| Literature DB >> 28343940 |
Katarzyna Magiera1, Marcin Tomala2, Katarzyna Kubica2, Virginia De Cesare3, Matthias Trost3, Bartosz J Zieba4, Neli Kachamakova-Trojanowska5, Marcin Les2, Grzegorz Dubin6, Tad A Holak1, Lukasz Skalniak7.
Abstract
USP2a is a deubiquitinase responsible for stabilization of cyclin D1, a crucial regulator of cell-cycle progression and a proto-oncoprotein overexpressed in numerous cancer types. Here we report that lithocholic acid (LCA) derivatives are inhibitors of USP proteins, including USP2a. The most potent LCA derivative, LCA hydroxyamide (LCAHA), inhibits USP2a, leading to a significant Akt/GSK3β-independent destabilization of cyclin D1, but does not change the expression of p27. This leads to the defects in cell-cycle progression. As a result, LCAHA inhibits the growth of cyclin D1-expressing, but not cyclin D1-negative cells, independently of the p53 status. We show that LCA derivatives may be considered as future therapeutics for the treatment of cyclin D1-addicted p53-expressing and p53-defective cancer types.Entities:
Keywords: DUBs; USP2; cell-cycle arrest; colorectal carcinoma; cyclin D1; lithocholic acid; non-competitive inhibitor; ubiquitin-specific peptidase
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28343940 PMCID: PMC5404848 DOI: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2017.03.002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cell Chem Biol ISSN: 2451-9448 Impact factor: 8.116
Lithocholic Acid Derivatives Tested in This Study
| Compound | R1 | R2 | R3 | R4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LCA | – | – | ||
| CGG | ||||
| LCACN | – | – | ||
| LCAE | – | – | ||
| LCAGLY | – | – | ||
| LCAK | – | – | ||
| LCAME | – | – | ||
| LCAMR | – | – | ||
| LCANH2 | – | – | ||
| LCAHA | – | – | ||
| TCAS | ||||
| UDCA | – | |||
Effects of Lithocholic Acid and Its Derivatives on Cell Viability and on the Enzymatic Activity of USP2a
| Compound | Cell Lines Data: MTT Assay | USP2a Activity: Enzyme Assay | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HCT116wt | HCT116 p53−/− | Ub-AMC Assay | Di-Ub Assay | |||
| LD50 (μM) | GI50 (μM) | LD50 (μM) | GI50 (μM) | IC50 (μM) | IC50 (μM) | |
| LCA | 46.8 ± 2.6 | – | 37.4 ± 3.8 | – | 31.1 ± 3.4 | 32.0 ± 3.2 |
| CGG | >50 | – | >100 | – | not active | >100 |
| LCACN | 28.0 ± 0.7 | – | 29.9 ± 3.2 | – | 7.4 ± 1.2 | 13.9 ± 2.3 |
| LCAE | 23.2 ± 0.0 | – | 24.4 ± 0.4 | – | 5.8 ± 0.7 | 3.3 ± 0.1 |
| LCAGLY | >100 | – | >100 | – | >50 | >50 |
| LCAK | >50 | – | >50 | – | 32.0 ± 1.8 | 33.1 ± 3.2 |
| LCAME | 20.5 ± 1.1 | – | 35.1 ± 4.8 | – | >50 | >50 |
| LCAMR | 8.2 ± 0.7 | – | 7.9 ± 0.7 | – | >100 | >100 |
| LCANH2 | 24.5 ± 0.9 | – | 41.8 ± 2.7 | – | 27.9 ± 1.0 | 16.7 ± 1.3 |
| LCAHA | 27.8 ± 3.9 | 0.87 ± 0.09 | 26.5 ± 0.1 | 0.96 ± 0.29 | 9.7 ± 1.5 | 3.7 ± 0.8 |
| TCAS | >50 | – | >100 | – | not active | >100 |
| UDCA | >50 | – | >100 | – | not active | >100 |
| NSC 632839 | – | – | – | – | 39.1 ± 6.4 | >50 |
Compounds for which solubility problems were encountered in either the cell line experiment or the enzymatic assay.
Figure 1LCAHA Inhibits the Growth of HCT116 Cells
(A) MTT assay. The cells were seeded at low confluence and treated with indicated compounds for 6 days. Cell viability was assayed by MTT. The p53 status of tested cells is indicated. See also Figure S1.
(B) LDH release assay was performed following 48 hr of treatment. The data are presented as a percentage of total LDH activity in the treated cells lysed with Triton X-100.
(C) The activity of caspases 3 and 7 was measured in HCT116 p53wt cells treated with LCAHA or staurosporine for the indicated time periods. The graphs present the results normalized to cell numbers at the time of caspase activity testing and then to DMSO-treated controls.
(D–F) The analysis of cell cycle was performed on HCT116 p53wt (D [left panel], E, and F) and HCT116 p53−/− (D, right panel) cells treated with DMSO or LCAHA for 48 hr and pulse-labeled with BrdU. The cells were harvested or cultured for additional 9 hr in the absence of BrdU. The cells were stained with FITC-conjugated anti-BrdU antibody and propidium iodide (PI), and analyzed by flow cytometry for cell-cycle distribution (D and F) or BrdU incorporation (E). (F) The analysis of cell-cycle distribution was performed separately for BrdU+ (blue) and BrdU− (black) populations of cells. For the detailed description of the experiment, see also Figure S2.
All graphs show mean values ± SD from three independent experiments. Statistical significance was evaluated using one-way ANOVA with Tukey's post hoc test: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
Figure 2The Involvement of Cyclin D1 in the Growth-Inhibitory Effect of LCAHA
(A) HCT116 p53wt (left panel) or HCT116 p53−/− (right panel) cells were treated with DMSO (marked with D), or 5 or 20 μM tested compounds for 48 hr, followed by western blot analysis. The graphs present densitometry analysis of cyclin D1 expression and show mean ± SEM from three independent experiments. Statistical significance was evaluated using one-way ANOVA with Tukey's post hoc test: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. See also Figure S3.
(B) For the MTT assay the cells were seeded at low confluence and treated with tested compounds for 6 days. The graphs show mean values ± SD from three independent experiments.
(C) Analysis of cyclin D1 and p21 expression in the cells treated with DMSO or 10 μM LCAHA for 48 hr. The graph presents densitometry analysis of cyclin D1 expression and shows mean ± SEM from three independent experiments. For the statistics, a t test was performed: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
(D) Colony formation assay was performed on MCF-7 or SAOS-2 cells treated with DMSO or 5 μM LCAHA for 5 days. The photographs are representative of three experiments.
(E) The numbers and sizes of the colonies formed in the colony formation assay (D) were measured using ImageJ software. Based on these data, the surviving fraction and relative mean colony size was calculated for the LCAHA-treated cells. The graphs show mean ± SE values from three experiments. For the statistics, a t test was performed: **p < 0.01; n.s., not significant.
Figure 3Cyclin D1 Knockdown Renders HCT116 Cells Resistant to LCAHA
HCT116 p53wt cells were transfected with the cyclin D1 siRNA or control siRNA, followed by treatment with 5 μM LCAHA or DMSO as a control, as presented on the scheme at the top of the figure. Silencing of the cyclin D1 expression was verified 48 hr following treatment (72 hr following transfection) by western blotting (left panel). At the same time, the cells were pulse-labeled with BrdU and immediately harvested (time point “t0”) or cultured for an additional 9 hr (time point “t0+9h”). The cells were stained with the PI- and with FITC-conjugated anti-BrdU antibody and analyzed by flow cytometry. BrdU+ and BrdU− cells were analyzed separately for cell-cycle distribution using ModFit LT software. The dot-plot graphs show the representative results of two experiments, and the bar graphs show mean ± SD from these experiments. The samples indicated with the black rectangles were analyzed for statistically significant differences using the t test: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. See also Figure S4.
Figure 4Impact of LCAHA on the Expression and Stability of Cyclin D1
(A) The expression of cyclin D1-encoding mRNA (CCND1) was evaluated by RT-PCR. The cells were treated with DMSO or 10 μM LCAHA for 48 hr.
(B and C) The cells were treated with DMSO or LCAHA for 48 hr, and cycloheximide (CHX) was added for the last 15–60 min, followed by western blot analysis of cyclin D1 expression. The graph in (C) presents densitometry analysis of the expression level of cyclin D1 (B) and shows mean ± SEM values from three independent experiments. The statistical significance was evaluated using a t test on mean t1/2 values from these three experiments.
(D and E) Western blot analysis of the expression of cyclin D1, phospho-Akt, and phospho-GSK-3β in HCT116 p53wt cells after the treatment with 5 μM LCAHA for the indicated time periods. (D) Western blot images from the representative experiment. (E) Densitometry analysis of the expression level of cyclin D1, P-Akt(S473), and P-GSK-3β(S9) normalized to α-tubulin. The graphs show mean ± SD from three independent experiments. Statistical significance was evaluated using a t test: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
(F) HCT116 cells were treated with DMSO (marked with D), or 5 or 20 μM LCAHA for 48 hr, followed by western blot analysis of the expression of Aurora A and cyclin A1. The graphs present densitometry analysis of the proteins' expression and show mean ± SEM from three independent experiments. Statistical significance was evaluated using one-way ANOVA with Tukey's post hoc test: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
Figure 5Effect of Selected Compounds on USP2a Activity
(A) Ub-AMC hydrolysis assay demonstrates that LCAHA inhibits USP2a enzymatic activity. USP2a catalytic domain was incubated with the substrate and increasing concentrations of LCAHA and the fluorescence signal were measured during the time course of the experiment. The graph shows representative data of three or more repeats. See also Figure S5.
(B) Dose-response inhibition of USP2a activity measured in the Ub-AMC hydrolysis assay in the presence of various concentrations of LCA and its derivatives LCAE and LCAHA. The graph shows mean ± SD values from three independent experiments. See also Figure S5.
(C) Di-Ub K63-2 hydrolysis assay demonstrates that LCAHA inhibits USP2a capability to hydrolyze the isopeptide bond between two ubiquitin molecules. The graph shows representative data of three or more repeats.
(D) LCA derivatives induce thermal stabilization of USP2a, as monitored by thermal shift assay. The graph presents the effect on USP2a thermal stabilization in the presence of 50 μM LCAE or LCAHA.
(E) Kinetic analysis of the USP2a-catalyzed hydrolysis of Ub-AMC substrate in the presence of the LCAHA. The reciprocal initial velocities are plotted versus the reciprocal substrate concentrations (Lineweaver-Burk plot). The graphs show mean ± SD values from three independent experiments.
(F) Vmax and Km values determined by fitting the Lineweaver-Burk equation. Kinetic constants trends are characteristic for the non-competitive inhibition model. The graphs show mean ± SD values from three independent experiments. Statistical significance was evaluated using one-way ANOVA with Tukey's post hoc test: **p < 0.01. See also Table S1.
(G) The inhibition of USP2a and USP7 enzymes by the LCA, LCAE, and LCAHA compounds in the Ub-AMC assay. The graphs present percent inhibition of the proteins' activity in the presence of compounds at 10 μM and show mean ± SD values from three independent experiments. See also Figure S5.
| REAGENT or RESOURCE | SOURCE | IDENTIFIER |
|---|---|---|
| FITC-conjugated anti-BrdU antibody | BioLegend | Cat# 364104 RRID: |
| rabbit polyclonal anti-cyclin D1 | Santa Cruz Biotechnology | Cat# sc-753 RRID: |
| mouse monoclonal anti-Cyclin D3 | Cell Signaling Technology | Cat# 2936 RRID: |
| polyclonal anti-p53 | Santa Cruz Biotechnology | Cat# sc-6243 RRID: |
| rabbit monoclonal anti-p21 | Cell Signaling Technology | Cat# 2947 RRID: |
| rabbit monoclonal anti-p27 | Cell Signaling Technology | Cat# 3686 RRID: |
| mouse monoclonal anti-Cyclin A2 | Cell Signaling Technology | Cat# 4656 RRID: |
| mouse monoclonal anti-Cyclin E1 | Cell Signaling Technology | Cat# 4129 RRID: |
| rabbit monoclonal anti-p-Akt(S473) | Cell Signaling Technology | Cat# 4060 RRID: |
| rabbit monoclonal anti-p-GSK-3β(S9) | Cell Signaling Technology | Cat# 5558 RRID: |
| mouse monoclonal anti-Aurora A | Santa Cruz Biotechnology | Cat# sc-373856 RRID: |
| rabbit polyclonal anti-cyclin A1 | Santa Cruz Biotechnology | Cat# sc-7252 RRID: |
| rabbit monoclonal anti-GAPDH | Cell Signaling Technology | Cat# 2118 RRID: |
| rabbit monoclonal anti-α-Tubulin | Cell Signaling Technology | Cat# 2125 RRID: |
| goat peroxidase-conjugated anti-rabbit | Cell Signaling Technology | Cat# 7074 RRID: |
| horse peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse | Cell Signaling Technology | Cat# 7076 RRID: |
| One Shot® BL21(DE3) Chemically Competent/E. coli/ | Invitrogen (Thermo Fisher Scientific) | Cat#C600003 |
| THIAZOLYL BLUE TETRAZOLIUM BROMIDE, MTT | Sigma Aldrich | Cat#M5655-1G; CAS: 298-93-1 |
| Dimethyl sulfoxide, DMSO, Hybri-Max (for cell treatment and cryopreservation) | Sigma Aldrich | Cat#D2650-5X10ML; CAS: 67-68-5 |
| 5-Bromo-2′-deoxyuridine (BrdU) BioUltra, ≥99% | Sigma Aldrich | Cat#B9285-50MG; CAS: 59-14-3 |
| Staurosporine | Santa Cruz Biotechnology | Cat# sc-3510 A; CAS: 62996-74-1 |
| Propidium Iodide (PI) | Serva | Cat#33671.01; CAS: 25535-16-4 |
| Hoechst 33342 | Thermo Fisher Scientific | Cat#62249; CAS: 23491-52-3 |
| RIPA buffer | Sigma Aldrich | Cat#R0278-50ML |
| Protease inhibitor cocktail | Sigma Aldrich | Cat#P8340-5ML |
| Phosphatase inhibitor cocktail | Roche | Cat#04 906 845 001 |
| Albumin, Bovine, Fraction V. Heat Shock Isolation (BSA) | BioShop | Cat#ALB001.250 |
| Clarity Western ECL Substrate | BioRad | Cat#1705061 |
| Lipofectamine 2000 | Life Technologies | Cat#11668-027 |
| Renozol | GenoPlast Biochemicals | Cat#BMGPB1100-2 |
| M-MLV Reverse Transcriptase | Promega | Cat# M1701 |
| Hydroxylamine solution 50 wt. % in H2O | Sigma Aldrich | Cat# 438227; CAS: 7803-49-8 |
| Lithocholic acid | Sigma Aldrich | Cat# L6250; CAS: 434-13-9 |
| Glycine | Sigma Aldrich | Cat# 410225; CAS: 56-40-6 |
| Ammonium hydroxide solution | Sigma Aldrich | Cat# 09859; CAS: 13550-49-7 |
| 4-(2-Aminoethyl)morpholine | Sigma Aldrich | Cat# A55004; CAS: 2038-03-1 |
| Acetyl chloride | Sigma Aldrich | Cat# 320129; CAS: 75-36-5 |
| Chromium(VI) oxide | Sigma Aldrich | Cat# 675644; CAS: 1333-82-0 |
| Morpholine | Sigma Aldrich | Cat# 394467; CAS: 110-91-8 |
| Isobutyl chloroformate | Sigma Aldrich | Cat# 177989; CAS: 543-27-1 |
| DIC | Sigma Aldrich | Cat# D125407; CAS: 693-13-0 |
| Chloroform-d | Armar | Cat# 013300.2040; CAS: 865-49-6 |
| DMSO-d6 | Armar | Cat# 015600.2035; CAS: 2206-27-1 |
| Sulfuric acid | POCH | Cat# 575000115; CAS: 7664-93-9 |
| Acetic acid | POCH | Cat# 568760421; CAS: 64-19-7 |
| Methanol | POCH | Cat# 621990426; CAS: 67-56-1 |
| Dichloromethane | POCH | Cat# 628410421; CAS: 75-09-2 |
| TEA | POCH | Cat# 848930423; CAS: 121-44-8 |
| Acetonitrile | POCH | Cat# 102640111; CAS: 75-05-8 |
| Sodium Bicarbonate | POCH | Cat# 810530115; CAS: 144-55-8 |
| Sodium Sulfate Anhydrous | POCH | Cat# 807870111; CAS: 7727-73-3 |
| LB BROTH (MILLER) | BioShop | Cat#LBL407.5 |
| IPTG, Reagent Grade, min 99% | BioShop | Cat#IPT002.25; CAS: 367-93-1 |
| Phenylmethanesulfonyl fluoride (PMSF) | Sigma Aldrich | Cat#P7626; CAS: 329-98-6 |
| Chelating Sepharose Fast Flow | GE Healthcare | Cat#17057502 |
| Q Sepharose Fast Flow | GE Healthcare | Cat#17051001 |
| Ubiquitin-AMC | VIVA Bioscience | Cat#VB2906-0050 |
| Di-Ubiquitin K63-2 | LifeSensors | Cat#DU6302 |
| NSC-632839 | LifeSensors | Cat#SI9689; CAS: 157654-67-6 |
| SYPRO® Orange Protein Gel Stain | Thermo Fisher Scientific | Cat#S6650 |
| vector pGEX-6p-1 | GE Healthcare | Cat#28-9546-48 |
| PreScission Protease | GE Healthcare | Cat# 27-0843-01 |
| Recombinant USP2 (258-605) | This paper | N/A |
| Recombinant Ubiquitin (1-76) | This paper | N/A |
| Recombinant USP7 (208-561) | This paper | N/A |
| DUB enzymes and ubiquitin for MALDI TOF High Throughput DUB Activity Assay | ( | N/A |
| CytoTox-ONE™ Homogeneous Membrane Integrity Assay | Promega | Cat# G7891 |
| Caspase-Glo® 3/7 Assay | Promega | Cat# G8091 |
| GoTaq qPCR Master Mix | Promega | Cat# A6001 |
| Human: HCT116 | ECACC | Cat# 91091005, RRID:CVCL_0291 |
| Human: U-2 OS | ECACC | Cat# 92022711, RRID:CVCL_0042 |
| Human: SAOS-2 | ECACC | Cat# 89050205, RRID:CVCL_0548 |
| Human: MCF-7 | ECACC | Cat# 86012803, RRID:CVCL_0031 |
| Human cyclin D1 siRNA | Santa Cruz Biotechnology | Cat# sc-29286 |
| siRNA-A | Santa Cruz Biotechnology | Cat# sc-37007 |
| siRNA-B | Santa Cruz Biotechnology | Cat# sc-44230 |
| siRNA-C | Santa Cruz Biotechnology | Cat# sc-44231 |
| Oligo-dT: | Genomed | N/A |
| RT PCR CCND1 mRNA primer 1: | This paper | N/A |
| RT PCR CCND1 mRNA primer 2: | This paper | N/A |
| RT PCR GAPDH mRNA primer 1: | Genomed ; ( | N/A |
| RT PCR GAPDH mRNA primer 2: | Genomed; ( | N/A |
| Mycoplasma detection primer 1: | Genomed; ( | N/A |
| Mycoplasma detection primer 2: | Genomed; ( | N/A |
| USP7 (208-561) primer forward: | Genomed | N/A |
| USP7 (208-561) primer reverse: | Genomed | N/A |
| pet16b-UB (1-76, human) | Prof. Stefan Jentsch, Max Planck Institute for Biochemistry, Munich, Germany; ( | N/A |
| pet24a-USP2 (258-605, human) | Prof. Tad Holak, Max Planck Institute for Biochemistry, Munich, Germany; ( | N/A |
| human USP7 ORF | BioScience | OCABo5050A1122D |
| pGEX-6p-1-USP7 (208-561, human) | This paper | N/A |
| ModFit LT Software v4.1.7 | Verity Software House | |
| Image Lab v5.0 | BioRad | |
| ImageJ 1.48v | ||