Lale Erdem-Eraslan1, Ya Gao1, Nanne K Kloosterhof1, Yassar Atlasi2, Jeroen Demmers3, Andrea Sacchetti2, Johan M Kros2, Peter Sillevis Smitt1, Joachim Aerts4, Pim J French5. 1. Dept. of Neurology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 2. Dept. of Pathology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Dept. of Proteomics Center, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Dept. of Pulmonary diseases, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 5. Dept. of Neurology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: p.french@erasmusmc.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is frequently mutated in various types of cancer. Although all oncogenic mutations are considered activating, different tumour types have different mutation spectra. It is possible that functional differences underlie this tumour-type specific mutation spectrum. METHODS: We have determined whether specific mutations in EGFR (EGFR, EGFRvIII and EGFR-L858R) have differences in binding partners, differences in downstream pathway activation (gene expression and phosphoproteins), and have functional consequences on cellular growth and migration. RESULTS: Using biotin pulldown and subsequent mass spectrometry we were able to detect mutation specific binding partners for EGFR. Differential binding was confirmed using a proximity ligation assay and/or Western Blot for the dedicator of cytokinesis 4 (DOCK4), UDP-glucose glycoprotein glucosyltransferase 1 (UGGT1), MYC binding protein 2 (MYCBP2) and Smoothelin (SMTN). We also demonstrate that each mutation induces the expression of a specific set of genes, and that each mutation is associated with specific phosphorylation patterns. Finally, we demonstrate using stably expressing cell lines that EGFRvIII and EGFL858R display reduced growth and migration compared to EGFR wildtype expressing cells. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that there are distinct functional differences between different EGFR mutations. The functional differences between different mutations argue for the development of mutation specific targeted therapies.
BACKGROUND:Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is frequently mutated in various types of cancer. Although all oncogenic mutations are considered activating, different tumour types have different mutation spectra. It is possible that functional differences underlie this tumour-type specific mutation spectrum. METHODS: We have determined whether specific mutations in EGFR (EGFR, EGFRvIII and EGFR-L858R) have differences in binding partners, differences in downstream pathway activation (gene expression and phosphoproteins), and have functional consequences on cellular growth and migration. RESULTS: Using biotin pulldown and subsequent mass spectrometry we were able to detect mutation specific binding partners for EGFR. Differential binding was confirmed using a proximity ligation assay and/or Western Blot for the dedicator of cytokinesis 4 (DOCK4), UDP-glucose glycoprotein glucosyltransferase 1 (UGGT1), MYC binding protein 2 (MYCBP2) and Smoothelin (SMTN). We also demonstrate that each mutation induces the expression of a specific set of genes, and that each mutation is associated with specific phosphorylation patterns. Finally, we demonstrate using stably expressing cell lines that EGFRvIII and EGFL858R display reduced growth and migration compared to EGFR wildtype expressing cells. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that there are distinct functional differences between different EGFR mutations. The functional differences between different mutations argue for the development of mutation specific targeted therapies.
Authors: D A Casolari; T Nguyen; C M Butcher; D G Iarossi; C N Hahn; S C Bray; P Neufing; W T Parker; J Feng; K Z Y Maung; A Wee; L Vidovic; C H Kok; P G Bardy; S Branford; I D Lewis; S W Lane; H S Scott; D M Ross; R J D'Andrea Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-05-26 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Youri Hoogstrate; Wies Vallentgoed; Johan M Kros; Iris de Heer; Maurice de Wit; Marica Eoli; Juan Manuel Sepulveda; Annemiek M E Walenkamp; Jean-Sebastien Frenel; Enrico Franceschi; Paul M Clement; Micheal Weller; Martin E van Royen; Peter Ansell; Jim Looman; Earle Bain; Marie Morfouace; Thierry Gorlia; Vassilis Golfinopoulos; Martin van den Bent; Pim J French Journal: Neurooncol Adv Date: 2019-12-09
Authors: Maurice de Wit; Ya Gao; Darlene Mercieca; Iris de Heer; Bart Valkenburg; Martin E van Royen; Joachim Aerts; Peter Sillevis Smitt; Pim French Journal: EBioMedicine Date: 2020-06-05 Impact factor: 8.143
Authors: Po-Jen Yang; Ming-Ju Hsieh; Chun-I Lee; Chi-Hua Yen; Hsiang-Ling Wang; Whei-Ling Chiang; Tu-Chen Liu; Thomas Chang-Yao Tsao; Chia-Yi Lee; Shun-Fa Yang Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-10-08 Impact factor: 3.390