Literature DB >> 35251493

Defining the mechanisms underlying cyclin dependent kinase control of HIF-1α.

Noel A Warfel1,2.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  HIF-1; SMURF2; cyclin dependent kinase; hypoxia

Year:  2022        PMID: 35251493      PMCID: PMC8893780          DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.28208

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncotarget        ISSN: 1949-2553


× No keyword cloud information.
Constitutive activation of HIF-1α is common in human cancers, regardless of oxygen tension. While the majority of HIF-1 activation can be attributed to lack of oxygen in the tumor microenvironment, numerous non-hypoxic stimuli have also been shown to regulate HIF-1α levels. Stabilization of HIF-1α in normoxia has been attributed to genetic alterations, most notably loss of the von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) tumor suppressor gene, the primary E3 ligase responsible for targeting HIF-1α for proteasomal degradation [1]. In recent years, multiple new proteins and post-translational modifications have been implicated in the oxygen-independent control of HIF-1α. This includes alternative E3-ubiquitin ligases that target HIF-1α for proteasomal degradation (RACK, CHIP, HAF, etc.) [2], as well as binding proteins that enhance stability, such as HSP90 [3]. Another critical event that impacts HIF-1α levels and activation is phosphorylation. Numerous phosphorylation sites and upstream kinases, including PKA and PIM1 kinases, have been identified and shown to modulate HIF-1α protein stability in both normoxia and hypoxia [4-6]. Regardless of the mechanism, stabilization of HIF-1α in normoxia results in the constitutive upregulation of genes that initiate and sustain signaling pathways that drive cellular processes that support tumor growth and metastasis. As a result, identifying new mechanisms regulating HIF-1 is crucial to our understanding of cancer progression and developing more effective therapies. Prior research from the El-Deiry lab was the first to demonstrate that the cyclin dependent kinases CDK1 and CDK4/6 are sufficient to stabilize HIF-1α, independent of hypoxia or VHL. Following up on these exciting findings, Zhou and El-Deiry utilized an unbiased proteomic screen to identify SMAD specific E3-ubiquitin protein ligase 2 (SMURF2) as a novel E3 ligase controlling HIF-1α levels downstream of CDK4/6, regardless of oxygen tension. Moreover, mass spectrometry analysis revealed loss of phosphorylation of HIF-1α at Ser451 in cells treated with palbociclib, raising the possibility that this site could be important for maintaining HIF-1 stability. Interestingly, recent work from our group showed that phosphorylation of HIF-1α at Thr455 by PIM1 blocks HIF-1α degradation by disrupting prolyl hydroxylase domain (PHD) protein binding and hydroxylation, which is the initiating step in the canonical HIF-1α degradation pathway [4]. While the mechanism appears to be distinct, since PIM1 blocks VHL-mediated degradation, the close proximity of these sites and their localization within the oxygen dependent degradation domain in HIF-1α points to the importance of post-translational modifications to this region for the regulation of HIF-1α protein stability through both canonical and non-canonical means. Importantly, analysis of the TCGA data showed that high levels of SMURF2 correlated with significantly better overall survival and disease-free survival in clear cell renal cancer, in which over 80% of patients lack functional VHL and display high basal levels of HIF-1α. In a parallel study, the same authors leveraged their findings to test whether targeting multiple molecules that stabilize HIF-1α simultaneously enhanced therapeutic response. Strikingly, the combination of FDA-approved CDK4/6 inhibitors and HSP90 inhibitors showed enhanced inhibition of HIF-1 activity and synergistic anti-tumor effects in models of renal and colon cancer lacking VHL and Rb [7]. Taken together, these studies describe a new mechanism responsible for the activation of HIF-1 in human cancer and provide a strong rationale for the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors to target HIF-1, particularly in tumors lacking VHL or harboring other signaling alterations that promote the constitutive activation of HIF-1.
  7 in total

1.  Hypoxia-Inducible PIM Kinase Expression Promotes Resistance to Antiangiogenic Agents.

Authors:  Andrea L Casillas; Rachel K Toth; Alva G Sainz; Neha Singh; Ankit A Desai; Andrew S Kraft; Noel A Warfel
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2017-10-30       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 2.  HIF-1 regulation: not so easy come, easy go.

Authors:  Mei Yee Koh; Taly R Spivak-Kroizman; Garth Powis
Journal:  Trends Biochem Sci       Date:  2008-09-21       Impact factor: 13.807

3.  Protein kinase A-dependent phosphorylation stimulates the transcriptional activity of hypoxia-inducible factor 1.

Authors:  John W Bullen; Irina Tchernyshyov; Ronald J Holewinski; Lauren DeVine; Fan Wu; Vidya Venkatraman; David L Kass; Robert N Cole; Jennifer Van Eyk; Gregg L Semenza
Journal:  Sci Signal       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 8.192

4.  The tumour suppressor protein VHL targets hypoxia-inducible factors for oxygen-dependent proteolysis.

Authors:  P H Maxwell; M S Wiesener; G W Chang; S C Clifford; E C Vaux; M E Cockman; C C Wykoff; C W Pugh; E R Maher; P J Ratcliffe
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-05-20       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Hsp90 regulates a von Hippel Lindau-independent hypoxia-inducible factor-1 alpha-degradative pathway.

Authors:  Jennifer S Isaacs; Yun-Jin Jung; Edward G Mimnaugh; Alfredo Martinez; Frank Cuttitta; Leonard M Neckers
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2002-06-06       Impact factor: 5.157

6.  Anti-cancer efficacy including Rb-deficient tumors and VHL-independent HIF1α proteasomal destabilization by dual targeting of CDK1 or CDK4/6 and HSP90.

Authors:  Shuai Zhao; Lanlan Zhou; David T Dicker; Avital Lev; Shengliang Zhang; Eric Ross; Wafik S El-Deiry
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-10-22       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Direct phosphorylation and stabilization of HIF-1α by PIM1 kinase drives angiogenesis in solid tumors.

Authors:  Andrea L Casillas; Shailender S Chauhan; Rachel K Toth; Alva G Sainz; Amber N Clements; Corbin C Jensen; Paul R Langlais; Cindy K Miranti; Anne E Cress; Noel A Warfel
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 9.867

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.