| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Molecular and Cellular Biology, October 2007, p. 7291-7301, Vol. 27, No. 20
0270-7306/07/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/MCB.00773-07
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Department of Oncological Sciences, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York 10029
Received 2 May 2007/ Returned for modification 25 May 2007/ Accepted 26 July 2007
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
(CK1-
) and glycogen synthase kinase-ß, which occurs within a protein complex containing axin and the tumor suppressor adenomatous polyposis coli. Inhibition of ß-catenin phosphorylation impairs its degradation and results in accumulation of the uncomplexed cytosolic molecule, which translocates to the nucleus and interacts with TCF/LEF factors to activate transcription (9, 13, 24). Frizzled receptors are known to mediate signaling through both the Wnt-ß-catenin "canonical" pathway and other, "noncanonical" ones, such as the planar cell polarity and Wnt/Ca2+ pathways. In contrast, the LRP6 receptor and the family member LRP5 specifically function in the Wnt-ß-catenin pathway (5, 13, 17). In fact, inactivation of the LRP5/6 homologue arrow in Drosophila melanogaster results in a phenotype similar to that of the wingless mutant, and injection of LRP6 mRNA into Xenopus laevis embryos enhances Wnt-induced developmental defects (33, 35). Moreover, mice deficient for LRP6 exhibit defects resembling those caused by the loss of various Wnt proteins (27). There is evidence supporting a dual-receptor model in which independent binding of Wnt to Frizzled and LRP6 recruits these two proteins into a receptor complex that triggers signaling (14). Although the mechanism involved in transmission of the Wnt signal to intracellular components is not fully understood, it is known that following Wnt binding, LRP5/6 is phosphorylated on a series of amino acid motifs present on its cytoplasmic domain (34). LRP5/6 phosphorylation leads to the recruitment of the scaffolding protein axin to the cell membrane (22). Recently, two studies identified glycogen synthase kinase-ß and CK1 as the kinases responsible for LRP6 phosphorylation (11, 39).
LRP5/6 is a single-pass transmembrane protein containing a large extracellular domain composed of four YWTD propeller domains, with each followed by an epidermal growth factor domain and three LDLR domains. Truncation mutants lacking the extracellular domain are constitutively active, while deletion of the intracellular region results in a dominant-negative receptor (14). In addition to Wnt, LRP5/6 functions as the receptor for the Dickkopf (Dkk) family of secreted antagonists, which function as specific inhibitors of canonical Wnt signaling (3, 21, 32).
Ligand regulation of receptor trafficking between the cell surface and the endosomal compartment is an important aspect of receptor function (26, 37). It has been reported that Wnt5a induces the internalization of Fz4 through the binding of Dvl to ß-arrestin 2 and that this internalization requires protein kinase C activation (8). Although recent evidence suggests that Wnt3a induces internalization of LRP6 (38), the mechanism by which the receptor is regulated by its ligand has not yet been investigated.
Our understanding of LRP6 structure and function has relied on studies involving its overexpression, while analysis of the receptor under physiologic conditions has been lacking. In the present study, using a new, highly sensitive anti-LRP6 monoclonal antibody (MAb), we demonstrate that endogenous LRP6 is posttranslationally modified by glycosylation, is present at the membrane in a dimeric form, and is phosphorylated in response to Wnt in a sustained but ligand-dependent manner. Cell surface biotinylation analysis revealed that Wnt induces LRP6 internalization followed by its recycling to the cellular membrane. Importantly, our analysis uncovered a novel feedback regulation of LRP6 by which Wnt, through the downstream effector ß-catenin, inhibits its receptor at the transcriptional level.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
For viral infection, 5 x 105 NIH 3T3, NIH 3T3/Wnt3a, or AB589 cells in 60-mm plates were seeded in growth medium with 2 µg/ml Polybrene. Twenty-four hours later, cells were infected with viral supernatants produced as previously described (2). Cells were selected for 2 weeks with Geneticin (750 µg/ml), puromycin (2 µg/ml), or hygromycin (100 µg/ml). pCMV-LRP5-Flag and pCMV-LRP6-Flag cDNAs were transfected using Fugene (Roche) according to the manufacturer's instructions.
Western blot, immunoprecipitation, and glutathione S-transferase (GST)-E-cadherin binding assays.
For Western blotting and immunoprecipitation assays, cells were solubilized in lysis buffer (10 mM sodium phosphate, 0.15 M NaCl, 1% NP-40, and a cocktail of phosphatase and protease inhibitors). For immunoprecipitation, cell lysates were incubated with a specific antibody (anti-axin 1, 5 µg/ml; and anti-LRP6, 5 µg/ml) and then with protein G beads (Pharmacia). After sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) and transfer, membranes were blocked in 5% bovine serum albumin and incubated with the following primary antibodies at the indicated dilutions: anti-Flag, 1:1,000 (Sigma); anti-LRP5, 1:1,000 (Orbigen); anti-tubulin, 1:10,000 (Sigma); anti-actin, 1:30,000 (Sigma); anti-axin, 1:1,000 (Zymed); anti-N-cadherin, 1:500 (Sigma); antihemagglutinin (anti-HA) MAb, 1:1,000 (Hybridoma Center, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, NY); anti-phospho-LRP6 (Ser1490), 1:1,000 (Cell Signaling); anti-p53, 1:1,500 (Novo Castra); anti-platelet-derived growth factor receptor (anti-PDGFR), 1:2,000 (Santa Cruz); anti-TCF4, 1:1,000 (Upstate); and the MAb to LRP6, 1:1,000 (generated in collaboration with the Hybridoma Center, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, NY). Detection was performed by enhanced chemiluminescence (ECL) or, alternatively, with an Odyssey infrared imaging system (LI-COR). For phosphatase treatment, 293T cells were detached from the plates with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS)-EDTA (5 mM), divided into two aliquots, and lysed in either the presence or absence of phosphatase inhibitors. The latter aliquot was then subjected to
-phosphatase (New England BioLabs) treatment for 1 h at 37°C and then incubated at 65°C for 1 h. Treated and untreated lysates were analyzed by Western blotting. A glycosidase reaction was carried out by incubating denatured cell lysates with peptide N-glycosidase F (PNGase F) (NEB) according to the manufacturer's instructions.
The GST-E-cadherin binding assay has been described previously (1). Bacterially expressed GST-E-cadherin was purified with glutathione-Sepharose beads (Amersham) and incubated with total cell lysates (0.5 to 1.0 mg). Following bead recovery and SDS-PAGE, uncomplexed ß-catenin was detected with a MAb to ß-catenin (BD Biosciences).
Membrane biotinylation and chemical cross-linking. Cells washed with PBS (Invitrogen) were incubated at 4°C, first with sulfo-NHS-LC-biotin (Pierce) for 30 min and then with 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5) for 20 min, to quench the reaction. After being washed in PBS, cells were solubilized in lysis buffer and incubated with immobilized avidin beads (Pierce) for 1 h. Beads washed three times in lysis buffer were subjected to SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting.
For cross-linking assays, cells washed twice with PBS to remove the culture medium were incubated with 2 mM thiol-cleavable DTSSP (3,3'-dithiobis[sulfosuccinimidylpropionate]) (Pierce) or noncleavable BS3 (Pierce) for 30 min at room temperature. The cross-linker was quenched with 20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, for 15 min. Cell lysates were immunoprecipitated with anti-LRP6 MAb and protein G-Sepharose (GE Healthcare). Immunoprecipitates and total lysates were resolved by SDS-PAGE and analyzed with the LRP6 MAb.
RNA interference. The previously described 19-nucleotide target sequence for LRP6 (2) was cloned into a lentiviral vector containing a puromycin-selectable marker (unpublished data). The lentiviral vector was cotransfected with envelope and packaging vectors in 293T cells, utilizing Fugene (Roche) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Lentivirus supernatant was collected at 48 and 72 h. For infection, 5 x 105 293T cells were infected and selected with puromycin (2 µg/ml) for 2 weeks.
Metabolic labeling. Cells were grown in phosphate-free DMEM (Invitrogen) supplemented with 10% dialyzed fetal bovine serum for 18 to 24 h. Phosphate-depleted cells were metabolically labeled with 0.35 mCi [32P]orthophosphate (Amersham Biosciences) for 3 h. For experiments with recombinant purified Wnt3a, cells were preincubated with [32P]orthophosphate for 1 h and further labeled for an additional 2 h in the presence of Wnt3a. Lysates were subjected to immunoprecipitation with the anti-LRP6 MAb, followed by SDS-PAGE, transfer to an Immobilon polyvinylidene difluoride membrane (Millipore), and autoradiography. The same membrane was probed with the LRP6 MAb and analyzed by ECL.
Real-time PCR. Total RNAs were extracted from cell lines by using TRIzol (Invitrogen) following the manufacturer's protocol. First-strand cDNA synthesized using random hexamers (Invitrogen) was used for real-time PCR (DNA Engine Opticon 2; Bio-Rad). Each PCR, done in triplicate, consisted of 10-fold-diluted first-strand cDNA as the template, FastStart SYBR green master mix (Roche Applied Science), and 500 nM of either LRP6 or TATA box binding protein primers. The PCR conditions used were 95°C for 15 min, followed by 40 cycles of 94°C for 10 seconds, 61°C for 20 seconds, and 72°C for 30 seconds. Melting curve analysis was conducted to ensure the specificity of the reactions, as recommended by the manufacturer's protocol (DNA Engine Opticon 2; Bio-Rad). The results were analyzed using Opticon2 software (Bio-Rad). The following primers were utilized: for mouse LRP6, 5'-AGGGTGGAATGAGTGTGCCT-3' (forward) and 5'-TGATGGCGCTCTTCTGACTGA-3' (reverse); and for mouse TATA box binding protein, 5'-ACATCTCAGCAACCCACACA-3' (forward) and 5'-CAGCCAAGATTCACGGTAGA-3' (reverse).
Northern blotting. Total RNA was isolated using TRIzol (Invitrogen) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Twenty micrograms of total RNA was subjected to electrophoresis (1% agarose in morpholinepropanesulfonic acid [MOPS]-formaldehyde). RNAs were transferred to a nylon membrane (Amersham Biosciences), and prehybridization was carried out for 2 h at 68°C in ExpressHyb hybridization solution (BD Biosciences). Hybridization was performed overnight under the same conditions, but with a radiolabeled probe. Membranes were washed twice in 2x SSC (1x SSC is 0.15 M NaCl plus 0.015 M sodium citrate)-0.05% SDS at room temperature and twice in 0.1x SSC-0.1% SDS at 50°C for 15 min. After being washed, the membranes were exposed to X-ray film at –80°C.
siRNA targeting of clathrin. Small interfering RNA (siRNA) oligonucleotides directed against human clathrin, as previously described (6), were custom ordered from Invitrogen (sense, 5'-GCAAUGAGCUGUUUGAAGATT-3'; and antisense, 5'-UCUUCAAACAGCUCAUUGCTT-3'). The oligonucleotides were resuspended in RNase-free water and annealed in a buffer containing 20 mM potassium acetate, 6 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, and 400 nM magnesium acetate. HeLa cells were transfected with the annealed oligonucleotides (10 nM), using siPORT NeoFX agent (Ambion) following the manufacturer's instructions. After 48 h, the efficiency of knockdown was monitored by Western blotting using an anti-clathrin antibody (BD Biosciences).
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
LRP6 is posttranslationally modified and is present at the cell surface in a dimeric form. Analysis of endogenous LRP6 in a series of normal and tumor cell lines revealed that the receptor is detectable as two distinct species similar to those observed in 293T cells (Fig. 2A). To analyze endogenous LRP6 posttranslational modifications, we exposed 293T cells to tunicamycin, a known inhibitor of N-glycosylation (40). Following exposure to increasing concentrations of tunicamycin, both LRP6 forms were progressively reduced to a single low-molecular-weight band. Similar results were obtained with COS-7 cells (Fig. 2B). To further assess LRP6 glycosylation, we subjected lysates from 293T cells to treatment with an N-glycosidase, PNGase F, which cleaves oligosaccharides from N-linked glycoproteins. The results indicated that following treatment with this enzyme, LRP6 mobility was altered, confirming receptor glycosylation (Fig. 2C). Cell surface biotinylation of NIH 3T3 cells followed by immunoprecipitation with streptavidin beads indicated that the higher-molecular-weight LRP6 species was predominant at the cell membrane and thus represents the signaling form of the receptor (Fig. 2D). To determine whether LRP6 modification by glycosylation is necessary for its localization at the cell membrane, we performed cell surface biotinylation analysis following treatment with increasing concentrations of tunicamycin. The progressive reduction of LRP6 to lower-molecular-weight forms in the total lysates resulted in a corresponding decrease in the receptor levels at the cell membrane, establishing that glycosylation is necessary for the cell surface localization of this receptor (Fig. 2E).
|
Analysis of endogenous LRP6 phosphorylation under conditions of acute or chronic Wnt stimulation.
There is evidence that upon Wnt stimulation, LRP6 is activated by phosphorylation at a series of sites present in its cytoplasmic domain (11, 34, 39). Analysis of endogenous LRP6 following treatment with purified Wnt3a in NIH 3T3 cells showed a decrease in the higher-molecular-weight species localized at the cell surface and the appearance of a slowly migrating form (Fig. 3A). Stimulation with purified Wnt5a under similar conditions had no effect, consistent with the reported inability of this ligand to induce canonical signaling in these cells (19) (Fig. 3A). Treatment of the Wnt3a-stimulated cell lysates with
-phosphatase reverted the observed shift, confirming membrane-bound LRP6 phosphorylation (Fig. 3B). Moreover, preincubation of the cells with the soluble antagonist DKK1 completely blocked Wnt-induced LRP6 phosphorylation (Fig. 3C).
|
In order to more directly investigate endogenous LRP6 phosphorylation, we performed metabolic labeling of NIH 3T3 cells with [32P]orthophosphate followed by immunoprecipitation analysis with the anti-LRP6 antibody. As indicated in Fig. 3G (top left panel), a signal corresponding to phospho-LRP6 was detectable in the untreated cells, suggesting that the receptor can be phosphorylated in a Wnt-independent manner. The addition of purified Wnt3a increased the signal for phospho-LRP6 3.5-fold, as determined by densitometry after normalization to total receptor levels detected by ECL analysis (Fig. 3G, top left panel). We next analyzed LRP6 phosphorylation under conditions of chronic ligand stimulation. For this purpose, we utilized NIH 3T3 cells in which constitutive autocrine Wnt signaling was established by retroviral infection with a Wnt3a-HA vector (Fig. 3G, right panel). Metabolic labeling of NIH 3T3 cells stably expressing Wnt3a resulted in an increase in LRP6 phosphorylation similar to that observed under conditions of acute ligand stimulation (Fig. 3G, middle panels). To further analyze LRP6 phosphorylation under acute or chronic conditions, NIH 3T3 cells either treated with recombinant Wnt3a or stably expressing this ligand were analyzed with the anti-phospho-LRP6 Ser1490 antibody directly or following immunoprecipitation with the anti-LRP6 antiserum (Fig. 3H). The results observed with this anti-phospho-LRP6 antibody were consistent with those obtained following in vivo metabolic labeling. All of these findings establish that chronic Wnt stimulation by either prolonged treatment with soluble ligand or autocrine signaling results in sustained receptor phosphorylation.
Wnt induces a rapid interaction between endogenous LRP6 and axin. Biochemical studies support a model by which Wnt-induced phosphorylation of LRP6 results in recruitment of axin to the cell membrane. Evidence for LRP6-axin interaction has been provided by studies involving their cotransfection in model cells (20, 22). Thus, in order to analyze the interaction between endogenous axin and LRP6 as well as to elucidate its kinetics in response to Wnt stimulation, 293T cells were exposed to Wnt3a-conditioned medium for increasing amounts of time. Immunoprecipitates obtained with the anti-axin antibody were analyzed with the same antiserum or the anti-LRP6 MAb. As shown in Fig. 4, while little or no interaction was observed in cells treated with control conditioned medium, LRP6 was detectable in complex with axin following Wnt stimulation. The results show that the interaction was detectable by 15 min, maximal at 30 min, and maintained for up to 1 h, providing evidence for recruitment of axin by LRP6 under physiological conditions.
|
|
Wnt signaling negatively regulates LRP6 expression at the transcriptional level. Having analyzed the effects of acute Wnt stimulation on LRP6, we next sought to investigate the receptor under conditions of chronic Wnt signaling. Cell surface biotinylation analysis of NIH 3T3 cells stably infected with Wnt3a-HA or control virus (Fig. 3G, right panel) indicated that constitutive Wnt3a expression resulted in a dramatic reduction in the levels of LRP6 localized at the cell membrane (Fig. 6A). Notably, analysis of cell lysates revealed that total LRP6 levels in NIH 3T3/Wnt3a cells were reduced as well (Fig. 6A). A similar decrease in receptor levels was noted during our studies of the kinetics of LRP6 phosphorylation when stimulation with soluble Wnt3a was carried out for three or more hours (Fig. 3D). These findings suggested that while acute Wnt stimulation induced receptor internalization and recycling, prolonged treatment with soluble ligand or chronic stimulation resulting from autocrine signaling decreased LRP6 steady-state levels.
|
Wnt-induced inhibition of LRP6 transcription is mediated by ß-catenin. Wnt signaling activation inhibits the phosphorylation and subsequent degradation of ß-catenin, which translocates to the nucleus and, through interaction with the TCF/LEF transcription factors, activates gene expression (9). To determine whether the Wnt effects on LRP6 were mediated by the ß-catenin/TCF complex, we stably infected NIH 3T3/Wnt3a cells with a lentivirus containing a dominant-negative form of TCF4 which lacks the ß-catenin binding domain (DNTCF4). Analysis of LRP6 protein levels revealed that even low levels of DNTCF4 resulted in an increase in LRP6 protein expression, implicating the TCF/LEF transcription factors as mediators of the observed Wnt effects (Fig. 7A). We next stably infected NIH 3T3 cells with a retroviral construct encoding a mutant form of ß-catenin, ß-catenin S33Y, which is resistant to phosphorylation and degradation (25). Analysis of uncomplexed ß-catenin levels indicated constitutive pathway activation induced by expression of this mutant form of ß-catenin in NIH 3T3 cells. Western blot analysis of LRP6 revealed that, similar to the case observed under conditions of chronic Wnt stimulation, expression of ß-catenin S33Y dramatically decreased the steady-state levels of the receptor (Fig. 7B). Northern blot and real-time PCR analyses indicated that the decrease in LRP6 levels was due to reduced expression at the RNA level (Fig. 7C and D). These results strongly implicate the ß-catenin/TCF heterodimer as the mediator of the negative regulation of LRP6 by Wnt.
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Characterization of endogenous LRP6 revealed that the receptor is posttranslationally modified by N-glycosylation and that this modification is necessary for its cell surface localization. Two previous studies reached different conclusions concerning LRP6 dimerization in the absence or presence of Wnt stimulation (10, 20). Our findings indicating the presence of LRP6 dimers in unstimulated 293T cells are in accordance with those of Liu et al., suggesting that the LRP6 dimeric complexes are inactive. Whether LRP6 forms homo- or heterodimeric complexes as well as higher-order oligomers remains to be determined. Analysis of the kinetics of receptor activation revealed that, unlike that of certain receptors that are rapidly and transiently phosphorylated following ligand binding (31), phosphorylation of endogenous LRP6 in response to Wnt is sustained and the receptor is not desensitized by chronic ligand stimulation. However, sustained phosphorylation of the receptor depends on Wnt, and ligand removal causes slow dephosphorylation of LRP6. Consistent with the current model that phosphorylated LRP6 recruits axin from the cytoplasm (22), we provide the first evidence for complex formation between endogenous LRP6 and axin under conditions of Wnt stimulation. Since axin recruitment is believed to occur in a cyclical manner, sustained receptor phosphorylation may be necessary to ensure the continued shuttling of axin from the cytoplasm to the cell membrane.
Analysis of cell surface biotinylation revealed that Wnt stimulation induces progressive internalization of endogenous LRP6. A previous report indicated that Wnt induces exogenous LRP6 endocytosis through the caveolin-mediated pathway (38). In contrast, there is evidence suggesting that internalization of Wingless is mediated through clathrin (6). Our results showing that LRP6 internalization is decreased in the presence of inhibitors of either clathrin- or caveolin-mediated endocytosis may explain these discrepancies, providing evidence for the involvement of both pathways in the internalization of endogenous LRP6. Many cell surface receptors are either targeted for lysosomal degradation or recycled to the plasma membrane following ligand-induced internalization. Our observations indicate that following Wnt-induced endocytosis, LRP6 is recycled back to the cell surface within hours of the initial stimulus.
Finally, we have identified a novel feedback mechanism of receptor regulation by which Wnt down-regulates LRP6 and have provided evidence that the effects observed are not due to increased ligand-induced LRP6 degradation but, rather, occur at the RNA level. Our analysis of LRP6 transcript stability indicated that posttranscriptional mechanisms are not involved. Additionally, overexpression of a stable form of ß-catenin or DNTCF4 provided evidence that the Wnt-induced transcriptional effects are mediated through the ß-catenin/TCF complex. Whether LRP6 is a direct or indirect target of ß-catenin/TCF remains to be determined. However, since the ß-catenin/TCF heterodimer has been shown to act as a transcriptional activator rather than a repressor, we can speculate that the effects on LRP6 transcription are likely to be indirect. Notably, earlier studies of Drosophila embryos reported that after the onset of zygotic transcription, arrow RNA levels appeared to be reduced in cells expressing Wingless, although the mechanism responsible for these effects was not investigated (35).
Ligand-induced receptor "down-regulation" is a common mechanism for receptor modulation and is believed to be essential in ensuring attenuation of cellular signals. For some receptors, such as G-protein-coupled receptors, down-regulation is achieved by internalization and subsequent degradation (15), while for others, such as hormone receptors, ligand-induced down-regulation occurs at the transcriptional level (4, 29). Interestingly, the LDL receptor, which is structurally related to LRP6, undergoes repeated rounds of endocytosis followed by recycling and is also regulated by its ligands at the mRNA level (30).
The critical role of the canonical Wnt pathways in many developmental processes and the evidence that its improper activation leads to human disease (9, 36) predict the need for mechanisms that regulate Wnt signaling. The existence of several naturally occurring Wnt antagonists, such as FRP and DKK, which spatially and temporally modulate Wnt activity, supports this hypothesis (16). Our identification of Wnt-induced inhibition of LRP6 RNA expression uncovers a new mechanism by which this pathway is regulated. The possibility that the aberrant activation of Wnt signaling may in some cases involve the loss of this negative feedback mechanism has important implications concerning therapeutic strategies aimed at targeting the LRP6 receptor.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This work was supported by a grant from the U.S. Department of Defense (DAMD17-03-1-0268), the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and a grant from the NIH/NCI (1 R01 CA121119-01A1). Teresa Villanueva de la Torre is supported by Fundacion Alfonso Martin Escudero, Madrid, Spain.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Published ahead of print on 13 August 2007 . ![]()
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Bafico, A., G. Liu, L. Goldin, V. Harris, and S. A. Aaronson. 2004. An autocrine mechanism for constitutive Wnt pathway activation in human cancer cells. Cancer Cell 6:497-506.[CrossRef][Medline]
3. Bafico, A., G. Liu, A. Yaniv, A. Gazit, and S. A. Aaronson. 2001. Novel mechanism of Wnt signalling inhibition mediated by Dickkopf-1 interaction with LRP6/Arrow. Nat. Cell Biol. 3:683-686.[CrossRef][Medline]
4. Bellingham, D. L., M. Sar, and J. A. Cidlowski. 1992. Ligand-dependent down-regulation of stably transfected human glucocorticoid receptors is associated with the loss of functional glucocorticoid responsiveness. Mol. Endocrinol. 6:2090-2102.[Abstract]
5. Bhanot, P., M. Brink, C. H. Samos, J. C. Hsieh, Y. Wang, J. P. Macke, D. Andrew, J. Nathans, and R. Nusse. 1996. A new member of the frizzled family from Drosophila functions as a Wingless receptor. Nature 382:225-230.[CrossRef][Medline]
6. Blitzer, J. T., and R. Nusse. 2006. A critical role for endocytosis in Wnt signaling. BMC Cell Biol. 7:28.[CrossRef][Medline]
7. Cadigan, K. M., and R. Nusse. 1997. Wnt signaling: a common theme in animal development. Genes Dev. 11:3286-3305.
8. Chen, W., D. ten Berge, J. Brown, S. Ahn, L. A. Hu, W. E. Miller, M. G. Caron, L. S. Barak, R. Nusse, and R. J. Lefkowitz. 2003. Dishevelled 2 recruits beta-arrestin 2 to mediate Wnt5A-stimulated endocytosis of Frizzled 4. Science 301:1391-1394.
9. Clevers, H. 2006. Wnt/beta-catenin signaling in development and disease. Cell 127:469-480.[CrossRef][Medline]
10. Cong, F., L. Schweizer, and H. Varmus. 2004. Wnt signals across the plasma membrane to activate the beta-catenin pathway by forming oligomers containing its receptors, Frizzled and LRP. Development 131:5103-5115.
11. Davidson, G., W. Wu, J. Shen, J. Bilic, U. Fenger, P. Stannek, A. Glinka, and C. Niehrs. 2005. Casein kinase 1 gamma couples Wnt receptor activation to cytoplasmic signal transduction. Nature 438:867-872.[CrossRef][Medline]
12. Di Guglielmo, G. M., C. Le Roy, A. F. Goodfellow, and J. L. Wrana. 2003. Distinct endocytic pathways regulate TGF-beta receptor signalling and turnover. Nat. Cell Biol. 5:410-421.[CrossRef][Medline]
13. Gordon, M. D., and R. Nusse. 2006. Wnt signaling: multiple pathways, multiple receptors, and multiple transcription factors. J. Biol. Chem. 281:22429-22433.
14. He, X., M. Semenov, K. Tamai, and X. Zeng. 2004. LDL receptor-related proteins 5 and 6 in Wnt/beta-catenin signaling: arrows point the way. Development 131:1663-1677.
15. Katzmann, D. J., G. Odorizzi, and S. D. Emr. 2002. Receptor downregulation and multivesicular-body sorting. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell. Biol. 3:893-905.[CrossRef][Medline]
16. Kawano, Y., and R. Kypta. 2003. Secreted antagonists of the Wnt signalling pathway. J. Cell Sci. 116:2627-2634.
17. Kikuchi, A., H. Yamamoto, and S. Kishida. 2007. Multiplicity of the interactions of Wnt proteins and their receptors. Cell. Signal. 19:659-671.[CrossRef][Medline]
18. Le Roy, C., and J. L. Wrana. 2005. Clathrin- and non-clathrin-mediated endocytic regulation of cell signalling. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell. Biol. 6:112-126.[CrossRef][Medline]
19. Liu, G., A. Bafico, and S. A. Aaronson. 2005. The mechanism of endogenous receptor activation functionally distinguishes prototype canonical and noncanonical Wnts. Mol. Cell. Biol. 25:3475-3482.
20. Liu, G., A. Bafico, V. K. Harris, and S. A. Aaronson. 2003. A novel mechanism for Wnt activation of canonical signaling through the LRP6 receptor. Mol. Cell. Biol. 23:5825-5835.
21. Mao, B., W. Wu, Y. Li, D. Hoppe, P. Stannek, A. Glinka, and C. Niehrs. 2001. LDL-receptor-related protein 6 is a receptor for Dickkopf proteins. Nature 411:321-325.[CrossRef][Medline]
22. Mao, J., J. Wang, B. Liu, W. Pan, G. H. Farr III, C. Flynn, H. Yuan, S. Takada, D. Kimelman, L. Li, and D. Wu. 2001. Low-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein-5 binds to axin and regulates the canonical Wnt signaling pathway. Mol. Cell 7:801-809.[CrossRef][Medline]
23. Mikels, A. J., and R. Nusse. 2006. Wnts as ligands: processing, secretion and reception. Oncogene 25:7461-7468.[CrossRef][Medline]
24. Moon, R. T., A. D. Kohn, G. V. De Ferrari, and A. Kaykas. 2004. WNT and beta-catenin signalling: diseases and therapies. Nat. Rev. Genet. 5:691-701.[CrossRef][Medline]
25. Morin, P. J., A. B. Sparks, V. Korinek, N. Barker, H. Clevers, B. Vogelstein, and K. W. Kinzler. 1997. Activation of beta-catenin-Tcf signaling in colon cancer by mutations in beta-catenin or APC. Science 275:1787-1790.
26. Neel, N. F., E. Schutyser, J. Sai, G. H. Fan, and A. Richmond. 2005. Chemokine receptor internalization and intracellular trafficking. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 16:637-658.[CrossRef][Medline]
27. Pinson, K. I., J. Brennan, S. Monkley, B. J. Avery, and W. C. Skarnes. 2000. An LDL-receptor-related protein mediates Wnt signalling in mice. Nature 407:535-538.[CrossRef][Medline]
28. Polakis, P. 2000. Wnt signaling and cancer. Genes Dev. 14:1837-1851.
29. Rosewicz, S., A. R. McDonald, B. A. Maddux, I. D. Goldfine, R. L. Miesfeld, and C. D. Logsdon. 1988. Mechanism of glucocorticoid receptor down-regulation by glucocorticoids. J. Biol. Chem. 263:2581-2584.
30. Russell, D. W., T. Yamamoto, W. J. Schneider, C. J. Slaughter, M. S. Brown, and J. L. Goldstein. 1983. cDNA cloning of the bovine low density lipoprotein receptor: feedback regulation of a receptor mRNA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 80:7501-7505.
31. Schlessinger, J. 2000. Cell signaling by receptor tyrosine kinases. Cell 103:211-225.[CrossRef][Medline]
32. Semenov, M. V., K. Tamai, B. K. Brott, M. Kuhl, S. Sokol, and X. He. 2001. Head inducer Dickkopf-1 is a ligand for Wnt coreceptor LRP6. Curr. Biol. 11:951-961.[CrossRef][Medline]
33. Tamai, K., M. Semenov, Y. Kato, R. Spokony, C. Liu, Y. Katsuyama, F. Hess, J. P. Saint-Jeannet, and X. He. 2000. LDL-receptor-related proteins in Wnt signal transduction. Nature 407:530-535.[CrossRef][Medline]
34. Tamai, K., X. Zeng, C. Liu, X. Zhang, Y. Harada, Z. Chang, and X. He. 2004. A mechanism for Wnt coreceptor activation. Mol. Cell 13:149-156.[CrossRef][Medline]
35. Wehrli, M., S. T. Dougan, K. Caldwell, L. O'Keefe, S. Schwartz, D. Vaizel-Ohayon, E. Schejter, A. Tomlinson, and S. DiNardo. 2000. arrow encodes an LDL-receptor-related protein essential for Wingless signalling. Nature 407:527-530.[CrossRef][Medline]
35. Wei, Q., C. Yokota, M. V. Semenov, B. Doble, J. Woodgett, and X. He. 2007. R-spondin1 is a high affinity ligand for LRP6 and induces LRP6 phosphorylation and beta-catenin signaling. J. Biol. Chem. 282:15903-15911.
36. Westendorf, J. J., R. A. Kahler, and T. M. Schroeder. 2004. Wnt signaling in osteoblasts and bone diseases. Gene 341:19-39.[CrossRef][Medline]
37. Wiley, H. S. 2003. Trafficking of the ErbB receptors and its influence on signaling. Exp. Cell Res. 284:78-88.[CrossRef][Medline]
38. Yamamoto, H., H. Komekado, and A. Kikuchi. 2006. Caveolin is necessary for Wnt-3a-dependent internalization of LRP6 and accumulation of beta-catenin. Dev. Cell 11:213-223.[CrossRef][Medline]
39. Zeng, X., K. Tamai, B. Doble, S. Li, H. Huang, R. Habas, H. Okamura, J. Woodgett, and X. He. 2005. A dual-kinase mechanism for Wnt co-receptor phosphorylation and activation. Nature 438:873-877.[CrossRef][Medline]
40. Zhou, Y. B., F. Liu, Z. D. Zhu, H. Zhu, X. Zhang, Z. Q. Wang, J. H. Liu, and Z. G. Han. 2004. N-glycosylation is required for efficient secretion of a novel human secreted glycoprotein, hPAP21. FEBS Lett. 576:401-407.[CrossRef][Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||