance due to expression of Cup1p
signaled increased use of one 5′ splice site over another
(25). This CUP1 system has
proven highly adaptable for studying other aspects of pre-mRNA processing as
well (26,
27).In addition to ours, a number of other reporter systems for monitoring
either general or alternative splicing in mammalian cells via a protein
activity readout have been described
(9,
12,
28,
29). For example, Nasim et
al. (12) characterized a
dual reporter system in which a transiently transfected plasmid encodes
β-galactosidase in the first exon and firefly luciferase in the second.
The two exons are separated by an intron containing multiple in-frame stop
codons. Thus, whereas β-galactosidase is produced from both pre-mRNA and
mRNA, luciferase is only expressed from the latter. In this system, specific
inhibition of splicing is signaled by a decrease in luciferase activity
without a concomitant decrease in β-galactosidase activity. An alternate
dual reporter scheme was developed by Lynch and co-workers
(28) to monitor exon exclusion
of CD45 exon 4. In their system, skipping-dependent expression of the
transcriptional activator Gal4-VP16 drives expression of green fluorescent
protein. Augmentation of the initial readout (i.e. an increase in
Gal4-VP16 expression) by transcriptional synergy enabled amplification of a
3–5 fold change in splicing pattern into a 30–50 fold change in
green fluorescent protein expression. This system was used successfully to
identify two small molecules that promote exon 4 exclusion
(28). More recently Stoilov
et al. employed an alternative splicing reporter expressing either
green fluorescent protein or red fluorescent protein in an alternative
exon-dependent manner in a small scale screen
(9). Of particular note was the
140-fold dynamic range of this cell-based assay obtained by monitoring the
ratio of two alternative splicing reporters. From their screen, Stoilov et
al. (9) identified a
number of well known cardiotonic steroids, such as digoxin, as altering the
splicing pattern of MAPT exon 10, their initial reporter construct. Although
some of these same compounds were tested in our screen, they did not have any
significant effects in our system. This is consistent with the idea that they
are specific, not general, splicing effectors.Isoginkgetin inhibits cell proliferation in a reversible fashion.
A, cell growth upon treatment with DMSO (squares, dashed
line) or 33 μm isoginkgetin (triangles, solid
line). B, luciferase activity of 293F-I cells exposed to fresh
medium after 24 h treatment with 33 μm isoginkgetin. C,
cell growth in fresh medium after an 18-h exposure to DMSO (squares,
dashed line) or 33 μm isoginkgetin (triangles, solid
line).Isoginkgetin inhibits splicing of multiple substrates A, denaturing gels
showing concentration dependence of isoginkgetin-mediated inhibition of in
vitro splicing of the indicated pre-mRNA substrates AdML (i),
TPI (ii), and β-globin (iii). B, native gel of
splicing reactions with or without 70 μm isoginkgetin, DMSO, and
ATP. Lanes 6–11 show a time course of splicing complex
formation; positions of complexes are indicated to the right. C,
native gel of splicing reactions (60 min) with or without 70 μm
isoginkgetin and ATP.In contrast to the aforementioned systems, our cell-based assay was
specifically designed to identify a general inhibitor of pre-mRNA splicing. It
is based entirely on luciferase as a readout and employs three nearly
identical reporters. By using the FLP/FRT system to generate cell lines stably
transfected at identical genetic loci, we eliminated possible effects at the
level of transcription due to different genomic contexts. By comparing the
expression of two reporters that differed by only one nucleotide at the RNA
level but were identical at the protein level, we eliminated possible
differential effects of compounds on RNA or protein stability, RNA
translatability, or protein activity. Here we used reporter cell lines II and
III to identify a pre-mRNA splicing inhibitor. However, other combinations of
these cell lines could be used to screen for compounds affecting a different
step in mRNA biogenesis. For example, a compound promoting release of
unspliced RNA from the nucleus without directly affecting splicing might be
predicted to increase the luciferase signal from construct III while only
minimally affecting those from constructs I and II. We note that several
compounds having this particular set of differential effects were identified
in our screen (Table 1, rows
6–11) and may be worthy of follow up.Despite screening a relatively small number of compounds (<8000), we
were able to identify a bona fide splicing inhibitor, the natural
product isoginkgetin, which was by far our most positive hit. Isoginkgetin has
previously been described as one of several biflavonoids isolated from G.
biloba, many of which have been characterized as having
antiproliferative, antioxidative, anti-inflammatory, and/or neuroprotective
activities
(30–32)
(reviewed in Ref. 33). Perhaps
the best characterized role of isoginkgetin is as an inhibitor of tumor cell
invasion. At isoginkgetin concentrations similar to those we found inhibitory
of splicing both in vivo and in vitro, Yoon et al.
(15) showed that tumor cell
invasion was inhibited. Supporting this, they documented changes in the levels
of mRNAs encoding proteins involved in tumor cell invasion. These gene
expression changes were suggested to result from inhibition of the
kinase-dependent phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/ATK/NF-κB signaling
pathway, although the exact target of isoginkgetin was not identified in that
study.Recently, two other classes of cell-permeable compounds have emerged as
general pre-mRNA splicing inhibitors: pladienolide-B and spliceostatin A, a
derivative of FR901464 (13,
14,
34). Although these natural
products were isolated from different organisms and have different core
structures, they both target the SF3b complex. SF3b, which consists of the
three proteins SAP130, SAP145, and SAP155, is a component of U2 and U12 snRNPs
important for early spliceosome assembly and branch point adenosine
definition. Extracts lacking SF3b fail to assemble A complex
(35). Also known as the
prespliceosome, A complex represents the first ATP-dependent stage of
spliceosome assembly, and contains U2 snRNP stably associated with the branch
site. Consistent with SF3b being the target of spliceostatin A, we recently
showed that meayamycin, another FR901464 analog, which is 2 orders of
magnitude more potent than FR901464
(36), completely blocks A
complex formation in
vitro.3 In
contrast, isoginkgetin appears to act by a different mechanism, since its
presence promotes the accumulation of A complex in in vitro splicing
reactions. Although we have not yet identified the target of isoginkgetin,
likely candidates would be components of both the major and minor spliceosomes
required for the A to B complex transition. An example of such a component is
the SRPK2 kinase, which phosphorylates PRP28, allowing stable association with
the U4/U5/U6 tri-snRNP and progression to B complex
(37). Regardless of its
target, isoginkgetin should prove a useful reagent for the accumulation of
prespliceosomes for mechanistic and structural studies.Like isoginkgetin, pladienolide-B and FR901464 (and its derivatives) have
been reported to have antiproliferative activity. Indeed, it was their promise
as anti-tumor agents that prompted the studies leading to the identification
of SF3b as the cellular target of both. That isoginkgetin, pladienolide-B, and
spliceostatin A all have both anti-tumor and anti-splicing activity but
inhibit splicing by two different mechanisms (inhibition of A complex
formation versus the A to B complex transition) suggests that their
shared anti-tumor activity is a consequence of failure to express some
limiting component needed for tumor cell growth due to general splicing
inhibition. In Schizosaccharomyces pombe, for example, mutation of
the general splicing factor CDC5 leads to a cell cycle defect due to decreased
splicing efficiency of α-tubulin pre-mRNA. The simple requirement for
large quantities of α-tubulin at the G2/M transition leaves
the cell vulnerable to anything limiting α-tubulin production
(38). A similar mechanism may
be at work with small molecule inhibitors of splicing. The antiproliferative
effect may be the result of an increased sensitivity to decreases in certain
limiting proteins in proliferating cells. Thus, small molecule inhibitors of
general pre-mRNA splicing potentially represent an exciting new avenue for the
development of novel anti-inflammatory and/or anti-cancer agents.
Authors: Noah Levinson; Rochelle Hinman; Ashwini Patil; Corey R J Stephenson; Stefan Werner; Grace H C Woo; Jingbo Xiao; Peter Wipf; Kristen W Lynch Journal: RNA Date: 2006-03-23 Impact factor: 4.942
Authors: Kathleen Petri Seiler; Gregory A George; Mary Pat Happ; Nicole E Bodycombe; Hyman A Carrinski; Stephanie Norton; Steve Brudz; John P Sullivan; Jeremy Muhlich; Martin Serrano; Paul Ferraiolo; Nicola J Tolliday; Stuart L Schreiber; Paul A Clemons Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2007-10-18 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Sarah A Boswell; Andrew Snavely; Heather M Landry; L Stirling Churchman; Jesse M Gray; Michael Springer Journal: Nat Chem Biol Date: 2017-03-06 Impact factor: 15.040
Authors: Sébastien Apcher; Guy Millot; Chrysoula Daskalogianni; Alexander Scherl; Bénédicte Manoury; Robin Fåhraeus Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2013-09-30 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Martina Huranová; Ivan Ivani; Ales Benda; Ina Poser; Yehuda Brody; Martin Hof; Yaron Shav-Tal; Karla M Neugebauer; David Stanek Journal: J Cell Biol Date: 2010-10-04 Impact factor: 10.539