Inhibition of the JNK signalling pathway enhances proteasome inhibitor-induced apoptosis of kidney cancer cells by suppression of BAG3 expression.

Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
British Journal of Pharmacology (Impact Factor: 4.99). 09/2009; 158(5):1405-12. DOI: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.2009.00455.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Proteasome inhibitors represent a novel class of anti-tumour agents that have clinical efficacy against haematological and solid cancers. The anti-apoptotic protein BAG3 is a member of the Bcl-2-associated athanogene family. We have previously shown that BAG3 is up-regulated after exposure to proteasome inhibitors and that inhibition of BAG3 sensitized cells to apoptosis induced by proteasome inhibition. However, the mechanisms by which proteasome inhibition induced BAG3 expression remained unclear and the present experiments were designed to elucidate these mechanisms.
Effects of the proteasome inhibitor MG132 on activation of mitogenic signalling pathways were evaluated in kidney cancer cells (A498, Caki1, Caki2), with Western blotting. Specific inhibitors against individual mitogenic signalling pathways, real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and luciferase reporter assays were used to investigate the roles of mitogenic signalling pathways in BAG3 induction after proteasome inhibition. Cell death was evaluated using Annexin V/propidium iodide staining and subsequent FACS.
MG132 activated several key mitogenic signalling pathways including extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK), c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) activities. Induction of BAG3 by MG132 was inhibited by blocking JNK, but not ERK1/2 and p38 MAPK signalling pathways. In addition, SP600125 and dominant-negative JNK1 suppressed BAG3 promoter-driven reporter gene expression. Furthermore, activation of the JNK pathway induced BAG in kidney cancer cells after treatment with MG132.
Our results suggested that the JNK pathway was associated with the protective response against proteasome inhibition, by mediating induction of BAG3.

Download full-text


Available from: Xin Meng, Feb 07, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this work, we report an extensive characterisation of fully silicided gate (FUSI) devices with oxynitride (SiON) and Hf-silicate gate dielectrics. Enhanced drive current is obtained, in comparison with poly gate devices, together with an increase in electron/hole mobility and reduction in CET values. We show that the work function (WF) can be engineered by doping of the poly gates prior to FUSI for SiON devices but not for Hf-silicate devices. With reference to the poly gate, Hf-silicate/FUSI devices exhibit improved TDDB reliability behavior, having higher acceleration factor (γ) values. NBTI gives a maximum operating voltage above 1.2 V for ΔV<sub>T</sub> = 10% or 30 mV, as extrapolated for a 10 years-lifetime.
    Electron Devices Meeting, 2004. IEDM Technical Digest. IEEE International; 01/2005
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Caspases are a conserved family of cell death proteases that cleave intracellular substrates at Asp residues to modify their function and promote apoptosis. In this report, we identify BAG3 as a novel caspases substrate. Here, we show that one of these BAG proteins, BAG3, is cleaved during apoptosis. BAG3 cleavage is inhibited by several different caspase inhibitors. The analysis of BAG3 cleavage by recombinant caspase proteins shows that BAG3 is efficiently cleaved by caspase-3, to a smaller extent by caspases-1 and -8, and relatively inefficient by caspase-9. Cleavage of the BAG3 protein occurs in the C-terminal part of the protein majorly at Asp347 (KEVD347 downward arrow S) in vitro and in pancreatic cancer SW1990 and PANC-1 cells undergoing apoptosis. We also demonstrate that unlike cleavage of Bcl-2 and Bcl-XL, cleaved form of BAG3 does not result in pro-apoptotic fragments, however, cleavage of BAG3 lead to loss its per se anti-apoptotic property. This novel regulation of BAG3 may have important implications for its role in apoptosis.
    Journal of Cellular Physiology 01/2010; 224(1):94-100. DOI:10.1002/jcp.22097 · 3.87 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Molecular targeted therapy has shown promise as a treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Celecoxib (Celebrex®) exhibits antitumor effects in human HCC cells, and its mechanism of action is mediated either by its ability to inhibit cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) or by a number of various other COX-2 independent effects. Proteasome inhibitors (PIs) can exert cell growth inhibitory and apoptotic effects in different tumor cell types, including HCC cells. The present study examined the interaction between celecoxib and the PI MG132 in two human liver tumor cell lines HepG2 and HA22T/VGH. Our data showed that each inhibitor reduced proliferation and induced apoptosis in a dose-dependent manner in both cell lines. Moreover, the combination of celecoxib with MG132 synergistically inhibited cell viability and increased apoptosis, as documented by caspase 3 and 7 activation, PARP cleavage, and down-regulation of Bcl-2. Celecoxib and MG132, both alone and synergistically in combination, induced expression of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress genes ATF4, CHOP, TRB3 and promoted the splicing of XBP1 mRNA. Knockdown of TRB3 mRNA expression by small interference RNA significantly decreased combination-induced cell death in HA22T/VGH cells, whereas it increased combination-induced cell death in HepG2 cells, suggesting that activation of the ER stress response might have either a detrimental or a protective role in liver tumor cell survival. In conclusion, our data indicate that combination treatment with celecoxib and MG132 resulted in synergistic antiproliferative and proapoptotic effects against liver cancer cells, providing a rational basis for the clinical use of this combination in the treatment of liver cancer.
    Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.) 04/2010; 9(7):1399-410. DOI:10.4161/cc.9.7.11254 · 5.01 Impact Factor