| Literature DB >> 31496920 |
Xiangyu Zhang1, Jiali Wang1, Yunlong Jia1, Tianxu Liu1, Mengjie Wang1, Wei Lv1, Rong Zhang2, Juan Shi3, Lihua Liu1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bridging integrator 1 (BIN1) has showed outstanding tumor-suppressive potential via inhibiting c-MYC-mediated tumorigenesis. However, a frequent phosphorylation of c-MYC at Ser-62 site could block the BIN1/c-MYC interaction and limits the tumor-suppressive effect of BIN1. Cyclin-dependent kinase 5 (CDK5), a generally dysregulated protein in various carcinomas, can mediate c-MYC phosphorylation at Ser-62 site. However, whether the existence of CDK5 could block the BIN1/c-MYC interaction remains unclear.Entities:
Keywords: BIN1; CDK5; NSCLC; c-MYC
Year: 2019 PMID: 31496920 PMCID: PMC6720419 DOI: 10.1186/s12935-019-0952-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Cell Int ISSN: 1475-2867 Impact factor: 5.722
Fig. 1The expression of CDK5 and its effect on the BIN1/c-MYC interaction in NSCLC cells. a The protein expression of BIN1 and CDK5 in NSCLC cell lines and embryo lung cells 2BS detected by western blotting. b The co-expression status of CDK5 and BIN1 in H460 and PC9 cells detected by immunofluorescence. c The efficiency of various siRNAs in suppressing the expression of CDK5. d The effect of CDK5 knockdown on the expression of CDK5, c-MYC and phosphorylated c-MYC at Ser-62 site in H460 cells. e The effect of CDK5 overexpression on the expression of CDK5, c-MYC and phosphorylated c-MYC at Ser-62 site in PC9 cells. f The effect of CDK5 on the interaction of BIN1/c-MYC in H460 and PC9 cells detected with Co-IP. Significant P-values marked by asterisk: *P < 0.05
Fig. 2Schematic of the proposed effect of CDK5 on the interaction between BIN1 and c-MYC. a BIN1 could bind to the N terminus of c-MYC with its SH3 domain to inhibit the proliferation, migration and invasion ability of NSCLC cells. b CDK5 could induce the phosphorylation of c-MYC at Ser-62 site. Thus, the presence of CDK5 could block the interaction between BIN1 and c-MYC to neutralize the tumor-suppressing effect of BIN1
Fig. 3Effects of CDK5 on the malignant behaviors of NSCLC cells. a The effect of CDK5 knockdown on the growth ability of H460 cells. b The effect of CDK5 knockdown on the migration ability of H460 cells. c The effect of CDK5 knockdown on the invasion ability of H460 cells. d The effect of CDK5 knockdown on the expression of EMT-related proteins in H460 cells, GAPDH as control. e The effect of CDK5 overexpression on the growth ability of PC9 cells. f The effect of CDK5 overexpression on the migration ability of PC9 cells. g The effect of CDK5 overexpression on the invasion ability of PC9 cells. h The effect of CDK5 overexpression on the expression of EMT-related proteins in PC9 cells, GAPDH as control. Significant P-values marked by asterisk: *P < 0.05
Fig. 4The effect of Dinaciclib treatment on H460 cells in vitro and in vivo. a The effects of Dinaciclib (concentration: 1 nM) on the expression of CDK5 and its activated form CDK5/p35 in vitro. b The effects of Dinaciclib (concentration: 1 nM) on the expression of phosphorylated c-MYC at Ser-62 site, c-MYC and BIN1. c The effects of Dinaciclib on the BIN1/c-MYC interaction. d, e The tumor volume of nude mice bearing with H460 cells. Significant P-values marked by asterisk: *P < 0.05
Fig. 5The role of CDK5 and BIN1 in predicting prognosis of the NSCLC patients. a The presentative expression of CDK5 and BIN1 in NSCLC tissues. b The correlation between CDK5 expression and overall postoperative survival of NSCLC patients. c The correlation between BIN1 expression and overall postoperative survival of NSCLC patients. d The correlation between co-expression status of BIN1 and CDK5 and overall postoperative survival of NSCLC patients
Associations of expression of CDK5 and BIN1 with patient clinical parameters of NSCLC patients
| n | Expression of CDK5 (n) | P | Expression of BIN1 (n) | P | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | Low | High | Low | ||||
| Gender | |||||||
| Male | 103 | 61 | 42 | 0.190 | 43 | 60 | 0.791 |
| Female | 50 | 24 | 26 | 22 | 28 | ||
| Age | |||||||
| ≤ 60 | 109 | 62 | 47 | 0.604 | 46 | 63 | 0.912 |
| > 60 | 44 | 23 | 21 | 19 | 25 | ||
| TNM stage | |||||||
| I + II | 86 | 33 | 53 | < 0.001 | 47 | 39 | 0.001 |
| III | 67 | 52 | 15 | 18 | 49 | ||
| Invasion range | |||||||
| T1 + T2 | 59 | 21 | 38 | < 0.001 | 32 | 27 | 0.020 |
| T3 | 94 | 64 | 30 | 33 | 61 | ||
| Lymph node metastasis | |||||||
| Negative | 75 | 27 | 48 | < 0.001 | 43 | 32 | < 0.001 |
| Positive | 78 | 58 | 20 | 22 | 56 | ||