Petra Hyroššová1, Marc Aragó1, Juan Moreno-Felici1, Xiarong Fu2, Andrés Mendez-Lucas1, Pablo M García-Rovés1, Shawn Burgess2, Agnès Figueras3, Francesc Viñals3, Jose C Perales4,5. 1. Department of Physiological Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Feixa Llarga s/n, 08907, L'Hospitalet del Llobregat, Spain. 2. Center for Human Nutrition and Department of Pharmacology, University of Texas, Dallas, 75390, USA. 3. IDIBELL, Gran Via de l'Hospitalet 199, 08908, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain. 4. Department of Physiological Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Feixa Llarga s/n, 08907, L'Hospitalet del Llobregat, Spain. jperales@ub.edu. 5. IDIBELL, Gran Via de l'Hospitalet 199, 08908, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain. jperales@ub.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mitochondrial phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase (PEPCK-M; PCK2) is expressed in all cancer types examined and in neuroprogenitor cells. The gene is upregulated by amino acid limitation and ER-stress in an ATF4-dependent manner, and its activity modulates the PEP/Ca2+ signaling axis, providing clear arguments for a functional relationship with metabolic adaptations for cell survival. Despite its potential relevance to cancer metabolism, the mechanisms responsible for its pro-survival activity have not been completely elucidated. METHODS: [U-13C]glutamine and [U-13C]glucose labeling of glycolytic and TCA cycle intermediates and their anabolic end-products was evaluated quantitatively using LC/MS and GC/MS in conditions of abundant glucose and glucose limitation in loss-of-function (shRNA) and gain-of-function (lentiviral constitutive overexpression) HeLa cervix carcinoma cell models. Cell viability was assessed in conjunction with various glucose concentrations and in xenografts in vivo. RESULTS: PEPCK-M levels linearly correlated with [U-13C]glutamine label abundance in most glycolytic and TCA cycle intermediate pools under nutritional stress. In particular, serine, glycine, and proline metabolism, and the anabolic potential of the cell, were sensitive to PEPCK-M activity. Therefore, cell viability defects could be rescued by supplementing with an excess of those amino acids. PEPCK-M silenced or inhibited cells in the presence of abundant glucose showed limited growth secondary to TCA cycle blockade and increased ROS. In limiting glucose conditions, downregulation of PKC-ζ tumor suppressor has been shown to enhance survival. Consistently, HeLa cells also sustained a survival advantage when PKC-ζ tumor suppressor was downregulated using shRNA, but this advantage was abolished in the absence of PEPCK-M, as its inhibition restores cell growth to control levels. The relationship between these two pathways is also highlighted by the anti-correlation observed between PEPCK-M and PKC-ζ protein levels in all clones tested, suggesting co-regulation in the absence of glucose. Finally, PEPCK-M loss negatively impacted on anchorage-independent colony formation and xenograft growth in vivo. CONCLUSIONS: All in all, our data suggest that PEPCK-M might participate in the mechanisms to regulate proteostasis in the anabolic and stalling phases of tumor growth. We provide molecular clues into the clinical relevance of PEPCK-M as a mechanism of evasion of cancer cells in conditions of nutrient stress.
BACKGROUND: Mitochondrial phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase (PEPCK-M; PCK2) is expressed in all cancer types examined and in neuroprogenitor cells. The gene is upregulated by amino acid limitation and ER-stress in an ATF4-dependent manner, and its activity modulates the PEP/Ca2+ signaling axis, providing clear arguments for a functional relationship with metabolic adaptations for cell survival. Despite its potential relevance to cancer metabolism, the mechanisms responsible for its pro-survival activity have not been completely elucidated. METHODS: [U-13C]glutamine and [U-13C]glucose labeling of glycolytic and TCA cycle intermediates and their anabolic end-products was evaluated quantitatively using LC/MS and GC/MS in conditions of abundant glucose and glucose limitation in loss-of-function (shRNA) and gain-of-function (lentiviral constitutive overexpression) HeLa cervix carcinoma cell models. Cell viability was assessed in conjunction with various glucose concentrations and in xenografts in vivo. RESULTS: PEPCK-M levels linearly correlated with [U-13C]glutamine label abundance in most glycolytic and TCA cycle intermediate pools under nutritional stress. In particular, serine, glycine, and proline metabolism, and the anabolic potential of the cell, were sensitive to PEPCK-M activity. Therefore, cell viability defects could be rescued by supplementing with an excess of those amino acids. PEPCK-M silenced or inhibited cells in the presence of abundant glucose showed limited growth secondary to TCA cycle blockade and increased ROS. In limiting glucose conditions, downregulation of PKC-ζ tumor suppressor has been shown to enhance survival. Consistently, HeLa cells also sustained a survival advantage when PKC-ζ tumor suppressor was downregulated using shRNA, but this advantage was abolished in the absence of PEPCK-M, as its inhibition restores cell growth to control levels. The relationship between these two pathways is also highlighted by the anti-correlation observed between PEPCK-M and PKC-ζ protein levels in all clones tested, suggesting co-regulation in the absence of glucose. Finally, PEPCK-M loss negatively impacted on anchorage-independent colony formation and xenograft growth in vivo. CONCLUSIONS: All in all, our data suggest that PEPCK-M might participate in the mechanisms to regulate proteostasis in the anabolic and stalling phases of tumor growth. We provide molecular clues into the clinical relevance of PEPCK-M as a mechanism of evasion of cancer cells in conditions of nutrient stress.
Authors: Jiangbin Ye; Monika Kumanova; Lori S Hart; Kelly Sloane; Haiyan Zhang; Diego N De Panis; Ekaterina Bobrovnikova-Marjon; J Alan Diehl; David Ron; Constantinos Koumenis Journal: EMBO J Date: 2010-05-14 Impact factor: 11.598
Authors: Shawn C Burgess; TianTeng He; Zheng Yan; Jill Lindner; A Dean Sherry; Craig R Malloy; Jeffrey D Browning; Mark A Magnuson Journal: Cell Metab Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 27.287
Authors: F Ann Ran; Patrick D Hsu; Jason Wright; Vineeta Agarwala; David A Scott; Feng Zhang Journal: Nat Protoc Date: 2013-10-24 Impact factor: 13.491
Authors: Petra Biewenga; Marrije R Buist; Perry D Moerland; Emiel Ver Loren van Themaat; Antoine H C van Kampen; Fiebo J W ten Kate; Frank Baas Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2008-01-11 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: K Leithner; A Hrzenjak; M Trötzmüller; T Moustafa; H C Köfeler; C Wohlkoenig; E Stacher; J Lindenmann; A L Harris; A Olschewski; H Olschewski Journal: Oncogene Date: 2014-03-17 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Ji-Won Park; Seung Cheol Kim; Won Ki Kim; Jun Pyu Hong; Kyung-Hee Kim; Hyun Yang Yeo; Jae Yong Lee; M Sun Kim; Jong Heon Kim; Se Young Yang; Dae Yong Kim; Jae Hwan Oh; Jae Youl Cho; Byong Chul Yoo Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2014-03-06 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Oliver D K Maddocks; Celia R Berkers; Susan M Mason; Liang Zheng; Karen Blyth; Eyal Gottlieb; Karen H Vousden Journal: Nature Date: 2012-12-16 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Juan Moreno-Felici; Petra Hyroššová; Marc Aragó; Sergio Rodríguez-Arévalo; Pablo M García-Rovés; Carmen Escolano; Jose C Perales Journal: Cells Date: 2019-12-19 Impact factor: 6.600
Authors: Petra Hyroššová; Marc Aragó; Cristina Muñoz-Pinedo; Francesc Viñals; Pablo M García-Rovés; Carmen Escolano; Andrés Méndez-Lucas; Jose C Perales Journal: Cell Death Dis Date: 2022-08-24 Impact factor: 9.685