| Literature DB >> 25975820 |
Joseph Cursons1,2, Karl-Johan Leuchowius3,4, Mark Waltham5, Eva Tomaskovic-Crook6, Momeneh Foroutan7, Cameron P Bracken8,9, Andrew Redfern10, Edmund J Crampin11,12,13,14, Ian Street15,16, Melissa J Davis17, Erik W Thompson18,19,20.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The normal process of epithelial mesenchymal transition (EMT) is subverted by carcinoma cells to facilitate metastatic spread. Cancer cells rarely undergo a full conversion to the mesenchymal phenotype, and instead adopt positions along the epithelial-mesenchymal axis, a propensity we refer to as epithelial mesenchymal plasticity (EMP). EMP is associated with increased risk of metastasis in breast cancer and consequent poor prognosis. Drivers towards the mesenchymal state in malignant cells include growth factor stimulation or exposure to hypoxic conditions.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25975820 PMCID: PMC4432969 DOI: 10.1186/s12964-015-0106-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cell Commun Signal ISSN: 1478-811X Impact factor: 5.712
Figure 1Stimulation of PMC42-ET and PMC42-LA cells with EGF, or stimulation of MDA-MB-468 cells with EGF or growth under hypoxic conditions (HPX) promotes a mesenchymal phenotype. (a-h) Fluorescence images of stimulated and unstimulated cells labelled with DAPI (blue) and anti-vimentin (red). Scale bar represents 10 μm. Changes in mRNA transcript abundance between stimulated and unstimulated cells for (i) EMT markers and (j) EMT-implicated transcription factors. Note the use of alternative colour-bars to indicate statistically significant (**; q-value < 0.05; red-green) and non-significant (brown/orange-teal) changes in abundance. Grey squares indicate mRNA transcripts that were not reliably detected – normalised count data are shown in Additional file 2: Figure S1.
Different signalling pathways are dysregulated between the models of induced EMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 238 | 591 | 3155 | 3716 | 3261 | 2938 | 1626 | |
| KEGG signalling pathway/system: | PI3K-Akt | 0.015 |
| 0.030 | 0.005 | 0.153 | 0.559 | 0.943 |
| HIF-1 | 0.952 | 0.244 |
|
| 0.982 | 0.732 |
| |
| Rap1 | 0.562 | 0.014 |
|
| 0.175 | 0.075 | 0.742 | |
| Hippo | 0.173 |
| 0.022 | 0.085 | 0.004 | 0.297 | 0.996 | |
| Wnt | 0.015 | 0.371 | 0.038 | 0.071 |
| 0.455 | 0.534 | |
| MAPK | 0.214 | 0.044 | 0.312 | 0.680 | 0.360 | 0.634 | 0.768 | |
| Hedgehog | 0.977 |
| 0.999 | 0.939 | 0.217 | 0.093 | 0.993 | |
| TGF-beta | 0.029 |
| 0.215 | 0.328 | 0.053 | 0.632 | 0.694 | |
| Ras | 1.000 | 0.169 | 0.259 | 0.022 | 0.120 | 0.065 | 0.783 | |
| Phosphatidyl-inositol | 0.796 | 0.833 | 0.238 | 0.049 | 0.753 | 0.923 | 0.893 | |
| cAMP | 0.992 | 0.639 | 0.242 | 0.017 | 0.983 | 0.756 | 0.201 |
The first row shows the number of mRNA transcripts with a significant (q-value < 0.05) difference in abundance between the specified cell lines or conditions. Subsequent rows show the estimated p-value for enrichment of elements within KEGG pathways without correction for multiple hypothesis testing. KEGG maps related to signal transduction with a significant (p-value < 0.05) enrichment in at least one comparison are shown (for a complete list please refer to Additional file 8: Table S2). Values in bold are statistically-significant following a Bonferroni correction for multiple hypothesis testing (adjusted p-value < 0.05; n = 22 ‘signalling pathway’ KEGG maps), p-value entries greater than 0.10 are in grey.
Figure 2Numerous signalling components showed significant differences between EGF and HPX mediated EMT. Heat maps for: (a) mRNA transcripts for signalling components which are present across at least six perturbed signalling pathway KEGG maps (Table 1); (b, c) mRNA transcripts with significant (q-value < 0.05) differences in mRNA transcript abundance within at least one PMC42 cell line condition comparison, and differences in mRNA transcript abundance going in (b) the same, or (c) different directions for EGF or HPX-stimulated MDA-MB-468 cells compared to unstimulated, with a significant difference in transcript abundance between the EGF- and HPX-stimulated MDA-MB-468 cells. Membership within KEGG maps that are listed in Table 1 is shown at right (black box). Note the use of alternative colour-bars to indicate statistically significant (**; q-value < 0.05; red-green) and non-significant (brown/orange-teal) changes in abundance.
Signalling pathway components showed variable levels of transcriptional disruption to their local interactome
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | HSP90AA1 | 164 | 11 | PIK3R1 | 66 | 21 | ERBB2 | 42 |
| 2 | HSP90AB1 | 132 | 12 | VCP | 59 | 22 | TGFBR1 | 41 |
| 3 | EGFR | 122 | 13 | CALM1 | 58 | 23 | HSPA1A | 39 |
| 4 | MYC | 99 | 14 | TUBB | 57 | 24 | RAC1 | 38 |
| 5 | GSK3B | 84 | 15 | LYN | 49 | 25 | PIN1 | 37 |
| 6 | FYN | 76 | 16 | JUN | 48 | 26 | NFKB1 | 37 |
| 7 | ABL1 | 70 | 17 | GAPDH | 47 | 27 | CDK6 | 35 |
| 8 | PRKACA | 68 | 18 | FOS | 45 | 28 | MAPK3 | 35 |
| 9 | PRKCA | 67 | 19 | CREBBP | 45 | 29 | TK1 | 34 |
| 10 | CDK1 | 67 | 20 | TUBA1A | 42 | 30 | PSMA7 | 34 |
mRNA transcripts encoding proteins for which there are drugs, inhibitors or antagonists available (through DrugBank v3.0), ranked by degree within a protein-protein interaction network of differentially expressed transcripts. Degree reflects the number of interaction partners (for the encoded protein) which show significant changes in transcript abundance.
Figure 3Differences in signalling component transcript changes between EGF and hypoxia induced EMT. Changes in transcript abundance (legend top right) for selected intracellular signalling components, within a schematic representation of the signalling network interactions between encoded proteins. Note the use of alternative colour-bars to indicate statistically significant (**; q-value < 0.05; red-green) and non-significant (brown/orange-teal) changes in abundance. Kinase inhibitors within the families selected for screening (described in text; shown in purple) are listed in Table 3.
Targeted Inhibition of signalling molecules show differential effects between EGF- and hypoxia-induced EMT
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |||||||||
| Erlotinib (Tarceva) | EGFR (2 nM) | >25 | 15.04 | 0.18 | 16.42 | 0.14 | 16.42 | 5.71 | >25 | |
| Lapatinib (GW572016) | EGFR (10.2 nM), HER2 (9.8 nM) | >25 | 2.46 | 0.57 | 1.65 | 4.32 | 2.99 | 1.96 | 1.44 | |
|
| Vandetanib (Zactima) | VEGFR2 (40 nM), VEGFR3 (110 nM), EGFR (500 nM) | >25 | 1.84 | 0.57 | 1.57 | 0.50 | 3.77 | - | - |
| Gefitinib (Iressa) | EGFR (33 nM) | >25 | 5.78 | 0.26 | 1.48 | 0.25 | 2.31 | 6.62 | 6.27 | |
| TOVOK (Afatinib) | Irreversible binder. EGFR (0.5 nM), HER2 (14 nM) | >25 | 1.24 | 0.02 | 0.96 | 0.03 | 0.26 | 2.38 | 1.01 | |
| AV-412 | EGFR (43 nM), HER2 (282 nM) | >25 | 0.33 | 0.05 | 0.32 | 0.05 | 0.54 | >25 | 0.06 | |
| U0126 | MEK1 (70 nM), MEK2 (60 nM) | >25 | >25 | 1.38 | >25 | 0.38 | 8.74 | 4.99 | >25 | |
| SL 327 | MEK1 (180 nM), MEK2 (220 nM) | >25 | 16.43 | 1.43 | >25 | >25 | 12.56 | >25 | 0.03 | |
|
| PD 198306 | MEK (8 nM) | >25 | 1.36 | 0.34 | 2.50 | 0.46 | 0.97 | 1.7 | 2.94 |
| AZD6244 (Selumetinib) | MEK1 (14 nM) | >25 | >25 | 0.06 | >25 | 1.38 | 13.71 | >25 | >25 | |
| CI-1040 (PD-184352) | MEK (1–1.3 nM) | >25 | 3.27 | 0.16 | 1.40 | 0.19 | 2.00 | 4.7 | 6.33 | |
| PD0325901 | MEK (0.33 nM) | >25 | >25 | <0.02 | >25 | <0.02 | 2.77 | 4.17 | 0.06 | |
| PD173955-Analogue 1 | c-Src (9 nM) | >25 | 5.94 | >25 | 6.28 | 1.70 | 3.40 | 6.55 | >25 | |
| Saracatinib (AZD0530) | Src (2.7 nM) | >25 | 0.75 | 0.94 | 0.50 | >25 | 6.35 | >25 | 0.72 | |
|
| Bosutinib (SKI-606) | Src (1.2 nM), Abl (1 nM) | >25 | 1.40 | 0.23 | 1.17 | 0.25 | 1.05 | 1.19 | 0.54 |
| Dasatinib (BMS-354825) | Src (0.8 nM), Abl (0.6 nM) | >25 | 0.04 | 0.76 | <0.02 | 0.64 | 5.59 | >25 | 0.04 | |
| PD173952 | Src (8 nM), Lck (5 nM), FGFR1 (100 nM) | >25 | 0.35 | 1.61 | 0.23 | 0.10 | 0.25 | - | - | |
| PIK-90 | PI3K (α 11 nM, β 350 nM, γ 18 nM, δ 58 nM) | >25 | 16.35 | >25 | 16.36 | 3.26 | >25 | >25 | <0.02 | |
| ZSTK474 | PI3K (α 17 nM, β 53 nM, γ 6 nM) | >25 | 0.83 | >25 | 2.11 | 0.21 | 0.72 | 2.35 | >25 | |
| GDC-0941 | PI3K (α 3 nM, β 33 nM, γ 75 nM, δ 3 nM) | >25 | 0.46 | 8.67 | 1.18 | 1.27 | 1.79 | 4.69 | 4.88 | |
| BEZ-235 (NVP-BEZ235) | p110 (α 4 nM, β 75 nM, γ 5 nM, δ 7 nM) | >25 | 0.06 | >25 | >25 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 3.43 | |
|
| PI103 | DNA-PK (2 nM), mTORC1 (20 nM), PI3K-C2b (26 nM), p110 (α 8 nM, β 88 nM, γ 150 nM, δ 48 nM) | 15.18 | 0.32 | >25 | 1.82 | 0.38 | 0.88 | 1.22 | 1.04 |
| GNE-493 | PI3K (α 3.4 nM, β 12 nM, γ 16 nM, δ 16 nM) | >25 | 1.11 | >25 | 12.09 | 0.29 | 1.45 | 0.99 | 6.41 | |
| GSK2126458 (HYR-582) | Ki: P110 (α 0.019 nM, β 0.13 nM, γ 0.06 nM, δ 0.024 nM), mTORC1 (0.18 nM), mTORC2 (0.3 nM) | >25 | 0.02 | 6.69 | 0.62 | <0.02 | 0.08 | 0.29 | 0.74 | |
| GNE-490 | PI3K (α 3.5 nM, β 25 nM, γ 5.2 nM, δ 15 nM) | >25 | 2.16 | >25 | 2.23 | 0.93 | 1.25 | 12.68 | >25 | |
| LY294002 | PI3K (α 0.5 uM, β 0.97 uM, γ 0.57 uM) | >25 | 14.86 | >25 | 12.12 | 4.18 | 13.22 | >25 | >25 | |
| GSK690693 | Akt1 (2 nM), Akt2 (13 nM), Akt3 (9 nM) | >25 | >25 | >25 | 8.32 | >25 | 3.31 | >25 | >25 | |
| A-674563 | Ki: Akt1 (11 nM), PKA (16 nM), CDK2 (46 nM), ERK2 (260 nM) | >25 | 0.48 | 0.17 | 0.76 | 0.65 | 0.25 | 2.83 | 0.60 | |
| Akt-i-1 | Akt1 (4.6 μM) | >25 | >25 | >25 | >25 | >25 | 6.46 | >25 | 12.30 | |
|
| Akt-i-1/2 | Akt1 (58 nM), Akt2 (210 nM) | >25 | >25 | >25 | >25 | >25 | 2.82 | >25 | 4.79 |
| AT7867 | Akt1 (32 nM), Akt2 (17 nM), Akt3 (47 nM), PKA (20 nM) | >25 | 2.63 | >25 | 0.24 | >25 | 2.95 | >25 | 4.57 | |
| AZD5363 | Akt1 (3 nM), Akt2 (8 nM), Akt3 (8 nM), ROCK2 (56 nM) | >25 | >25 | >25 | >25 | 0.63 | >25 | >25 | >25 | |
| Merck-22-6 | Akt1 (138 nM), Akt2 (212 nM) | >25 | 4.27 | >25 | 1.48 | >25 | 0.46 | >25 | 0.55 | |
| MK-2206 | Akt1 (8 nM), Akt2 (12 nM), Akt3 (65 nM) | >25 | 5.62 | >25 | 3.16 | >25 | 1.86 | >25 | 9.77 | |
Inhibition of vimentin expression and cell counts by a selection of kinase inhibitors. Shown are the IC50 values (where the fraction of vimentin positive cells, or the cell count, was reduced by 50% compared to the controls). Concentrations are specified in μM units.
Inhibitors have been grouped according to the kinases they target. The dose–response curves for selected kinase inhibitors are shown in Figure 4. For reference, the IC50 values of each compound measured in biochemical assays with purified enzymes are included.
Figure 4Hypoxia- and EGF-induced metastatic MDA-MB-468 cells show markedly different responses to pharmacological inhibitors. Pharmacological dose–response curves showing the fraction of vimentin-positive cells (blue; left axes) and cell-count (red; right axes) in the presence of (a-c) the MEK inhibitor AZD6244, (d-f) the PI3K inhibitor GDC-0941, (g-i) the AKT1/2/3 inhibitor AZD5363 (j-l) and the mTOR inhibitor Everolimus. (m-o) pharmacological inhibition of vimentin with a combination of MEK-1/2 (AZD6244) and AKT1/2/3 (AZD5363) inhibitors at varying concentrations. (p) pharmacological inhibition of vimentin with a comination of MEK-1/2 (AZD6244) and AKT1 (Akt-i-1) inhibitors at varying concentrations.