SIRPalpha1 and SIRPalpha2: their role as tumor suppressors in breast carcinoma cells.

Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Showa-ku, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications (Impact Factor: 2.28). 10/2007; 361(1):7-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2007.06.159
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We have previously reported that expression of SIRPalpha1/SHPS-1 was strongly suppressed in v-Src-transformed cells and its forced expression resulted in the suppression of anchorage-independent growth of the cells [K. Machida, S. Matsuda, K. Yamaki, T. Senga, A.A. Thant, H. Kurata, K. Miyazaki, K. Hayashi, T. Okuda, T. Kitamura, T. Hayakawa, M. Hamaguchi, v-Src suppresses SHPS-1 expression via the Ras-MAP kinase pathway to promote the oncogenic growth of cells, Oncogene 19 (2000) 1710-1718]. We examined the effect of human SIRPalpha1 expression in breast cancer cell lines, Hs578T and MCF7, and compared with the effect of SIRPalpha2 expression in Hs578T. Forced expression of either SIRPalpha1 or SIRPalpha2 did not perturb the growth of Hs578T in a conventional attached condition. Their expression, however, enforced the actin stress fiber formation and induced activation of Rho, but not Rac, in Hs578T cells. Moreover, forced expression of either SIRPalpha1 or SIRPalpha2 displayed distinct suppressive effect on the anchorage-independent growth of Hs578T cells. Similarly, forced expression of SIRPalpha1 in MCF7 specifically suppressed the anchorage-independent growth of the cells. Taken together, our results strongly suggest the function of SIRPalpha1 and 2 as type II tumor suppressors for human breast carcinoma.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The hormone prolactin (PRL) contributes to the pathogenesis of breast cancer in part through its activation of Janus-activated kinase 2 (Jak2)/signal transducer and activator of transcription 5 (Stat5), a PRL receptor (PRLr)-associated pathway dependent on cross-talk signaling from integrins. It remains unclear, however, how this cross-talk is mediated. Following PRL stimulation, we show that a complex between the transmembrane glycoprotein signal regulatory protein-α (SIRPα) and the PRLr, β(1) integrin, and Jak2 in estrogen receptor-positive (ER(+)) and ER(-) breast cancer cells is formed. Overexpression of SIRPα in the absence of collagen 1 significantly decreased PRL-induced gene expression, phosphorylation of PRLr-associated signaling proteins, and PRL-stimulated proliferation and soft agar colony formation. In contrast, overexpression of SIRPα in the presence of collagen 1 increased PRL-induced gene expression; phosphorylation of Jak2, Stat5, and Erk; and PRL-stimulated cell growth. Interestingly, overexpression of a tyrosine-deficient SIRPα (SIRPα-4YF) prevented the signaling and phenotypic effects mediated by wild-type SIRPα. Furthermore, overexpression of a phosphatase-defective mutant of Shp-2 or pharmacologic inhibition of Shp-2 produced effects comparable with that of SIRPα-4YF. However, the tyrosine phosphorylation of SIRPα was unaffected in the presence or absence of collagen 1. These data suggest that SIRPα modulates PRLr-associated signaling as a function of integrin occupancy predominantly through the alteration of Shp-2 activity. This PRLr-SIRPα-integrin complex may therefore provide a basis for integrin-PRLr cross-talk and contribute to the biology of breast cancer.
    Molecular Cancer Research 10/2010; 8(10):1413-24. · 4.35 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Src kinase dysregulation contributes to cancer progression but mechanistic understanding for this contribution remains incomplete. Signal regulatory protein α1 (SIRPα1) is a tumor suppressor that is constitutively suppressed in v-Src-transformed cells, where restoration of SIRPα1 expression inhibits anchorage-independent growth. In this study, we investigated the role of the protein tyrosine phosphatase-2 (SHP-2) in SIRPα1 activity. SHP-2 suppression resulted in a blockade of SIRPα1-mediated inhibition of anchorage-independent growth. Notably, we found that SIRPα1 did not act in v-Src-transformed cells by triggering cell growth arrest but by eliciting a suspension-selective apoptosis (anoikis), and that SHP-2 was required for this effect. Furthermore, we found that SHP-2 was crucial for recovery of stress fiber and focal contact formation by SIRPα1 in v-Src-transformed cells. Finally, we found that SIRPα1/SHP-2 signaling regulates anoikis in human breast carcinoma cells with activated c-Src. Taken together, our findings define SHP-2 as an essential component of tumor suppression and anoikis mediated by SIRPα1 in human breast carcinoma cells as well as in v-Src-transformed cells.
    Cancer Research 02/2011; 71(4):1229-34. · 9.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Phosphorylation of actin-binding proteins plays a pivotal role in the remodeling of the actin cytoskeleton to regulate cell migration. Palladin is an actin-binding protein that is phosphorylated by growth factor stimulation; however, the identity of the involved protein kinases remains elusive. In this study, we report that palladin is a novel substrate of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK). Suppression of ERK activation by a chemical inhibitor reduced palladin phosphorylation, and expression of active MEK alone was sufficient for phosphorylation. In addition, an in vitro kinase assay demonstrated direct palladin phosphorylation by ERK. We found that Ser77 and Ser197 are essential residues for phosphorylation. Although the phosphorylation of these residues was not required for actin cytoskeletal organization, we found that expression of non-phosphorylated palladin enhanced cell migration. Finally, we show that phosphorylation inhibits the palladin association with Abl tyrosine kinase. Taken together, our results indicate that palladin phosphorylation by ERK has an anti-migratory function, possibly by modulating interactions with molecules that regulate cell migration.
    PLoS ONE 12/2011; 6(12):e29338. · 3.53 Impact Factor