Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Molecular and Cellular Biology, August 2006, p. 6261-6271, Vol. 26, No. 16
0270-7306/06/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/MCB.02478-05
Copyright © 2006, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Mina L. Xu,2,
Gavin Histen,2
Olga Shestova,3
Monideepa Roy,2
Yunsun Nam,2
Stephen C. Blacklow,2
David B. Sacks,2
Warren S. Pear,3 and
Jon C. Aster2*
Department of Hematology/Oncology, Abramson Family Cancer Research Institute, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104,1 Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115,2 Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Abramson Family Cancer Research Institute, Institute for Medicine and Engineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 191043
Received 28 December 2005/ Returned for modification 8 February 2006/ Accepted 26 May 2006
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-secretase (8, 18, 32). Additional cleavages by
-secretase free the intracellular domain of NOTCH1 (ICN1), allowing it to translocate to the nucleus, where it activates transcription through the formation of a ternary complex with the DNA-binding factor CSL (16, 19, 36, 44) and coactivator proteins of the Mastermind-like (MAML) family (27, 28, 43).
|
Increased NOTCH1 signaling plays a central part in the pathogenesis of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL), a tumor derived from T-cell progenitors. We observed that human T-ALLs commonly harbor frameshift and stop codon mutations that delete various numbers of C-terminal residues from NOTCH1 (41), a finding that was presaged by the detection of retroviral insertions in murine T-ALLs that cause similar truncations (10, 14). Although these mutations are scattered throughout the 3' end of exon 34, all of the deletions found to date eliminate at least residues 2524 to 2556, suggesting that this minimal region contains at least one important motif that negatively regulates NOTCH1 signal strength. Here, we analyze the role of a short conserved sequence, WSSSSP (referred to as S4), found within the minimal deleted region that influences not only the function and stability of activated NOTCH1 but also its leukemogenic activity.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
EGF, a form bearing a deletion that removes the coding region for epidermal growth factor (EGF)-like repeats 1 to 36 (residues R23 to I1446);
EGF
LNR, a form bearing a deletion that removes the coding region for EGF-like repeats 1 to 36 and the three Lin12/NOTCH repeats (residues R23 to C1562); and ICN1 (residues 1762 to 2556) have been described (31). Expression constructs for forms of ICN1 bearing a N-terminal FLAG-tag were created by PCR with primers containing a consensus Kozak start codon followed by the coding sequence for the FLAG epitope. A C-terminal deletion removing residues 2473 to 2556 (originally identified in the cell line ALL-SIL) has been described (41). NOTCH1-GAL4 chimeric cDNAs were creating by ligating a PCR product encoding the DNA-binding domain of GAL4 in frame to ICN1 cDNA cut with the restriction enzymes Bsu36I and NcoI, which removes sequences encoding the RAM and ANK domains. In other constructs, premature stop codons and point mutations were introduced by using the QuikChange kit (Stratagene). cDNAs were assembled variously in pcDNA3 (Invitrogen); pcDNA5 (Invitrogen); or the retroviral vector MSCV-GFP, which drives expression of NOTCH1 and green fluorescence protein (GFP) from a single bicistronic RNA containing an internal ribosomal entry sequence (IRES). Expression plasmids for CSL-MYC (4), MAML1-GFP (43), and dominant-negative MAML1-GFP (42) have all been described. A pCMV2 plasmid (Sigma) encoding a "kinase-dead" dominant-negative form of CDK8 was kindly provided by Andrew Rice, Baylor University. Cell culture. U2OS and 293T cells (American Type Culture Collection) were maintained in Dulbecco modified Eagle medium (DMEM; Invitrogen) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (Invitrogen), 2 mM L-glutamine (Invitrogen), 100 U of penicillin (Invitrogen)/ml, and 100 µg of streptomycin (Invitrogen)/ml. 293 TRex cells were obtained from Invitrogen. Cells were grown at 37°C under 5% CO2.
Transcriptional activation assays.
NOTCH1 expression plasmids were introduced into U2OS cells by transient transfection with Lipofectamine Plus (Invitrogen) and assessed for their ability to activated a NOTCH-sensitive luciferase reporter gene, as described previously (4). Briefly, cells in 24-well dishes were cotransfected in triplicate with 10 ng of various pcDNA3-NOTCH1 expression constructs, a NOTCH-sensitive firefly luciferase reporter gene (15), and an internal control Renilla luciferase plasmid (Promega). Experiments involving NOTCH1-GAL4 fusion constructs used a GAL4-luciferase reporter gene (Clontech). Total introduced DNA was kept constant by adding empty pcDNA3 plasmid. Normalized firefly luciferase activities were measured in whole-cell extracts prepared 44 to 48 h after transfection using the Dual Luciferase kit (Promega) and a specially configured luminometer (Turner Systems). In some experiments, the cells were treated posttransfection with the
-secretase inhibitor compound E (kindly provided by Michael Wolfe) at 1 µM or with carrier alone (0.01% dimethyl sulfoxide [DMSO]).
ICN1 immunoprecipitation. 293T cells transfected with pcDNA plasmids encoding various NOTCH signaling components were lysed in 50 mM Tris (pH 8.0), containing 1% NP-40, 100 mM NaCl, 30 mM NaF, 20 mM Na pyrophosphate, 2 mM Na vanadate, 2 mM Na molybdate, and 5 mM Na EDTA (buffer A). ICN1 polypeptides were immunoprecipitated with a rabbit polyclonal antibody raised against the transcriptional activation domain of NOTCH1, as described previously (3). In some experiments, the immunoprecipitation polypeptides were treated with lambda phosphatase (New England Biolabs) according to the manufacturer's recommendations. In other experiments, complexes containing CSL-MYC were immunoprecipitated with the mouse monoclonal antibody 9E10, as described previously (3).
Phosphoamino acid analysis. 293 TRex cells (Invitrogen) were cotransfected with pcDNA5-FLAG-ICN1 plasmids and pOGG44, which expresses Flp recombinase. Isogenic 293 recombinants were selected with hygromycin B and then split into 100-mm dishes. After the induction of ICN1 expression by the addition of tetracycline (1 µg/ml) for 24 h, cells were incubated twice for 1 h in phosphate-free DMEM (Invitrogen) containing 10% dialyzed fetal calf serum (depletion medium) and then grown overnight in a 9:1 mixture of depletion medium and complete medium containing 2.5 mCi of [32P]orthophosphate (New England Nuclear). After three washes with ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline, the cells were lysed in ice-cold buffer A for 15 min and centrifuged at 14,000 x g for 15 min. Proteins in the resulting supernatants were immunoprecipitated by adding FLAG-M2-antibody agarose beads (Sigma), followed by mixing for 2 h at 4°C. The beads were washed four times with buffer A, and bound proteins were released by adding sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) loading buffer and heating the mixture for 10 min to 100°C. ICN1 proteins were separated by SDS-PAGE in 8% gels, which were dried and analyzed by autoradiography.
After digestion of phosphorylated ICN1 with trypsin-TPCK (tolylsulfonyl phenylalanyl chloromethyl ketone; Worthington), acid hydrolysis was carried out in 6 M HCl at 110°C for 2 h. Phosphoamino acids were separated by thin-layer electrophoresis at pH 1.9 as described previously (17).
Phosphopeptide analysis. 32P-labeled ICN1 polypeptides were prepared from 293 TRex cells by immunoprecipitation, followed by SDS-PAGE in 8% gels as described above. Portions of the dried gels containing phosphorylated ICN1 polypeptides were excised, rehydrated, oxidized with performic acid, and digested with trypsin (Worthington) as described previously (17). Peptides were then resuspended in 5 µl of formic acid (96%) and separated by thin-layer electrophoresis on cellulose plates (Sigma) for 5 h at 400 V in formic acid-acetic acid-water (10:31:359 [pH 1.9]). After drying the cellulose plate, ascending chromatography was performed in butanol-pyridine-acetic acid-water (50:33:10:40). 32P-labeled peptides were visualized by autoradiography.
Pulse-chase analysis. 293 cells in 60-mm dishes were transfected with pcDNA3-FLAG-ICN1 plasmids (1 µg) on day 1, split into six-well dishes on day 2, and then subjected to pulse-chase labeling on day 3 as follows. Cells were incubated twice for 1 h in DMEM without L-methionine containing 10% dialyzed fetal calf serum, followed by incubation in the same medium containing 2.5 mCi of 35S-labeled L-methionine (New England Nuclear) for 30 min. After two washes with Hanks buffered saline, the cells were either harvested immediately or incubated for up to 6 additional hours in replete DMEM containing 10% fetal calf serum and 2 mM cold L-methionine. 35S-labeled ICN1 polypeptides were immunoprecipitated from whole-cell detergent lysates on FLAG-M2-antibody beads (Sigma). After elution from the beads by heating for 10 min at 100°C in SDS-PAGE loading buffer, the proteins were separated by SDS-PAGE in 10% polyacrylamide gels, and detected within dried gels by autoradiography.
Western blot analysis. Whole-cell extracts and immunoprecipitated polypeptides were resolved by SDS-PAGE in 8% gels and transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Millipore) as described previously (3). Membranes were stained with rabbit polyclonal antibodies against the intracellular domain of NOTCH1 (3) or ICN1 (V1744 antibody, Cell Signaling) or with mouse monoclonal antibodies against GFP (Clontech), the MYC epitope (clone 9E10), or the FLAG epitope (Sigma).
Murine bone marrow transplantation assays. All experiments were performed as described previously (1, 4), in accordance with National Institutes of Health guidelines for the care and use of animals, and with an approved animal protocol from the University of Pennsylvania Animal Care and Use Committee. Briefly, cDNAs cloned into the MigRI vector were packaged into retroviruses by transient transfection of 293T cells. After the virus titers were determined on NIH 3T3 cells, GFP-normalized retroviral supernatants were used to "spinoculate" 5-fluorouracil-treated bone marrow cells from female 4- to 8-week-old C57BL/6 mice (Taconic Farms). Transduction was performed over 48 h in a cocktail consisting of DMEM, 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (Gibco-BRL, Gaithersburg, MD), 5% WEHI-conditioned medium, 6 U of recombinant mouse interleukin-3 (Genzyme Corp., Cambridge, MA)/ml, 10,000 U of recombinant mouse interleukin-6 (Genzyme)/ml, 5 U of recombinant mouse stem cell factor (Genzyme)/ml, 1 µg of Polybrene (Sigma Chemical Co., St. Louis, MO)/ml, 100 U of streptomycin (Gibco-BRL)/ml, 100 U of penicillin (Gibco-BRL)/ml, and 2 mM L=glutamine (Gibco-BRL). The retrovirally transduced bone marrow cells were then injected into lethally irradiated (900 rads) 4- to 8-week-old female syngeneic recipients.
Flow cytometry.
Peripheral blood samples and tumor cell suspensions were assessed for the presence of GFP+ immature T cells by flow cytometric analysis (FACSCalibur; Becton Dickinson). Cells were incubated with phycoerythrin-labeled anti-CD8
(53-6.7), biotinylated anti-TCRß (H57-597), and allophycocyanin-labeled anti-CD4 (RM4-5) antibodies (Pharmingen). Biotinylated antibodies were revealed with streptavidin-PerCP. Dead cells, identified by forward scatter and side scatter, were excluded from the analysis. fluorescence-activated cell sorting results were analyzed by using Flowjo software.
Southern blot analysis. High-molecular-weight DNA was isolated from fresh or snap-frozen spleen tissue. A total of 10 µg of DNA was digested with the appropriate restriction enzymes overnight, fractionated by electrophoresis on a 0.8% agarose gel, and blotted overnight onto Nytran membrane (Schleicher & Schuell, Keene, NH) via alkaline transfer. Blots were hybridized overnight with gel-purified 32P-labeled probes corresponding to the IRES or GFP fragments of MigR1.
Histology and immunohistochemistry. To assess histology, paraffin-embedded sections of mouse tissues fixed in 10% phosphate-buffered formalin were stained with hematoxylin and eosin. For immunohistochemistry, sections were deparaffinized in xylene and graded alcohols, subjected to antigen retrieval in citrate buffer using a pressure cooker, and then stained with rabbit polyclonal antibodies specific for the intracellular domain of NOTCH1 (3), CD3 (Dako), and terminal deoxytransferase (Dako). Antibody staining was developed by using the Dako Envision kit, per the manufacturer's instructions, and the horseradish peroxidase substrate diaminobenzamidine.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
EGF
LNR (Fig. 2C), the A4 mutation stimulated signaling to an extent comparable to the
2473-2556 deletion. We also investigated the effects of mutating individual S4 residues. Each single S-to-A substitution produced a modest stimulation in NOTCH1 activity in the context of the
EGF
LNR polypeptide, but no single mutation was as strong as the A4 substitution (Fig. 2D). Thus, multiple S residues within the S4 sequence appear to contribute to negative regulation of NOTCH1 signaling. S4 affects ICN1 phosphorylation. The S4 sequence is distinct from previously identified sites of NOTCH1 phosphorylation. To determine whether the S4 sequence influences ICN1 phosphorylation, we first compared the electrophoretic mobilities of ICN1-S4 and ICN1-A4. The mean electrophoretic mobility of ICN1-A4 was consistently greater than that of ICN1-S4 (Fig. 3A), a finding that could be explained by ICN-A4 being underphosphorylated relative to ICN-S4. In support of this interpretation, the broad bands corresponding to ICN1-S4 and ICN1-A4 on Western blots were resolved into tight bands of faster, but identical, electrophoretic mobility by treatment with lambda phosphatase (Fig. 3A), suggesting that the S4 sequence influences the phosphorylation of ICN1 by one or more protein kinases.
|
S4 influences ICN1 stability.
The simplest way for the A4 mutation to stimulate ICN1 activity is by increasing ICN1 protein levels. We first addressed this by comparing the levels of ICN1 that are present in cells expressing various forms of
EGF
LNR, a NOTCH1 polypeptide that is susceptible to ligand-independent S2 and S3 cleavages due to the absence of the protective LNR domain (31). Relative to intact
EGF
LNR,
EGF
LNR polypeptides bearing the deletion
2473-2556 or the A4 mutation generated substantially higher steady-state levels of ICN1 in a fashion that was sensitive to a
-secretase inhibitor, compound E (Fig. 4A).
|
S4 is unlikely to be a target sequence for CDK8.
Three sites in the C terminus of ICN1 near the S4 site (S2514, S2517, and S2538) can be phosphorylated by CDK8, which appears to be recruited to ICN1 through the C terminus of MAML cofactors (13). We thus performed a series of experiments to explore the relationship of the S4 site to CDK8. Most directly, we first investigated whether a "kinase-dead" dominant-negative form of CDK8 altered the difference in phosphorylation between ICN1-S4 and ICN1-A4, as judged by electrophoretic mobility. We observed that ICN1-A4 remained underphosphorylated relative to ICN1-S4 in whole-cell extracts and in CSL complexes even in the presence of a 10-fold excess of dominant-negative CDK8 plasmid (Fig. 5A). Additional experiments were performed in cells overexpressing CSL and full-length MAML1 (which should enhance CDK8 recruitment), or CSL and a dominant-negative form of MAML1 (DN-MAML1). DN-MAML consists of a 62-amino-acid kinked
-helix that forms a stable ternary complex through contacts on both CSL and the ankyrin repeats of NOTCH1 (25) but which lacks the C-terminal portions of MAML1 that are responsible for recruitment of p300 and CycC:CDK8 (12, 13, 40). Thus, if S4-targeted phosphorylation is dependent on CycC:CDK8, DN-MAML should render ICN1-S4 equivalent to ICN1-A4, both in terms of stability and phosphorylation, by preventing the recruitment of CycC:CDK8. In these experiments, we adjusted the input of the ICN1-A4 and ICN1-S4 plasmids, relative to the CSLmyc and MAML1 plasmids, to make ICN1 the limiting factor for complex assembly (Fig. 5B). Whether judged by Western blots of whole-cell extracts (lanes 1 to 6) or CSL immunoprecipitates (lanes 7 to 12), we observed differences in electrophoretic mobility consistent with underphosphorylation of ICN1-A4 in the presence of endogenous MAMLs (compare lanes 1 and 2 and lanes 7 and 8), overexpressed full-length MAML1 (compare lanes 3 and 4 and lanes 9 and 10), and DN-MAML1 (compare lanes 5 and 6 and lanes 11 and 12). We also observed a stabilizing effect of the A4 mutation on full-length MAML1 and CSL when these proteins were coexpressed (compare the recovery of MAML1 in CSL complexes immunoprecipitated in lanes 9 and 10). The ability of overexpressed MAML1 to promote degradation of CSL and ICN1 is consistent with prior data implicating assembly of the CSL/ICN/MAML ternary complex in ICN1 turnover (12, 13, 40).
|
EGF
LNR polypeptides in which the RAM and ankyrin repeat domains of ICN1 were replaced with the DNA-binding domain of GAL4 (an approach used first by Struhl and Adachi [35]). This form of NOTCH1 activates GAL4 reporter genes in a
-secretase-dependent fashion but fails to assemble a ternary complex and cannot stimulate transcription from CSL-dependent promoters (data not shown). As seen in Fig. 5C, the A4 mutation strongly stimulated the activity of
EGF
LNR-GAL4 on a GAL4-reporter gene. Taken together, these data suggest that the S4 site is phosphorylated by a kinase or kinases other than CycC-CDK8 and that this phosphorylation event does not depend on the entry of ICN1 into the ternary complex.
S4 influences leukemogenesis.
A striking feature of the NOTCH1 tumor-associated mutations is that extracellular HD mutations frequently occur in cis with deletions of the intracellular PEST region (41). The data described above suggested that loss of S4-associated regulation of ICN1 might enhance the leukemogenic activity of weak gain-of-function forms of activated NOTCH1, which are not themselves leukemogenic, and might thus mimic the effect of tumor-associated mutations found in cis. To assess this possibility, we compared the leukemogenic activity of the weak gain-of-function
EGF
LNR form of NOTCH1 with
EGF
LNR-A4 in a murine bone marrow transplantation assay. The selection of
EGF
LNR for these experiments was based on the observations showing that although this form of NOTCH1 generated signals of sufficient strength to drive T-cell development (31), it did not induce T-ALL (Fig. 6A). Typically, mice reconstituted with bone marrow cells expressing
EGF
LNR developed a GFP+ CD4+ CD8+ immature "double-positive" T-cell population by 6 weeks after transplantation that disappeared by 13 weeks posttransplantation. None of these animals have developed leukemia at times greater than 1 year posttransplantation (Fig. 6B and data not shown).
|
EGF
LNR-A4 continued to rise (Fig. 6A), and all of these animals eventually became moribund and succumbed to disseminated leukemia (Fig. 6B). The disease latency in
EGF
LNR-A4 mice was similar to that seen in animals reconstituted with bone marrow cells expressing
EGF
LNR
PEST (which bears a deletion removing the 73 C-terminal amino acids of NOTCH1) and ICN1, a strong gain-of-function form of NOTCH1 (Fig. 6B). At necropsy, leukemic blasts replaced the bone marrow and heavily infiltrated the spleen, liver, lymph nodes, and viscera such as the kidneys (Fig. 7). Immunohistochemical stains confirmed that these blasts were immature T cells expressing CD3, terminal deoxytransferase (TdT), and NOTCH1 (Fig. 7). Western blots prepared from heavily infiltrated spleens confirmed the presence of NOTCH1 polypeptides of the expected size of the precursor and furin-processed forms of
EGF
LNR-A4 (Fig. 8). Further workup of
EGF
LNR-A4 tumors included flow cytometry, which revealed that the tumors expressed surface CD3 and variable levels of CD4 and CD8 (data not shown). As anticipated given the results of Western blotting, the tumors contained intact proviruses and were monoclonal or oligoclonal based on the presence of one or several dominant proviral insertions (Fig. 9 and data not shown).
|
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In addition to previously recognized retroviral insertions (10, 14), several recent reports describe acquired frameshift or stop codon mutations in diverse murine T-ALL models that produce C-terminal truncations of NOTCH1 (20, 26). The most C-terminal deletion noted in murine tumors to date falls at amino acid residue 2490 in murine NOTCH1 (20), which is the equivalent of residue 2516 in human NOTCH1; thus, the mutations that occur in murine T-ALL also consistently delete the S4 sequence. While these correlations (and the studies directed at the S4 sequence described here) do not preclude additional important contributions of other sequences in the C-terminal tail to the negative regulation of normal and pathophysiologic NOTCH1 signaling, they are consistent with a major role for the S4 sequence in T-ALL.
Several questions arise from this work, the most immediate of which concerns the identity of the kinase(s) that targets ICN1 through S4. After MAML-dependent recruitment to the NOTCH1 transcription complex on DNA, CycC-CDK8 can phosphorylate at least three serine residues in the far C-terminal region of NOTCH1, including one within the minimal deleted region (41). However, ICN1-A4 is still underphosphorylated relative to ICN1-S4 even under a variety of conditions in which ternary complex formation and recruitment of CDK8 are defective. These findings suggest that the S4 kinase is likely to be different than CycC-CDK8. Other candidates include the GSK3ß (9, 11) and MEK/ERK kinases, based on the well-recognized, but complex, functional interactions between the RAS and NOTCH signaling pathways (37). However, experiments conducted with pharmacologic inhibitors of MEK and GSK3ß, RNAi directed against GSK3ß, and constitutively active forms of MEK1, have failed to detect evidence of epistasis between these kinases and the S4 sequence (J. C. Aster, data not shown). It is likely that unbiased functional screens will be necessary to identify the kinase(s) that is responsible for S4-dependent ICN1 phosphorylation.
We have also failed to see evidence of epistasis between dominant-negative forms of FBW7 (a homolog of Sel-10) and S4 (J. C. Aster, data not shown). In this regard, it is relevant that the stability of mammalian NOTCH4 is regulated by FBW7/Sel-10 (38, 39) despite the absence of the S4 sequence from this Notch receptor. We thus favor the idea that S4-dependent modulation of ICN1 levels depends on factors other than FBW7/Sel-10. It will be of interest to determine whether mutations in the kinases or the destruction machinery responsible for S4-dependent ICN1 degradation will be identified in human T-ALLs lacking C-terminal NOTCH1 deletions.
The C-terminal NOTCH1 deletions that are found in human T-ALL often occur in concert with mutations involving the heterodimerization domain of NOTCH1 that lead to increased ICN1 production (41). We have also further characterized here a form of NOTCH1 with a mutation affecting the ectodomain,
EGF
LNR, which drives abnormal double positive T-cell development (31) without causing T-ALL. This demonstrates for the first time that the threshold dose of NOTCH1 signals that is required for efficient induction of T-ALL development is higher than that which is required to induce T-cell development. This raises the question of whether certain heterodimerization domain mutations will suffice to create signals that are strong enough to induce T-ALL, or whether they will require additional events in cis or in trans. The "hypoleukemic" phenotype induced in vivo by weak gain-of-function NOTCH1 alleles such as
EGF
LNR should be useful in identifying not only cis-acting elements such as the S4 sequence but also elements that act in trans. Such trans-acting factors could either elevate NOTCH1 signaling tone directly or, by complementing NOTCH1 functions that require strong signals, lower the dose of NOTCH1 that is required for efficient induction of T-ALL.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health to W.S.P. (CA93615 and AI47833), J.C.A. (CA82308), S.C.B. (CA92433), and D.B.S. (CA75205) and from the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society SCOR Program. M.L.X. was the recipient of an American Society of Hematology Medical Student Trainee award. M.C. was supported by a training grant from the NIH/NIDDK (T32-DK007780-07).
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
M.Y.C. and M.L.X. contributed equally to this study. ![]()
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Artavanis-Tsakonas, S., M. D. Rand, and R. J. Lake. 1999. Notch signaling: cell fate control and signal integration in development. Science 284:770-776.
3. Aster, J. C., E. S. Robertson, R. P. Hasserjian, J. R. Turner, E. Kieff, and J. Sklar. 1997. Oncogenic forms of NOTCH1 lacking either the primary binding site for RBP-J
or nuclear localization sequences retain the ability to associate with RBP-J
and activate transcription. J. Biol. Chem. 272:11336-11343.
4. Aster, J. C., L. Xu, F. G. Karnell, V. Patriub, J. C. Pui, and W. S. Pear. 2000. Essential roles for ankyrin repeat and transactivation domains in induction of T-cell leukemia by notch1. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20:7505-7515.
5. Blaumueller, C. M., H. Qi, P. Zagouras, and S. Artavanis-Tsakonas. 1997. Intracellular cleavage of Notch leads to a heterodimeric receptor on the plasma membrane. Cell 90:281-291.[CrossRef][Medline]
6. Brou, C., F. Logeat, N. Gupta, C. Bessia, O. LeBail, J. R. Doedens, A. Cumano, P. Roux, R. A. Black, and A. Israel. 2000. A novel proteolytic cleavage involved in Notch signaling: the role of the disintegrin-metalloprotease TACE. Mol. Cell 5:207-216.[CrossRef][Medline]
7. Cagan, R. L., and D. F. Ready. 1989. Notch is required for successive cell decisions in the developing Drosophila retina. Genes Dev. 3:1099-1112.
8. De Strooper, B., W. Annaert, P. Cupers, P. Saftig, K. Craessaerts, J. S. Mumm, E. H. Schroeter, V. Schrijvers, M. S. Wolfe, W. J. Ray, A. Goate, and R. Kopan. 1999. A presenilin-1-dependent
-secretase-like protease mediates release of Notch intracellular domain. Nature 398:518-522.[CrossRef][Medline]
9. Espinosa, L., J. Ingles-Esteve, C. Aguilera, and A. Bigas. 2003. Phosphorylation by glycogen synthase kinase-3ß down-regulates Notch activity, a link for Notch and Wnt pathways. J. Biol. Chem. 278:32227-32235.
10. Feldman, B. J., T. Hampton, and M. L. Cleary. 2000. A carboxy-terminal deletion mutant of Notch1 accelerates lymphoid oncogenesis in E2A-PBX1 transgenic mice. Blood 96:1906-1913.
11. Foltz, D. R., M. C. Santiago, B. E. Berechid, and J. S. Nye. 2002. Glycogen synthase kinase-3ß modulates notch signaling and stability. Curr. Biol. 12:1006-1011.[CrossRef][Medline]
12. Fryer, C. J., E. Lamar, I. Turbachova, C. Kintner, and K. A. Jones. 2002. Mastermind mediates chromatin-specific transcription and turnover of the Notch enhancer complex. Genes Dev. 16:1397-1411.
13. Fryer, C. J., J. B. White, and K. A. Jones. 2004. Mastermind recruits CycC:CDK8 to phosphorylate the Notch ICD and coordinate activation with turnover. Mol. Cell 16:509-520.[CrossRef][Medline]
14. Hoemann, C. D., N. Beaulieu, L. Girard, N. Rebai, and P. Jolicoeur. 2000. Two distinct Notch1 mutant alleles are involved in the induction of T-cell leukemia in c-myc transgenic mice. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20:3831-3842.
15. Hsieh, J. J., T. Henkel, P. Salmon, E. Robey, M. G. Peterson, and S. D. Hayward. 1996. Truncated mammalian Notch1 activates CBF1/RBPJk-repressed genes by a mechanism resembling that of Epstein-Barr virus EBNA2. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16:952-959.[Abstract]
16. Jarriault, S., C. Brou, F. Logeat, E. H. Schroeter, R. Kopan, and A. Israel. 1995. Signalling downstream of activated mammalian Notch. Nature 377:355-358.[CrossRef][Medline]
17. Joyal, J. L., and D. B. Sacks. 1994. Insulin-dependent phosphorylation of calmodulin in rat hepatocytes. J. Biol. Chem. 269:30039-30048.
18. Kimberly, W. T., W. P. Esler, W. Ye, B. L. Ostaszewski, J. Gao, T. Diehl, D. J. Selkoe, and M. S. Wolfe. 2003. Notch and the amyloid precursor protein are cleaved by similar
-secretase(s). Biochemistry 42:137-144.[CrossRef][Medline]
19. Kopan, R., E. H. Schroeter, H. Weintraub, and J. S. Nye. 1996. Signal transduction by activated mNotch: importance of proteolytic processing and its regulation by the extracellular domain. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:1683-1688.
20. Lin, Y. W., R. A. Nichols, J. J. Letterio, and P. D. Aplan. 2006. Notch1 mutations are important for leukemic transformation in murine models of precursor-T leukemia/lymphoma. Blood 107:2540-2543.
21. Logeat, F., C. Bessia, C. Brou, O. LeBail, S. Jarriault, N. G. Seidah, and A. Israel. 1998. The Notch1 receptor is cleaved constitutively by a furin-like convertase. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:8108-8112.
22. MacKichan, M. L., F. Logeat, and A. Israel. 1996. Phosphorylation of p105 PEST sequence via a redox-insensitive pathway up-regulates processing of p50 NF-
B. J. Biol. Chem. 271:6084-6091.
23. McGill, M. A., and C. J. McGlade. 2003. Mammalian numb proteins promote Notch1 receptor ubiquitination and degradation of the Notch1 intracellular domain. J. Biol. Chem. 278:23196-23203.
24. Mumm, J. S., E. H. Schroeter, M. T. Saxena, A. Griesemer, X. Tian, D. J. Pan, W. J. Ray, and R. Kopan. 2000. A ligand-induced extracellular cleavage regulates
-secretase-like proteolytic activation of Notch1. Mol. Cell 5:197-206.[CrossRef][Medline]
25. Nam, Y., P. Sliz, L. Song, J. C. Aster, and S. Blacklow. 2006. Structural basis for cooperativity in recruitment of the mastermind coactivator to Notch transcription complexes. Cell 124:973-983.[CrossRef][Medline]
26. O'Neil, J., J. Calvo, K. McKenna, V. Krishnamoorthy, J. C. Aster, C. H. Bassing, F. W. Alt, M. Kelliher, and A. T. Look. 2006. Activating Notch1 mutations in mouse models of T-ALL. Blood 107:781-785.
27. Petcherski, A. G., and J. Kimble. 2000. LAG-3 is a putative transcriptional activator in the Caenorhabditis elegans Notch pathway. Nature 405:364-368.[CrossRef][Medline]
28. Petcherski, A. G., and J. Kimble. 2000. Mastermind is a putative activator for Notch. Curr. Biol. 10:R471-R473.[CrossRef][Medline]
29. Rand, M. D., L. M. Grimm, S. Artavanis-Tsakonas, V. Patriub, S. C. Blacklow, J. Sklar, and J. C. Aster. 2000. Calcium depletion dissociates and activates heterodimeric notch receptors. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20:1825-1835.
30. Rechsteiner, M. 1989. PEST regions, proteolysis, and cell cycle progression. Revis. Biol. Celular. 20:235-253.[Medline]
31. Sanchez-Irizarry, C., A. C. Carpenter, A. P. Weng, W. S. Pear, J. C. Aster, and S. C. Blacklow. 2004. Notch subunit heterodimerization and prevention of ligand-independent proteolytic activation depend, respectively, on a novel domain and the LNR repeats. Mol. Cell. Biol. 24:9265-9273.
32. Schroeter, E. H., J. A. Kisslinger, and R. Kopan. 1998. Notch-1 signalling requires ligand-induced proteolytic release of intracellular domain. Nature 393:382-386.[CrossRef][Medline]
33. Shah, S., S. F. Lee, K. Tabuchi, Y. H. Hao, C. Yu, Q. LaPlant, H. Ball, C. E. Dann III, T. Sudhof, and G. Yu. 2005. Nicastrin functions as a
-secretase-substrate receptor. Cell 122:435-447.[CrossRef][Medline]
34. Shaye, D. D., and I. Greenwald. 2005. LIN-12/Notch trafficking and regulation of DSL ligand activity during vulval induction in Caenorhabditis elegans. Development 132:5081-5092.
35. Struhl, G., and A. Adachi. 1998. Nuclear access and action of notch in vivo. Cell 93:649-660.[CrossRef][Medline]
36. Struhl, G., and I. Grenwald. 1999. Presenilin is required for activity and nuclear access of Notch in Drosophila. Nature 398:522-525.[CrossRef][Medline]
37. Sundaram, M. V. 2005. The love-hate relationship between Ras and Notch. Genes Dev. 19:1825-1839.
38. Tetzlaff, M. T., W. Yu, M. Li, P. Zhang, M. Finegold, K. Mahon, J. W. Harper, R. J. Schwartz, and S. J. Elledge. 2004. Defective cardiovascular development and elevated cyclin E and Notch proteins in mice lacking the Fbw7 F-box protein. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101:3338-3345.
39. Tsunematsu, R., K. Nakayama, Y. Oike, M. Nishiyama, N. Ishida, S. Hatakeyama, Y. Bessho, R. Kageyama, T. Suda, and K. I. Nakayama. 2004. Mouse Fbw7/Sel-10/Cdc4 is required for notch degradation during vascular development. J. Biol. Chem. 279:9417-9423.
40. Wallberg, A. E., K. Pedersen, U. Lendahl, and R. G. Roeder. 2002. p300 and PCAF act cooperatively to mediate transcriptional activation from chromatin templates by notch intracellular domains in vitro. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22:7812-7819.
41. Weng, A. P., A. A. Ferrando, W. Lee, J. P. T. Morris, L. B. Silverman, C. Sanchez-Irizarry, S. C. Blacklow, A. T. Look, and J. C. Aster. 2004. Activating mutations of NOTCH1 in human T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Science 306:269-271.
42. Weng, A. P., Y. Nam, M. S. Wolfe, W. S. Pear, J. D. Griffin, S. C. Blacklow, and J. C. Aster. 2003. Growth suppression of pre-T acute lymphoblastic leukemia cells by inhibition of notch signaling. Mol. Cell. Biol. 23:655-664.
43. Wu, L., J. C. Aster, S. C. Blacklow, R. Lake, S. Artavanis-Tsakonas, and J. D. Griffin. 2000. MAML1, a human homologue of Drosophila mastermind, is a transcriptional coactivator for NOTCH receptors. Nat. Genet. 26:484-489.[CrossRef][Medline]
44. Ye, Y., N. Lukinova, and M. E. Fortini. 1999. Neurogenic phenotypes and altered Notch processing in Drosophila Presenilin mutants. Nature 398:525-529.[CrossRef][Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||