Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Molecular and Cellular Biology, October 2004, p. 8981-8993, Vol. 24, No. 20
0270-7306/04/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/MCB.24.20.8981-8993.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
William and Karen Davidson Laboratory of Brain Tumor Biology, Hermelin Brain Tumor Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan,1 Institute of Biochemistry II, Goethe University Medical School, Frankfurt am Main, Germany,2 San Diego Branch, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research,3 Department of Medicine and Cancer Center,4 Center for Molecular Genetics, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California5
Received 14 March 2004/ Returned for modification 5 April 2004/ Accepted 22 July 2004
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
EGFR, which signals at low intensity and does not bind Cbls or SETA/CIN85. In agreement with this, Alix interaction did not occur via SETA/CIN85. However, SETA/CIN85 and Alix were capable of mutually promoting their interaction with the EGFR. Increasing the level of Alix weakened the interaction between SETA/CIN85 and Cbl and reduced the tyrosine phosphorylation of c-Cbl and the level of ubiquitination of EGFR, SETA/CIN85, and Cbls. This antagonism of the Cbl-SETA/CIN85 complex by Alix was reflected in its diminution of EGFR internalization. In agreement with this, small interfering RNA-mediated knockdown of Alix promoted EGFR internalization and downregulation. It has been suggested that SETA/CIN85 promotes receptor internalization by recruiting endophilins. However, Alix was also capable of increasing the level of endophilin associated with EGFR, implying that this is not sufficient to promote receptor internalization. We propose that Alix inhibits EGFR internalization by attenuating the interaction between Cbl and SETA/CIN85 and by inhibiting Cbl-mediated ubiquitination of the EGFR. | INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
EGFR or EGFRvIII; referred to here as
EGFR), which signals in a ligand-independent manner (10, 19, 40, 47), albeit at a lower intensity and in the absence of receptor internalization (18). Interaction between wild-type EGFR and the Cbl-SETA/CIN85 complex and internalization are dependent on activation beyond a certain threshold, which
EGFR does not cross (38).
A central component of this complex, the adaptor molecule SETA/CIN85/Ruk, offers multiple avenues of regulation of receptor internalization by virtue of its broad spectrum of interactions. It was independently identified as being expressed in association with malignant transformation of astrocytes (SETA was derived from SH3 domain encoding, expressed in tumorigenic astrocytes [1]), as being a binding partner for c-Cbl (Cbl-interacting protein of 85 kDa or CIN85 [39, 42]), or as being a binding partner of p85
and a negative regulator of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (regulator of ubiquitous kinase or Ruk) (14). SETA/CIN85 proteins exist in several isoforms (2, 3, 14), the longest of which comprises three SH3 domains in the N-terminal half and a C-terminal half with a proline-rich region and a coiled-coil domain involved in multimerization at the terminus (2, 46). SETA/CIN85 constitutively associates with endophilins, proteins thought to modify membrane phospholipids and to induce negative curvature and invagination of the plasma membrane during the early steps of endocytosis (13, 36, 39, 41). In addition to its binding to Cbls and endophilins, SETA/CIN85 interacts with other signaling molecules, regulators of the cytoskeleton, and modulators of apoptosis, including Crk-I, Crk-II, p130(Cas), Grb2, Sos1, and apoptosis-linked gene 2-interacting protein X/apoptosis-linked gene 2-interacting protein 1 (Alix/AIP1) (2, 6, 37, 46).
The recent observation (30, 45) that Alix/AIP1 (referred to here as Alix to avoid confusion with other proteins that are named AIP1) itself interacts with endophilins (5) prompted this investigation. Our data show that Alix also binds EGFRs but does not discriminate between activation states and so binds active and inactive EGFRs as well as
EGFR. While Alix binds EGFR indirectly, this does not occur via SETA/CIN85. However, Alix and SETA/CIN85 mutually strengthen their interaction with active EGFR, suggesting that they can interact with each other while bound to the receptor. Importantly Alix appears to negatively regulate the interaction between SETA/CIN85 and Cbls, as well as Cbl phosphorylation following EGFR activation, and as a result Alix is capable of attenuating EGFR, SETA/CIN85, and Cbl ubiquitination. Modulation of Alix levels also impacts EGFR internalization: overexpression of Alix antagonizes this process, while small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown stimulates it. We propose a model in which the Alix-SETA/CIN85 interaction antagonizes the activity of the Cbl-SETA/CIN85 complex in promoting EGFR downregulation, at the levels of both SETA/CIN85-mediated internalization and Cbl-dependent ubiquitination.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
EGFR (18) in 1726/zeo/G retrovirus, a derivative of 1726/zeo (6) which carries a Gateway recombination cassette in the unique EcoRI site, making it a Gateway destination vector (Invitrogen), and wild-type EGFR as well as
EGFR and sequence-altered versions (see Fig. 3) were alternatively cloned into LRNL. Coding sequences for Cbl-b carrying a C-terminal hemagglutinin (HA) tag and c-Cbl carrying an N-terminal HA tag in pCEFL (11, 22), FLAG-tagged ubiquitin in pcDNA3.1, and green fluorescent protein (GFP) and HA-tagged endophilin A1 and Flag-tagged CIN85 in pcDNA3 were described previously (39).
|
EGFR monoclonal antibody (MAb; 806) was used as previously described (21). Monoclonal anti-Flag (M2) was purchased from Sigma, and a monoclonal mouse antiphosphotyrosine antibody (4G10) was purchased from Upstate Biotechnology. The monoclonal anti-Alix antibody was purchased from BD Pharmingen. Polyclonal anti-SETA/CIN85 antibodies were made and used as previously described (6). Polyclonal rabbit anti-EGFR pY1045 was purchased from Cell Signaling Technology. Cell lines, cell transfection, and EGF induction experiments. Human embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and U87MG glioblastoma cells were cultured under standard conditions in Dulbecco's modified Eagle medium supplemented with antibiotics and 10% fetal calf serum. CHO and CHO-EGFR cells were cultured in F12K medium (Kaighn's modification) plus supplements. Cells were transfected with plasmids by a modified calcium phosphate procedure. For epidermal growth factor (EGF) induction experiments 5 million cells were transfected and incubated at 37°C for 24 h. Cells were serum deprived for 18 to 20 h and subsequently incubated with 50 or 100 ng of recombinant EGF/ml in serum-free medium for 5 min. Recombinant human EGF, EGFR kinase inhibitor AG1478, and src kinase inhibitor PP2 were purchased from Oncogene Science.
siRNA silencing. Vector-based silencing of Alix was achieved by the use of pTER-Alix, which was constructed as previously described (43). Briefly, complementary oligonucleotides containing the Alix target sequence (boldface) described recently (28) (sense, 5'-GAT CCC GCC GCT GGT GAA GTT CAT CTT CAA GAG AGA TGA ACT TCA CCA GCG GCT TTT TGG AAA-3'; antisense, 5'-AGC TTT TCC AAA AAG CCG CTG GTG AAG TTC ATC TCT CTT GAA GAT GAA CTT CAC CAG CGG CGG-3') were annealed and cloned into BglII and HindIII restriction sites of the pTER+ vector (kindly provided by Hans Clevers). This construct was used to transfect 293T cells or HeLa cells with Lipofectamine (Invitrogen). Forty-eight hours after transfection cells were collected and the level of Alix protein was determined by Western blotting (WB).
Optimal oligonucleotide-based silencing of Alix was determined by transfection of different volumes (1 to 10 µl) of a 20 µM stock solution of an Alix siRNA duplex (QIAGEN; sequence as described above) into HeLa, HEK293, CHO-EGFR, NIH 3T3, and NIH SAA cells with Oligofectamine or LP2000 (Invitrogen) according to the manufacturer's guidelines. After 24, 48, and 72 h cells were harvested and endogenous Alix levels were determined by immunoblotting using an anti-Alix antibody kindly provided by Remy Sadoul (unpublished). Eventually, HeLa and CHO-EGFR cells were chosen as model systems and transfected with 1 µl of 20 µM siRNA solution in combination with LP2000. After 72 h cells were used for subsequent assays. With this combination a knockdown efficiency of endogenous Alix of more than 90% could be achieved.
Mouse brain homogenates. Mouse brain was prepared from BL6 mice, transferred to immunoprecipitation (IP) buffer (see below), and homogenized with an UltraTurrax homogenizer for two rounds, 1 min each, on ice. The insoluble fraction was removed by centrifugation at 3,200 x g for 5 min at 4°C. The resulting suspension was centrifuged at high speed (16,200 x g) five times at 4°C. Cloudy lower phases were pooled and termed the fat rich fraction, while the clear supernatant is referred to as the low-fat fraction. Both were subjected to immunoprecipitation studies.
Ubiquitination assays. To determine the degree of protein ubiquitination, HEK293 cells were cotransfected with EGFR, SETA/CIN85, Cbls, and Flag-tagged ubiquitin. The effect of Alix was measured by comparison with lacZ-transfected controls. Cells underwent EGF induction as described above and were harvested, and subsequently EGFR, SETA/CIN85, and Cbls were immunoprecipitated from the lysates. Precipitates were analyzed by immunoblotting with an anti-Flag antibody.
Immunoprecipitation. Cells were washed two times with ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and were lysed on ice for 30 min in a modified radioimmunoprecipitation assay buffer (50 mM HEPES [pH 7.5], 150 mM NaCl, 1% IGEPAL [{octylphenoxy}polyethoxyethanol] CA-630 [Sigma], 0.5% deoxycholate, 0.1% sodium dodecyl sulfate [SDS], 5 mM EDTA, 1 mM EGTA, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 4 mM sodium azide, 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 5 mM benzamidine, a protease inhibitor cocktail [2 µg of aprotinin and leupeptin/ml, 10 µg of E-64 and a trypsin inhibitor/ml, 1 µg of pepstatin A/ml], and a phosphatase inhibitor cocktail [2 mM sodium vanadate and sodium fluoride, 5 mM sodium molybdate, and 15 mM p-nitrophenylphosphate]). Additionally, to measure ubiquitination, 50 µM MG132 was added to inhibit proteasomal degradation. Following lysis, the cell suspension was sheared 10 times through an 18G1[1/2] needle and 10 times through an IM1 needle and incubated on ice for another 30 min. The cell solution was then cleared by centrifugation at 12,000 x g at 4°C. The supernatant was used for IP studies. Appropriate concentrations of primary antibody were added, and the solution was rotated at 4°C for at least an hour. Antibody-protein complexes were precipitated with 50 µl of protein A-agarose solution (Roche) by rotation at 4°C overnight. The agarose beads were collected by centrifugation at 12,000 x g for 5 min at 4°C and were washed seven times with precipitation buffer on ice. Finally, the sediment was boiled for 5 min at 95°C in 1x NuPAGE LDS sample buffer (Invitrogen) containing 10% ß-mercaptoethanol and transferred to ice immediately. The solution was cleared of agarose by centrifugation and stored at 80°C until further analysis by protein electrophoresis.
WB. Protein samples were analyzed by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis using an XCell SureLock minicell (Invitrogen) in combination with precast 4 to 12% NuPAGE or 10% Bis-Tris gels (1 mm) at 200 V according to the manufacturer's guidelines. Following electrophoresis, proteins were blotted to a polyvinylidene difluoride membrane and were incubated for at least 1 h in blocking buffer (5% bovine serum albumin [BSA] and 1% Tween 20 in Tris-buffered saline). Membranes were incubated overnight with appropriate dilutions of primary antibody in blocking buffer. The next day membranes were washed and incubated for 1 h with an appropriate alkaline phosphatase-conjugated secondary antibody solution in blocking buffer (Sigma; dilutions: anti-mouse antibody, 1:3,000; anti-rabbit antibody, 1:5,000; anti-goat antibody, 1:15,000). After additional washing steps, antibody complexes were visualized on film with Immun-Star AP substrate (Bio-Rad). In vitro confrontation assays were performed using the Promega TnT kit to generate [3H]leucine-labeled proteins and carried out as described previously (6). Figure panels were made by digitally photographing films and assembling the relevant lanes in Photoshop. For each row in a panel a single exposure of the same film was used, so that even noncontiguous lanes are from the same exposure of the same series of blots and the same experiment. Lanes were rearranged for clarity of presentation. Molecular weight standards were run in each experiment, and the mobilities of the bands shown throughout the data are the same as those shown in Fig. 1. Molecular weight labels have been omitted from the majority of the figures for clarity.
|
In the second approach, receptor internalization was measured by flow cytometry. Forty-eight hours after transfection with pTER-Alix and pEGFP-C1 cell monolayers of 293T or HeLa cells were incubated with 50 ng of EGF/ml at 37°C to induce internalization of EGFR. At various time points cells were harvested and blocked in 5% BSA-PBS for 30 min on ice. The amount of endogenous surface resident EGFR was detected by incubation with an anti-EGFR antibody, conjugated with phycoerythrin (BD Pharmingen) for 1 h at 4°C. Cells were washed with ice-cold PBS and analyzed with an Epics XL flow cytometer (Beckman-Coulter). For each sample 10,000 cells were analyzed and GFP-expressing cells were gated for determining the amount of EGFR at the plasma membrane. Mean fluorescence intensity of each sample was calculated with Expo 32 ADC software.
Receptor degradation was also measured by flow cytometry. Forty-eight hours after transfection with pTER-Alix and pEGFP-EGFR monolayers of 293T cells were incubated with 50 ng of EGF/ml at 37°C to induce internalization and degradation of EGFR. At various time points cells were harvested and analyzed with an Epics XL flow cytometer (Beckman-Coulter). For each sample 10,000 cells were analyzed and the amount of EGFR in the cell was determined by measuring the intensity of the GFP signal. Mean fluorescence intensity of each sample was calculated with Expo 32 ADC software.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
SETA/CIN85 and its associated proteins c-Cbl, Cbl-b, and endophilin A1 discriminate between the
EGFR mutant protein and EGFR in that they associate only with the latter (38). To test whether Alix also discriminates between these two forms of the EGFR, we performed IP experiments with conditions specific for the wild type and
EGFR (Fig. 1B). EGFR-specific conditions were achieved by transfecting this receptor alone into HEK293 cells (which do not express endogenous
EGFR) and immunoprecipitating with an N-terminal EGFR antibody. To isolate
EGFR from cells that had been transfected with it, the MAb 806 was used, as it preferentially recognizes this mutant form (21). However, as described previously (38), in cells that also express endogenous EGFR, as is usually the case in gliomas, as well as the HEK293 cell model used here, there is a degree of cross-reactivity with EGFR. Others have also reported this, particularly when EGFR is highly expressed, and it is thought to be because MAb 806 recognizes an activity-dependent conformation rather than a neo epitope of
EGFR (21, 27, 29). To reduce the level of EGFR in
EGFR immunoprecipitates, lysates were precleared by IP with an anti-EGFR antibody (Ab-1; Oncogene Science), followed by IP with MAb 806, which resulted in predominant recovery of
EGFR (Fig. 1B, lane 1). Cotransfection of Flag-tagged Alix with wild-type EGFR or
EGFR in HEK293 cells and IP of the respective receptor showed that Alix associated with both receptors, although lower levels of Alix were associated with
EGFR (Fig. 1B). These data suggest that Alix does not interact with EGFR via Cbl and SETA/CIN85, as neither of these proteins binds to
EGFR (38). However, as the interaction of Alix with
EGFR is weaker than that with wild-type EGFR, it is possible that SETA/CIN85 and Cbls can positively contribute to Alix's interaction with EGFR. Two experiments were then performed to test whether Alix and EGFR interacted in situations where neither protein was overexpressed by transient transfection. First, CHO cells stably expressing EGFR (CHO-EGFR) were subjected to EGFR IP, and it was found that endogenous Alix, as well as transfected Alix, could be recovered in the immunoprecipitates (Fig. 1C). The amount of endogenous Alix recovered was not affected by stimulation with EGF (Fig. 1C). Second, endogenous EGFR was immunoprecipitated from either a fat rich or a low-fat fraction of mouse brain homogenates and endogenous Alix was detected in the recovered material (Fig. 1D). Direct confrontation of bacterially made Alix with in vitro-transcribed and -translated EGFR or
EGFR failed to show interaction, while SETA/CIN85 and Alix bound in this situation as previously described (6) (data not shown), suggesting that the interaction between these proteins is not direct and requires the presence of an unidentified cellular cofactor. Additional control experiments (unpublished) were also performed to establish that the recovery of Alix in EGFR IP is dependent on the presence of the EGFR, that the EGFR antibodies do not recognize Alix, that preimmune and secondary antibodies are not capable of recovering Flag-tagged Alix in IPs, and that no Flag-tagged Alix is found in cells that are not transfected with this construct.
The interaction between SETA/CIN85 and EGFR is dependent on the EGFR being in an activated state (38, 39). To test whether the activation state modulated the interaction between Alix and EGFR, HEK293 cells transfected with both of these constructs were serum starved and challenged with EGF for 5 min to produce maximal EGFR activity. Although this resulted in a dramatic increase in the tyrosine phosphorylation state of the EGFR, it did not affect the amount of Alix that was recovered in the EGFR IP (Fig. 2A, lanes 1 and 2). Although no tyrosine-phosphorylated EGFR was detectable in the serum-starved cells (lane 1), cells were also treated with the EGFR inhibitor AG1478 or the src kinase inhibitor PP2 in the absence of EGF, in an attempt to eliminate any residual phosphorylation that might be present, but again this did not alter the amount of Alix that was recovered in the EGFR complex (Fig. 2A, lanes 3 and 4). Therefore, the interaction between Alix and EGFR was not dependent on the activation or phosphorylation state of the receptor. Similarly, the interaction between Alix and
EGFR was not affected by EGF stimulation, which has no effect on this ligand-independent mutant receptor (Fig. 2B, lanes 1 and 2). It also did not appear to be significantly affected by treatment with AG1478, which inhibits the
EGFR (17, 33). However, a slight reduction in Alix in the AG1478-treated
EGFR complex and an incomplete attenuation of
EGFR phosphorylation were observed (Fig. 2B, lane 3). The src kinase inhibitor PP2 had no effect.
|
EGFR in its interaction with Alix more thoroughly, various
EGFRs with tyrosine-to-phenylalanine substitutions (DY1, -2, -3, -4, -6, -8, and -12), as well as a kinase-inactive mutant
EGFR (DK), were examined (Fig. 3). The amount of Alix recovered in the IPs of kinase-inactive
EGFR DK or the various DYs did not vary with phosphorylation status (Fig. 3 shows details of the alterations). For example,
EGFR DK recovered an amount of Alix similar to that recovered by the active
EGFR, although it was not phosphorylated (Fig. 3, lanes 1 and 2). Interestingly, DY4, which showed very low levels of phosphorylation, bound relatively more Alix than DY1, which exhibited near-
EGFR levels of activity, compared to the intensity of the EGFR WB band (compare lanes 6 and 3). Taken together these data demonstrate that the phosphorylation state of the
EGFR does not influence Alix binding, so that binding is activity independent. Variations in binding intensity among DYs may reflect subtle variations in C-terminal protein structures that are not yet understood in the context of Alix interaction. We again observed a lower level of Alix associated with
EGFR than was associated with stimulated EGFR (Fig. 3, lanes 1 and 10).
The nature of the respective interactions of SETA/CIN85 and Alix with EGFRs suggests that they occur in parallel, with the SETA/CIN85 interaction being dependent on high levels of receptor activity and so restricted to ligand-activated wild-type EGFR (38, 39) and with the Alix interaction being independent of activity state, and so applying to all EGFRs tested. This does not, however, exclude the possibility that there is cross talk between these two complexes, which could be mediated via the Alix-SETA/CIN85 interaction (6). To determine whether SETA/CIN85 could modulate the interaction between Alix and EGFR, we compared the impact of this protein on the binding of wild-type and mutant Alix to the EGFR (Fig. 4). The mutant Alix Alix-
717-784 lacks the N-terminal part of the proline-rich C terminus that contains the SETA/CIN85 binding site (23, 37) and so shows compromised interaction with SETA/CIN85 (37). Both Alix proteins interacted with EGFR (Fig. 4A, lanes 1 to 3). Cotransfection of SETA/CIN85 increased the amount of Alix recovered in the EGFR immunoprecipitates (by approximately 1.7-fold according to densitometry analysis; Fig. 4A, compare lanes 1 and 4) but did not affect the level of Alix-
717-784 (lane 5), which does not bind SETA/CIN85. To determine whether the ability of SETA/CIN85 to promote the binding of Alix depended on its interaction with the receptor, we tested whether it could also increase Alix binding to
EGFR. No effect of SETA/CIN85 on the levels of Alix in
EGFR immunoprecipitates was observed (not shown), and, as this receptor does not interact with SETA/CIN85 (38), this suggests that SETA/CIN85 binding to the receptor is necessary for its effect on Alix levels. To test whether the converse, that Alix could increase the amount of SETA/CIN85 on the EGFR, was also true, the level of SETA/CIN85 in EGFR immunoprecipitates was determined, after transfection of lacZ control or Alix proteins. Wild-type Alix but not Alix-
717-784 increased the amount of SETA/CIN85 in EGFR immunoprecipitates relative to the lacZ control (by approximately 1.7-fold according to densitometry analysis; Fig. 4B), providing further evidence that the association between Alix and SETA/CIN85 stabilizes their interaction with the EGFR. Together these data show that increasing the levels of either SETA/CIN85 or Alix increases the amount of the other partner protein at the EGFR and that this is dependent on direct interaction between them.
|
717-784 (Fig. 5A, lane 8). Independent confirmation of the apparent antagonism between Alix and Cbl protein binding was sought in SETA/CIN85 immunoprecipitates (Fig. 5B). While c-Cbl was recovered in a SETA/CIN85 immunoprecipitate, Alix, but not Alix-
717-784, reduced the level of c-Cbl (by approximately 35% according to densitometry analysis; Fig. 5B, compare lanes 1 and 2). The antagonism of the SETA/CIN85-Cbl interaction by Alix was dependent on the amount of Alix expressed (Fig. 5C). Transfection of 0.1 µg of Alix plasmid had little effect, while 1 µg caused a 20% decrease in the amount of Cbl associated with SETA/CIN85 and 2 µg caused a 35% decrease (by densitometry; Fig. 5C). Taken together, these results suggest that Alix interferes in the interaction between SETA/CIN85 and Cbl proteins and appears to do this by direct interaction with SETA/CIN85. In addition these data show that Cbls and Alix interact, as each protein could be recovered in immunoprecipitates of the other (Fig. 5A), and so this interaction may also be important in modulating the impact Alix has on the interaction between SETA and Cbls.
|
|
Another important feature of the Cbl-SETA/CIN85 complex is the interaction with endophilins, which mediate receptor internalization (39). The recent observation that Alix also binds to endophilins (4) makes this question particularly interesting, in view of the important differences between SETA/CIN85 and Alix discussed above. IP of SETA/CIN85 or Alix via their Flag epitope tags recovered different levels of endophilin 1A, with Alix bringing down more endophilin than SETA/CIN85 (Fig. 7A, lanes 1 and 2). Similarly, IP of endophilin 1A recovered both SETA/CIN85 and Alix, as expected, but more Alix than SETA/CIN85 was recovered (Fig. 7A, lanes 1 and 2). Interestingly, the amount of SETA/CIN85 recovered in endophilin IP was raised by the presence of Alix (Fig. 7A, lanes 2 and 3). Therefore, Alix, which showed activity-independent interaction with the EGFR, was capable of a more robust interaction with endophilin than SETA/CIN85. This prompted us to determine whether Alix can also increase the amount of endophilin associated with the EGFR, as has been shown for SETA/CIN85 (39). However, because of the ability of SETA/CIN85 to mediate such an increase and because Alix can also bind SETA/CIN85 (6), we first created a variant of Alix with reduced SETA/CIN85 binding. Alix-
717-784, which shows essentially no SETA/CIN85 binding, could not be used in these experiments as this deletion also removes the endophilin binding site of Alix, which is PPAKPQPPARPPPP761 (4). This variant of Alix, Alix-R745G, was made on the basis of the SETA/CIN85 binding motif in Alix, PTPAPR745 (23), and showed reduced affinity for a glutathione S-transferase (GST)-SETA protein in an in vitro confrontation (Fig. 7B). In an EGFR IP, Alix and Alix-R745G were each capable of mediating an increase in the amount of endophilin recovered (Fig. 7C). This increase was greater than that observed by EGF stimulation in cells transfected with GFP instead of Alix, which is presumably mediated by the endogenous SETA/CIN85 protein. The Alix-mediated increase in EGFR-associated endophilin was independent of EGF stimulation, consistent with the activity-independent interaction of Alix with the receptor. Furthermore, Alix-R745G was also capable of promoting an increase in EGFR-bound endophilin, demonstrating that a strong interaction with SETA/CIN85 is not required.
|
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Alix was capable of binding to EGFR and appeared to do so independently of its interaction with SETA/CIN85 based on two observations. The first is that Alix did not show the same activity-dependent pattern of binding to EGFR as that previously demonstrated for SETA/CIN85 (38, 39). Our data show that Alix was able to bind with similar intensities to active and inactive EGFR, as well as the weakly active
EGFR and various engineered constructs of this oncogenic receptor, including a kinase-inactive form. The second, more direct indication that Alix binds EGFR in a SETA/CIN85-independent manner comes from the analysis of Alix variants Alix-
717-784 and Alix-R745G, both of which showed reduced SETA/CIN85 binding but retained their ability to bind EGFR. Therefore, our data show that the interaction between Alix and the EGFR does not require tyrosine phosphorylation, the tyrosine residues mutated in the DY series (Fig. 3), or the entire proline-rich C terminus of Alix. Furthermore, the interaction between Alix and EGFR was indirect, as it did not occur in vitro, suggesting that other proteins in this complex remain to be identified.
Although Alix and SETA/CIN85 bound the EGFR independently, increasing the levels of either protein affected the binding of the other. Higher levels of Alix increased the level of SETA/CIN85 in EGFR immunoprecipitates and vice versa. That this modulation required direct interaction between SETA/CIN85 and Alix is supported by the observation that Alix-
717-784, which does not bind SETA/CIN85, did not mediate it. Furthermore, the promotion of Alix binding to EGFR by increased levels of SETA/CIN85 required the association of SETA/CIN85 with the receptor, as it was not observed on the
EGFR, which does not bind SETA/CIN85 (38).
The strengthening of the association between SETA/CIN85 and the EGFR that is mediated by increased levels of Alix appears to occur at the expense of the Cbl-SETA/CIN85 interaction, suggesting that the association between SETA/CIN85 and these two partners is mutually exclusive and therefore that Alix stabilizes SETA/CIN85 in a complex on the EGFR that does not contain Cbls. Although SETA/CIN85 plays a key role in the internalization of the EGFR mediated by the Cbl complex, it does not modulate the ubiquitination activity of Cbls (39). Therefore, the observation that Alix attenuates the ubiquitination of EGFR, SETA/CIN85, and the Cbls suggests a second, independent mechanism by which Alix functionally antagonizes the Cbl-SETA/CIN85 complex. The mechanism for the inhibition of the ubiquitin ligase activity of the Cbls is unclear, but it is intriguing that we observed a strong Alix-mediated attenuation of Cbl phosphorylation downstream of the EGFR.
That the two inhibitory effects of Alix on the Cbl-SETA/CIN85 complex have functional consequences is demonstrated by the observation that overexpression of Alix inhibited EGFR internalization and antagonized the promotion of EGFR downregulation by c-Cbl. Further support comes from experiments in which Alix expression was knocked down by siRNA, which resulted in a stimulation of EGFR internalization. Although the effect of Alix was relatively modest, it was consistently observed over different cell lines and with different knockdown approaches and modes of measuring receptor internalization. Interestingly although alterations of Alix level changed EGFR ubiquitination and internalization, they did not profoundly affect EGFR degradation. This fits with a model in which Alix modulates the process of EGFR internalization, rather than being involved in its direct execution.
Alix, like SETA/CIN85, binds endophilins constitutively (4) and mediated the binding of endophilins to the EGFR in our experiments. This recruitment of endophilins was more robust than that mediated by stimulation of cells with EGF, which presumably relied on the activity of the endogenous Cbl-SETA/CIN85 complex. Alix-R745G, which shows reduced interaction with SETA/CIN85, was still capable of mediating this increase in endophilins at the EGFR, suggesting that Alix acts independently of SETA. Alix was also able to mediate an increase in endophilins at the inactive EGFR, consistent with Alix's binding characteristics, and this was further evidence that this mechanism of recruitment of endophilins to the EGFR is SETA/CIN85 independent. These data show that endophilin recruitment, at least by Alix, does not mediate receptor internalization, both because it occurs at inactive receptors and because of direct evidence that Alix antagonizes receptor internalization. It is possible that endophilin recruitment in the absence of Cbl-mediated ubiquitination is not sufficient to trigger EGFR internalization and that the inhibition of Cbl ubiquitin ligase activity is the more important aspect of Alix function in this context. Alternately, the nature of the endophilin complex created by Alix could be different from that created by SETA/CIN85 in terms of, for example, its stoichiometry or structure, and so, although endophilins are present, they do not act to promote internalization. Regardless of the mechanism, this explains the apparent contradiction that the endophilin binding protein Alix binds to the
EGFR, which is inefficiently internalized (7, 18, 34).
We propose a model to summarize our findings (Fig. 10) in which Alix is constitutively associated with all forms of EGFR regardless of their activation state (Fig. 10A). Therefore the model shows Alix associated with the EGFR, but this is not meant to imply that we believe all Alix to be at the receptor, nor does it exclude the possibility that cytosolic, non-EGFR-associated Alix also participates in these regulatory events. As shown previously, a Cbl-SETA/CIN85-endophilin complex forms on phosphotyrosines of active EGFR and triggers internalization, as well as EGFR, Cbl, and SETA/CIN85 ubiquitination (Fig. 10B) (15, 39). Increasing expression levels of SETA/CIN85 recruit Alix to the SETA/CIN85 complex (Fig. 10C). Similarly, increased levels of Alix recruit SETA/CIN85 to the Alix complex, but in this case at the expense of the interaction between SETA/CIN85 and Cbl (Fig. 10D). At the same time Alix antagonizes the ubiquitin ligase activity of the Cbl proteins. These changes are accompanied by attenuated EGFR internalization. The inhibition of the Cbl-SETA/CIN85 interaction may well be sufficient to reduce the internalization of the EGFR (39). Last, reduction of Alix levels (Fig. 10E) promotes the internalization of the EGFR, suggesting that Alix exerts a constitutive inhibitory effect on these processes. This effect is represented as weak in the model, both to distinguish it from the inhibitory impact seen when levels of Alix are elevated (Fig. 10C) and because EGFR internalization occurs robustly under normal levels of Alix. It is distinctly possible that Alix has similar impacts on the signaling of other receptor tyrosine kinases, such as the PDGFR, with which we demonstrated its interaction and modulation of internalization.
|
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This work was supported in part by CA-R01-84109 (O.B.) and CA-PO1-95616 (W.K.C. and F.B.F.) from the National Cancer Institute, the National Foundation for Cancer Research (W.K.C.), the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DI 931/1-1 (I.D.), and Boehringer Ingelheim Foundation (I.D.), as well as by the generosity of the Hermelin Brain Tumor Center donors, with particular thanks to William and Karen Davidson (O.B.). M.H.H.S. is a fellow of the European Molecular Biology Organization (ALTF 881-2003).
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Borinstein, S. C., M. A. Hyatt, V. W. Sykes, R. E. Straub, S. Lipkowitz, J. Boulter, and O. Bogler. 2000. SETA is a multifunctional adapter protein with three SH3 domains that binds Grb2, Cbl and the novel SB1 proteins. Cell. Signal. 12:769-779.[CrossRef][Medline]
3. Buchman, V., C. Luke, E. Borthwick, I. Gout, and N. Ninkina. 2002. Organization of the mouse Ruk locus and expression of isoforms in mouse tissues. Gene 295:13-17.[CrossRef][Medline]
4. Chatellard-Causse, C., B. Blot, N. Cristina, S. Torch, M. Missotten, and R. Sadoul. 2002. Alix (ALG-2-interacting protein X), a protein involved in apoptosis, binds to endophilins and induces cytoplasmic vacuolization. J. Biol. Chem. 277:29108-29115.
5. Chatterjee, S., A. Matsumura, J. Schradermeier, and G. Y. Gillespie. 2000. Human malignant glioma therapy using anti-
vß3 integrin agents. J. Neurooncol. 46:135-144.[CrossRef][Medline]
6. Chen, B., S. C. Borinstein, J. Gillis, V. W. Sykes, and O. Bogler. 2000. The glioma associated protein SETA interacts with AIP1/Alix and ALG-2 and modulates apoptosis in astrocytes. J. Biol. Chem. 275:19275-19281.
7. Chu, C. T., K. D. Everiss, C. J. Wikstrand, S. K. Batra, H. J. Kung, and D. D. Bigner. 1997. Receptor dimerization is not a factor in the signalling activity of a transforming variant epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFRvIII). Biochem. J. 324(Pt. 3):855-861.
8. Dikic, I., and S. Giordano. 2003. Negative receptor signalling. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 15:128-135.[CrossRef][Medline]
9. Duan, L., Y. Miura, M. Dimri, B. Majumder, I. L. Dodge, A. L. Reddi, A. Ghosh, N. Fernandes, P. Zhou, K. Mullane-Robinson, N. Rao, S. Donoghue, R. A. Rogers, D. Bowtell, M. Naramura, H. Gu, V. Band, and H. Band. 2003. Cbl-mediated ubiquitinylation is required for lysosomal sorting of epidermal growth factor receptor but is dispensable for endocytosis. J. Biol. Chem. 278:28950-28960.
10. Ekstrand, A. J., N. Sugawa, C. D. James, and V. P. Collins. 1992. Amplified and rearranged epidermal growth factor receptor genes in human glioblastomas reveal deletions of sequences encoding portions of the N- and/or C-terminal tails. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89:4309-4313.
11. Ettenberg, S. A., M. M. Keane, M. M. Nau, M. Frankel, L. M. Wang, J. H. Pierce, and S. Lipkowitz. 1999. cbl-b inhibits epidermal growth factor receptor signaling. Oncogene 18:1855-1866.[CrossRef][Medline]
12. Ettenberg, S. A., Y. R. Rubinstein, P. Banerjee, M. M. Nau, M. M. Keane, and S. Lipkowitz. 1999. cbl-b inhibits EGF-receptor-induced apoptosis by enhancing ubiquitination and degradation of activated receptors. Mol. Cell. Biol. Res. Commun. 2:111-118.[CrossRef][Medline]
13. Farsad, K., N. Ringstad, K. Takei, S. R. Floyd, K. Rose, and P. De Camilli. 2001. Generation of high curvature membranes mediated by direct endophilin bilayer interactions. J. Cell Biol. 155:193-200.
14. Gout, I., G. Middleton, J. Adu, N. N. Ninkina, L. B. Drobot, V. Filonenko, G. Matsuka, A. M. Davies, M. Waterfield, and V. L. Buchman. 2000. Negative regulation of PI 3-kinase by Ruk, a novel adaptor protein. EMBO J. 19:4015-4025.[CrossRef][Medline]
15. Haglund, K., N. Shimokawa, I. Szymkiewicz, and I. Dikic. 2002. Cbl-directed monoubiquitination of CIN85 is involved in regulation of ligand-induced degradation of EGF receptors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci USA 99:12191-12196.
16. Haglund, K., S. Sigismund, S. Polo, I. Szymkiewicz, P. P. Di Fiore, and I. Dikic. 2003. Multiple monoubiquitination of RTKs is sufficient for their endocytosis and degradation. Nat. Cell Biol. 5:461-466.[CrossRef][Medline]
17. Han, Y., C. G. Caday, A. Nanda, W. K. Cavenee, and H. J. Huang. 1996. Tyrphostin AG 1478 preferentially inhibits human glioma cells expressing truncated rather than wild-type epidermal growth factor receptors. Cancer Res. 56:3859-3861.
18. Huang, H. S., M. Nagane, C. K. Klingbeil, H. Lin, R. Nishikawa, X. D. Ji, C. M. Huang, G. N. Gill, H. S. Wiley, and W. K. Cavenee. 1997. The enhanced tumorigenic activity of a mutant epidermal growth factor receptor common in human cancers is mediated by threshold levels of constitutive tyrosine phosphorylation and unattenuated signaling. J. Biol. Chem. 272:2927-2935.
19. Humphrey, P. A., A. J. Wong, B. Vogelstein, M. R. Zalutsky, G. N. Fuller, G. E. Archer, H. S. Friedman, M. M. Kwatra, S. H. Bigner, and D. D. Bigner. 1990. Anti-synthetic peptide antibody reacting at the fusion junction of deletion-mutant epidermal growth factor receptors in human glioblastoma. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 87:4207-4211.
20. Jiang, X., F. Huang, A. Marusyk, and A. Sorkin. 2003. Grb2 regulates internalization of EGF receptors through clathrin-coated pits. Mol. Biol. Cell 14:858-870.
21. Johns, T. G., E. Stockert, G. Ritter, A. A. Jungbluth, H. J. Huang, W. K. Cavenee, F. E. Smyth, C. M. Hall, N. Watson, E. C. Nice, W. J. Gullick, L. J. Old, A. W. Burgess, and A. M. Scott. 2002. Novel monoclonal antibody specific for the de2-7 epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) that also recognizes the EGFR expressed in cells containing amplification of the EGFR gene. Int. J. Cancer 98:398-408.[CrossRef][Medline]
22. Keane, M. M., S. A. Ettenberg, M. M. Nau, P. Banerjee, M. Cuello, J. Penninger, and S. Lipkowitz. 1999. cbl-3: a new mammalian cbl family protein. Oncogene 18:3365-3375.[CrossRef][Medline]
23. Kowanetz, K., I. Szymkiewicz, K. Haglund, M. Kowanetz, K. Husnjak, J. D. Taylor, P. Soubeyran, U. Engstrom, J. Ladbury, and I. E. Dikic. 2003. Identification of a novel proline-arginine motif involved in CIN85-dependent clustering of Cbl and downregulation of EGF receptors. J. Biol. Chem. 278:39735-39746.
24. Lee, P. S., Y. Wang, M. G. Dominguez, Y. G. Yeung, M. A. Murphy, D. D. Bowtell, and E. R. Stanley. 1999. The Cbl protooncoprotein stimulates CSF-1 receptor multiubiquitination and endocytosis, and attenuates macrophage proliferation. EMBO J. 18:3616-3628.[CrossRef][Medline]
25. Levkowitz, G., H. Waterman, S. A. Ettenberg, M. Katz, A. Y. Tsygankov, I. Alroy, S. Lavi, K. Iwai, Y. Reiss, A. Ciechanover, S. Lipkowitz, and Y. Yarden. 1999. Ubiquitin ligase activity and tyrosine phosphorylation underlie suppression of growth factor signaling by c-Cbl/Sli-1. Mol. Cell 4:1029-1040.[CrossRef][Medline]
26. Levkowitz, G., H. Waterman, E. Zamir, Z. Kam, S. Oved, W. Y. Langdon, L. Beguinot, B. Geiger, and Y. Yarden. 1998. c-Cbl/Sli-1 regulates endocytic sorting and ubiquitination of the epidermal growth factor receptor. Genes Dev. 12:3663-3674.
27. Luwor, R. B., T. G. Johns, C. Murone, H. J. Huang, W. K. Cavenee, G. Ritter, L. J. Old, A. W. Burgess, and A. M. Scott. 2001. Monoclonal antibody 806 inhibits the growth of tumor xenografts expressing either the de2-7 or amplified epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) but not wild-type EGFR. Cancer Res. 61:5355-5361.
28. Matsuo, H., J. Chevallier, N. Mayran, I. Le Blanc, C. Ferguson, J. Faure, N. S. Blanc, S. Matile, J. Dubochet, R. Sadoul, R. G. Parton, F. Vilbois, and J. Gruenberg. 2004. Role of LBPA and Alix in multivesicular liposome formation and endosome organization. Science 303:531-534.
29. Mishima, K., T. G. Johns, R. B. Luwor, A. M. Scott, E. Stockert, A. A. Jungbluth, X. D. Ji, P. Suvarna, J. R. Voland, L. J. Old, H. J. Huang, and W. K. Cavenee. 2001. Growth suppression of intracranial xenografted glioblastomas overexpressing mutant epidermal growth factor receptors by systemic administration of monoclonal antibody (mAb) 806, a novel monoclonal antibody directed to the receptor. Cancer Res. 61:5349-5354. (Erratum, 61:7703-7705.)
30. Missotten, M., A. Nichols, K. Rieger, and R. Sadoul. 1999. Alix, a novel mouse protein undergoing calcium-dependent interaction with the apoptosis-linked-gene 2 (ALG-2) protein. Cell Death Differ. 6:124-129.[CrossRef][Medline]
31. Miyake, S., K. P. Mullane-Robinson, N. L. Lill, P. Douillard, and H. Band. 1999. Cbl-mediated negative regulation of platele