| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cell Growth & Differentiation |
(RAR
) Chimeric Proteins PML-, PLZF-, NPM-, and NuMA-RAR
Have Distinct Intracellular Localization Patterns1
The Institute of Medical Sciences [J. L. H., R. A. W., S. K-R.] and Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology [S. K-R.], University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 1A8; The Ontario Cancer Institute, The Department of Pathology, The University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2M9 [J. L. H., T. Z., S. K-R.], Canada
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
(RAR
) gene rearrangement by reciprocal chromosome translocation is the molecular signature of acutepromyelocytic leukemia (APL). Disruption of RAR
function appears to be the likely cause of aberrant myelopoiesis observed in APL, because PML-RAR
expression has been shown to deregulate the transcription of genes that control myelopoiesis. To target RAR
chimeric proteins, we engineered epitope-tagged versions of PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
, NPM-RAR
, and NuMA-RAR
(X-RAR
V5) and generated a panel of stable COS cell lines expressing X-RAR
V5. Protein fractionation and Western analysis of these COS lines reveal that X-RAR
proteins localize to both the cytoplasm and nucleus. NPM-RAR
is predominantly nuclear whereas NuMA-RAR
is predominantly cytoplasmic. Confocal immunofluorescent microscopy reveals that PML-RAR
and PLZF-RAR
share a primarily diffuse nuclear pattern that excludes the nucleolus. NPM-RAR
is also diffuse in the nucleus but, in contrast to PML-RAR
and PLZF-RAR
, is strongly associated with the nucleolus. Strikingly, NuMA-RAR
predominantly localizes throughout the cytoplasm in a microspeckled pattern. We further demonstrate that NPM and NuMA interact with NPM-RAR
and NuMA-RAR
, respectively. The distinct intracellular localization patterns and the shared ability of X-RAR
to interact with their respective RAR
partner proteins (X) further support the hypothesis that deregulation of these partners may play a role in APL pathogenesis. | Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
(17q21) gene (3
, 4)
to the PML (15q22) gene (5, 6, 7, 8)
and results in the expression of a PML-RAR
chimeric protein. Several rare variant APL translocations have been identified involving the PLZF, (11q23; Ref. 9
), NuMA (11q13; Refs. 10
, 11
), NPM (5q35; Refs. 12
, 13
), and STAT5b genes (17q21; Ref. 14
) fused to the essential functional domains of RAR
. RAR
, a member of the steroid/hormone nuclear receptor family that specifically binds to 9-cis RA and ATRA (3
, 15
, 16) , helps orchestrate myeloid development by acting as a transcription factor at specific DNA sequences called RAREs (17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22)
. Similar to other steroid/hormone nuclear receptors (TR, VD3R, and PPAR), RAR
functions as a heterodimer with the RXR
(19
, 21
, 23)
. Because RAREs have been identified in the upstream regions of several genes believed to control myelopoiesis (2
, 20
, 23)
the disruption of RAR
function is believed to be the likely cause of the aberrant myelopoiesis observed in APL. In addition, all APL fusion genes result in the expression of RAR
chimeric proteins (X-RAR
), which have been directly implicated in APL pathogenesis. PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
, and NPM-RAR
have been shown to possess altered transcriptional activity at RAREs, with a tendency to repress transcription in the presence of physiological levels of RA. Pharmacological levels of ATRA (10-6 M) can reestablish transcriptional activation at RAREs in cells expressing PML-RAR
and NPM-RAR
; however, these levels have little effect on cells expressing PLZF-RAR
(7
, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28)
. Consistent with this, APL patients bearing the t(11;17)(q23;q21) respond poorly to ATRA treatment (29)
.
Although the RAR
partner proteins (X) appear to have different functions, each contains a multimerization domain that potentiates the formation of X-RAR
homodimers. It has recently been determined by several groups that RAREs appear to be occupied by X-RAR
homodimers in conditions where PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
, and NPM-RAR
are overexpressed (30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35)
. In fact, increased repression at RAREs by PML-RAR
can be attributed to an increased affinity that the homodimers possess for corepressors, because PML-RAR
is capable of binding two SMRT complexes instead of one (34)
. PLZF itself has the capacity to bind SMRT through its POZ domain (9
, 30
, 36)
, and in vitro studies have recently revealed that the unresponsiveness of PLZF-RAR
-expressing cells to pharmacological doses of ATRA is caused, in part, by PLZF-RAR
homodimers interacting with as many as four corepressor complexes; two of which are at the PLZF moiety and are ATRA unresponsive (31, 32, 33
, 37)
. Although the stoichiometry of corepressor binding and ATRA-mediated corepressor release, as well as the subsequent effects on RAR
and X-RAR
transcriptional regulation at RAREs, are incompletely understood, these studies describe a molecular mechanism that helps explain the differential response to ATRA observed in APL. Physiological levels of ATRA are sufficient to dissociate one corepressor complex from RXR
/RAR
and activate transcription, whereas pharmacological levels are required to dissociate two corepressor complexes from PML-RAR
homodimers. Pharmacological levels of ATRA appear insufficient to dissociate four corepressor complexes from PLZF-RAR
homodimers. Whether or not STAT5b-RAR
, associated with an APL that did not respond to ATRA (14)
, functions like PLZF-RAR
by recruiting four corepressor complexes to RAREs, remains to be determined.
Proper protein function is highly dependent on intracellular localization. For example, the transforming ability of the ABL tyrosine kinase is related to its activity as well as to its cellular localization. It has been found that deletion of the NH2 terminus of ABL results in the translocation of ABL from the nucleus to the cytoplasm, and to the transformation of mouse fibroblasts (38, 39, 40)
. In CML, the translocation that gives rise to the Philadelphia chromosome (41)
fuses the BCR and ABL genes and results in the expression of BCR-ABL that is also transforming and found predominantly in the cytoplasm (42
, 43) . All of the RAR
partner proteins associated with APL typically interact with the nuclear matrix architecture. Immunofluorescent studies show that PML and PLZF are largely found in the nucleus associated within 1030 nuclear bodies (26
, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48)
. It has more recently been observed that PLZF tends to be more diffuse when compared with PML (49)
, and that PML and PLZF proteins localize to adjacent, but functionally distinct, nuclear bodies (50)
. NPM primarily localizes to the nucleoli of cells, in two to five discreet aggregates (51, 52, 53)
. Our group and others have studied the intracellular localization of PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
, and NPM-RAR
in APL cells, as well as hematopoietic and nonhematopoietic cell lines, and have shown that these RAR
chimeras share the ability to colocalize and interact with their respective partners, as well as with RXR
. Specifically, PML-RAR
disrupts PML localization within the nuclear bodies and delocalizes PML in a microspeckled, nuclear pattern (45, 46, 47)
. PML-RAR
interacts with RXR
as well, potentially deregulating retinoid signaling by sequestering this critical factor (54)
. In support of this hypothesis, PML-RAR
has been observed in large cytoplasmic aggregates (44
, 46)
. Interestingly, the treatment of cells that express PML-RAR
with RA results in the reformation of PML nuclear bodies (46
, 47
, 55)
, the degradation of PML-RAR
(44)
, and the restoration of RAR
signaling (7)
. In contrast, APL cells and cells engineered to express PLZF-RAR
, NPM-RAR
, and NuMA-RAR
show normal PML localization within nuclear bodies (11
, 13
, 56)
. Like PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
localizes in a diffuse nuclear pattern and is completely excluded from the nucleolus (26)
. We have previously shown that NPM-RAR
is localized in a diffuse nuclear pattern in t(5;17) APL cells (13)
. Like PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
and NPM-RAR
interact with their respective partner proteins and RXR
(13
, 25)
. Although PML nuclear body disruption may not be critical in all APL cases, X-RAR
chimeras likely contribute to APL pathogenesis by delocalizing and thereby altering normal intracellular trafficking of RAR
partner proteins as well as critical retinoid factors.
Having identified and characterized single APL cases expressing each of NPM-RAR
and NuMA-RAR
, our laboratory has focused on understanding the roles of NPM-RAR
and NuMA-RAR
in APL pathogenesis. Whereas engineering cell types to express PML-RAR
has contributed significantly to a better understanding of the role of PML-RAR
in APL pathogenesis, these studies have been complicated by an apparent toxicity of this chimeric protein. As a result, comparison of the intracellular localization patterns of X-RAR
among different studies is limited. Here, we examined the intracellular localization of PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
, NPM-RAR
, and NuMA-RAR
in a single-cell system to better understand the functional consequences of RAR
chimeric proteins. We report that X-RAR
chimeric proteins are localized to both the cytoplasm and nucleus, and in addition have distinct intracellular localization patterns. We show that, unlike PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
, and NPM-RAR
, the NuMA-RAR
chimera is localized predominantly in the cytoplasm. In addition, NPM-RAR
is the only X-RAR
protein detected in the nucleolus. Consistent with our previous patient reports (11
, 13)
, NPM-RAR
and NuMA-RAR
colocalize with NPM and NuMA, respectively, in this system.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
.
proteins, we subcloned full-length PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
, NPM-RAR
, and NuMA-RAR
cDNA cassettes into pcDNA3.1V5/HIS (pV5). X-RAR
cDNAs were subcloned such that the V5 epitope was in frame at the COOH termini. The same restriction enzyme/PCR strategy was applied to all cDNAs to remove a short RAR
region including the stop codon (see "Materials and Methods"). We were able to generate full length X-RAR
cDNAs lacking the RAR
stop codon in pBluescript, and subclone each into EcoRI/EcoRV-prepared pV5, in frame. Three versions of pV5, representing all possible reading frames, were created for each fusion cDNA to accommodate the variability of Klenow-polished DNA ends. Intact pX-RAR
V5 constructs were identified through sequence analysis of the cDNA-V5 junctions, and full-length protein expression was verified in transiently transfected COS-7 cells by Western blot analysis. As well as specific X-RAR
V5 proteins, high molecular weight signals were observed (Fig. 1A)
|
.
in a single-cell system, we created COS cells that stably expressed the epitope-tagged versions of X-RAR
. G418-selected colonies from each of PML-RAR
V5, PLZF-RAR
V5, NPM-RAR
V5, and NuMA-RAR
V5 COS lines were successfully expanded into cell lines expressing high levels of X-RAR
V5. COS lines containing pLacZV5 and pcDNA plasmids were also generated as unrelated gene and vector controls, respectively. Established COS X-RAR
V5 and control lines were routinely maintained under G418 selection pressure, and the presence of X-RAR
V5 was confirmed by Western analysis for up to 3 months. Representative COS X-RAR
V5 lines, based on the expression of appropriately sized X-RAR
V5, were chosen for further analysis (Fig. 1B)
V5 line grew more slowly, taking approximately twice as much time to reach confluence.
X-RAR
Proteins Are Cytoplasmic and Nuclear.
By targeting the V5 epitope, we were able to characterize and compare PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
, NPM-RAR
, and NuMA-RAR
localization patterns in COS X-RAR
V5 lines. Intracellular protein fractions, analyzed by Western blot, revealed that the LacZ control protein was cytoplasmic. COS PML-RAR
V5 and PLZF-RAR
V5 lines represented additional controls because their localization patterns in COS cells have been previously described (26
, 44)
. By this technique, PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
, and NPM-RAR
were predominantly nuclear, although these proteins were also detectable in the cytoplasmic fraction. In contrast, NuMA-RAR
appeared primarily within the cytoplasm (Fig. 2)
. To address the possibility that the NuMA-RAR
observation was the result of cloning or transfection artifact, we examined U937 cells expressing NuMA-RAR
that were established in our laboratory through retroviral transduction, as well as COS cells transiently transfected with two different vectors driving NuMA-RAR
expression. Although intracellular protein fractions revealed detectable NuMA-RAR
in the nucleus, the vast majority of NuMA-RAR
still appeared in the cytoplasm despite the use of different cell lines and different infection/transfection methods (Fig. 3)
.
|
|
Proteins Display Distinct Intracellular Patterns.
V5 cells by immunofluorescent confocal microscopy to generate detailed images of X-RAR
intracellular localization patterns for direct comparison. Although these cell lines were generated from single colonies, we observed that not all of the cells within a given COS X-RAR
V5 line overexpressed X-RAR
. Immunofluorescent confocal microscopy revealed that
3050% of the cells in a given field express X-RAR
to a high degree. Consistent with previous reports, PML-RAR
and PLZF-RAR
shared a diffuse nuclear pattern that completely excluded the nucleolus. Whereas cytoplasmic PLZF-RAR
was weakly detected, PML-RAR
was detected in large perinuclear and cytoplasmic aggregates (Fig. 4, A and B)
, NPM-RAR
primarily localized in the nucleus; however, in contrast, NPM-RAR
appeared to be strongly associated with the nucleoli (Fig. 4C)
was found to primarily localize throughout the cytoplasm in a microspeckled pattern ((Figs. 4D
was also detected, albeit weakly. These data reveal not only similarities, but also the unique differences between the intracellular localization of X-RAR
, and are consistent with the results of protein fractionation experiments. Nonspecific V5 antibody staining was not observed in COS or COS pcDNA control cells (Fig. 4E)
V5 cells that appeared to lack X-RAR
expression (Fig. 5)
localization patterns observed in this study.
|
|
|
and NuMA-RAR
Interact with Wild-Type NPM and NuMA, Respectively.
V5 and NuMA-RAR
V5 lines and immunofluorescent confocal microscopy to show that, as observed in patient APL cells bearing the variant t(5;17) and t(11;17) translocations, wild-type NPM and NuMA colocalize with NPM-RAR
and NuMA-RAR
, respectively. In COS NPM-RAR
V5 cells, dually immunostained with polyclonal NPM and monoclonal V5 antibodies, endogenous NPM was found to be microspeckled in the nucleus as well as being strongly associated with 12 large nucleoli (Fig. 5A)
expression was not detectable, NPM localized normally to three to five nucleoli. In addition, we observed that NPM overlapped with NPM-RAR
in a microspeckled nuclear pattern, as well as colocalized with NPM-RAR
throughout the nucleoli. In COS NuMA-RAR
V5 cells, dually immunostained with polyclonal NuMA and monoclonal V5 antibodies, NuMA was largely cytoplasmic and exhibited strong colocalization with NuMA-RAR
(Fig. 5B)
expression was not detectable, NuMA localized normally to the spindle poles, or in a diffuse nuclear pattern that excluded the nucleoli. Although Western analyses performed in our laboratory suggest the polyclonal NuMA antibody targets the COOH-terminal portion of NuMA, we examined endogenous NuMA localization in COS NuMA-RAR
V5 cells using a monoclonal Nu1 antibody that specifically targets the COOH-terminal portion of NuMA. Consistent with Fig. 5B
(Fig. 5C)
To determine whether NuMA-RAR
interacted directly with NuMA, immunoprecipitation reactions were performed with V5 antibodies in COS NuMA-RAR
V5 cell extracts. Western blot analysis of the A/G bead fractions immunoprobed with Nu1 antibody showed that NuMA coimmunoprecipitated with NuMA-RAR
. NuMA did not coimmunoprecipitate with the LacZ negative-control protein (Fig. 6A)
. We also tested whether NPM-RAR
interacted directly with NPM. Bacterial lysates containing GST-fusion proteins GST-NPMwt and the multimerization deficient mutant GST-NPM
md were combined in a binding reaction with NPM-RAR
or the negative control LacZ protein, both generated using a transcription/translation in vitro kit (see "Materials and Methods"). Western blots immunoprobed with V5 antibody demonstrated that unlike LacZV5, NPM-RAR
V5 interacts with GST-NPM. In contrast, we observed a weak interaction between NPM-RAR
V5 and GST-NPM
md (Fig. 6B)
.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
in APL pathogenesis. In particular, we are interested in examining the effects of X-RAR
on the function of the RAR
partner proteins PML, PLZF, NPM, and NuMA, as well as on retinoid signaling factors like RXR
. In this study, we describe the generation of COS cell lines that retain the ability to express V5 epitope-tagged versions of PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
, NPM-RAR
, and NuMA-RAR
(X-RAR
). By applying a PCR- and restriction endonuclease-based approach, pX-RAR
V5 constructs were made to allow for direct immunotargeting, as well as to eliminate the possibility of detecting basal levels of RAR
in subsequent immunochemical analyses (31
, 57)
. X-RAR
V5 chimeric proteins were highly expressed and specifically detected by V5 antibody in both transiently transfected COS cells and stably expressing COS X-RAR
V5 lines (Fig. 1)
complexes. PML-RAR
and PLZF-RAR
can form multimeric complexes through multimerization motifs retained in the partner portion of these chimeric proteins (34
, 49
, 54
, 57
, 58)
. Because the high-molecular-weight X-RAR
species that we observed were dissociated by treating protein lysates with higher ß-mercaptoethanol concentrations and increased boiling times before SDS-PAGE (59)
, we concluded that these signals likely represent X-RAR
multimers.
Even although COS cells are not of the myeloid lineage, we found that they can be used as a valuable model for the study of X-RAR
intracellular localization patterns and potential protein/protein interactions. In contrast to hematopoietic cell lines such as U937 and HL60, COS cells can be efficiently transfected for both transient and stable analyses. In addition, COS cells are adherent and have a low nuclear:cytoplasmic ratio that provides ideal topography for intracellular localization and protein translocation studies. In this study, the G418 selection of COS cells, transfected with pX-RAR
V5 constructs, resulted in the outgrowth of G418-resistant colonies that were individually isolated and expanded into COS X-RAR
V5 lines (Fig. 1B)
. COS X-RAR
V5 lines were examined by Western analyses after 3 months of continuous culture and were shown to have maintained X-RAR
expression (Fig. 2)
. Several groups have reported that PML-RAR
has a potent growth-inhibitory or toxic effect on mammalian nonhematopoietic cells, as well as on several hematopoietic cells tested (60, 61, 62)
, particularly when PML-RAR
is delivered by retroviral transduction. An avian retrovirus engineered to carry PML-RAR
, however, is capable of stably transducing early chick hematopoietic progenitors in vitro and in vivo (63
, 64)
. In our study, we were able to transfect, expand, and stably culture COS PML-RAR
V5 cells. Consistent with the observations of others, our COS PML-RAR
V5 line had a reduced growth rate in culture when compared with the other COS X-RAR
V5 lines (data not shown). Although PML-RAR
expression had a growth-inhibitory effect in our COS lines, toxicity was not observed in these studies.
Because of the many different hematopoietic and nonhematopoietic cell types, and different expression constructs used to characterize PML-RAR
and PLZF-RAR
intracellular localization, the comparison of X-RAR
is difficult and current data are disparate. For example, in vitro studies of COS and NB4 cells expressing PML-RAR
have demonstrated three possible intracellular patterns: predominantly nuclear (45
, 59)
; both nuclear and cytoplasmic (44, 45, 46, 47
, 54)
; and predominantly cytoplasmic (46
, 55)
. Observations for PLZF-RAR
have been more consistent, showing predominantly nuclear localization (26
, 31
, 37
, 49
, 50
, 65
, 66)
. In this study, we used protein fractionation and immunofluorescent confocal microscopy of COS X-RAR
V5 cells to examine the intracellular localization patterns for PML-RAR
, PLZF-RAR
, NPM-RAR
, and NuMA-RAR
in a single-cell system. Protein fractionation demonstrated that PML-RAR
was detected in both the nucleus and the cytoplasm, but was predominantly nuclear. The immunofluorescent image of PML-RAR
revealed a diffuse nuclear pattern that excluded the nucleolus, and a heavily aggregated cytoplasmic pattern (Fig. 4A)
. These data are consistent with the original reports of in vitro PML-RAR
expression in COS cells (44
, 46)
.
By protein fractionation, comparison of PLZF-RAR
and NPM-RAR
to PML-RAR
showed that all three RAR
chimeric proteins were detectable in the nucleus and the cytoplasm, with a bias toward the nucleus. In contrast to the other three, NuMA-RAR
was found to be predominantly cytoplasmic (Fig. 2)
. To be certain that this unique NuMA-RAR
pattern was not the result of transfection or cloning artifact, we extended the protein fractionation analysis to include a number of cell types expressing NuMA-RAR
from different constructs. In U937 cells stably expressing a retrovirally transduced NuMA-RAR
gene, and in COS cells transiently transfected with pV5- and pSG5 NuMA-RAR
constructs, NuMA-RAR
was still found to be predominantly cytoplasmic (Fig. 3)
. Because it is widely held that disruption of RARE transcriptional activation by X-RAR
is the primary cause of aberrant myelopoiesis in APL, it has been suggested that cytoplasmic localization of X-RAR
is an artifact of overexpression in nonhematopoietic cell lines (45
, 47) . Our data, combined with the fact that PML-RAR
is typically overexpressed in APL patients, and the findings that PML-RAR
can be detected in cytoplasmic fractions of APL patient cells as well as in hematopoietic cell lines (44
, 58
, 67)
, do not support this contention.
To obtain a more detailed view of X-RAR
intracellular localization, we compared COS PLZF-RAR
V5, NPM-RAR
V5, and NuMA-RAR
V5 with COS PML-RAR
V5 cells by immunofluorescent confocal microscopy. In keeping with current data, PLZF-RAR
shared a diffuse nuclear pattern with PML-RAR
, which excluded the nucleolus (Ref. 26
; Figs. 4, A and B
). PLZF-RAR
was weakly detected in the cytoplasm. NPM-RAR
was also localized in a diffuse nuclear pattern (Fig. 4C)
but, in contrast to PML-RAR
and PLZF-RAR
, was strongly associated with the nucleoli (Fig. 4C)
. Despite the apparent lack of nucleolar NPM-RAR
staining in t(5;17) APL patient cells (13)
, the presence of NPM-RAR
in nucleoli of COS cells is not surprising because the multimerization domain of NPM, retained in NPM-RAR
, facilitates the formation of functional NPM hexamers typically localized to the nucleolus (68, 69, 70)
. Moreover, two other NPM chimeric proteins, NPM-ALK and NPM-MLF1, which are associated with anaplastic large cell lymphoma and AML/myelodysplastic syndrome, respectively, are predominantly localized in the nucleus and nucleoli (71
, 72)
. Consistent with the results of our protein fractionation experiments, immunofluorescent images of NuMA-RAR
localization revealed a predominantly microspeckled, cytoplasmic pattern (Fig. 4D)
. These data clearly demonstrate that X-RAR
proteins have distinct intracellular localization patterns and, importantly, that NuMA-RAR
differs from the other RAR
chimeric proteins. Although the specific cytoplasmic or perinuclear structures with which NuMA-RAR
and PML-RAR
interact remain unidentified, our data suggest that X-RAR
chimeric proteins associate with distinct intracellular compartments. These data also represent the first description of NPM-RAR
and NuMA-RAR
intracellular localization in vitro.
To study the effects of NPM-RAR
and NuMA-RAR
on the normal patterns of wild-type NPM and NuMA, respectively, we examined NPM and NuMA immunofluorescent patterns in COS NPM-RAR
V5 and NuMA-RAR
V5 cells. Cells dually stained with NPM and V5 antibodies revealed partial overlap between NPM and NPM-RAR
in the nucleus, and colocalization in the nucleolus (Fig. 5A)
. NuMA and V5 antibodies showed that NuMA strongly colocalizes with NuMA-RAR
in the cytoplasm (Fig. 5B)
. Through GST pull-down and coimmunoprecipitation assays, we further demonstrated that this colocalization was the result of direct interaction of NPM-RAR
and NuMA-RAR
with NPM and NuMA, respectively (Fig. 6)
. Moreover, we demonstrated that the NPM multimerization domain mediates the interaction between NPM-RAR
and NPM, consistent with previous reports showing that PML interacts with PML-RAR
and PLZF interacts with PLZF-RAR
(9
, 36
, 44
, 54
, 58
, 73
, 74)
. This is the first demonstration of endogenous NuMA interacting with, and being translocated to the cytoplasm by, NuMA-RAR
. Taken together with the finding that STAT5b is delocalized by STAT5b-RAR
(14)
, our data show that all RAR
partners (X) interact with their respective X-RAR
chimeric protein.
NPM-RAR
and NuMA-RAR
displayed intracellular localization patterns unique to each protein. Unlike the other X-RAR
proteins, which are predominantly nuclear, NuMA-RAR
is found predominantly in the cytoplasm. NPM-RAR
appears to be the only RAR
chimeric protein localized at the nucleoli. It has been shown that cytoplasmic PML-RAR
requires PML heterodimerization to shuttle to the nucleus, where it affects retinoid signaling (46
, 62)
. Whereas our data show that NPM-RAR
is shuttled effectively to the nucleus and nucleolus, most likely by NPM (53)
, NuMA-RAR
nuclear translocation appears to be hindered. Because NuMA is shuttled back to the nucleus by ß-importin after mitosis (75)
, there is the possibility that expression of NuMA-RAR
impairs the ß-importin shuttling pathway or the interaction between NuMA and ß-importin. Wild-type NuMA is normally found in a dispersed nuclear pattern in the interphase nucleus and is associated with the polar region of the mitotic apparatus (Fig. 5B
; Ref. 76
). NuMA is critical for the completion of mitosis (77)
. NuMA gene sequence predicts a large protein containing two terminal globular domains, separated by a large coiled-coil domain (78
, 79)
. The functional importance of the tail domain has been partially determined through the use of tailless NuMA mutants (77
, 80)
. NuMA, lacking the tail domain, fails to target correctly and results in the formation of micronuclei but does not otherwise interfere with mitosis. The predominantly cytoplasmic localization of NuMA-RAR
in COS cells stably expressing this protein suggests that NuMA-RAR
functions as a tailless version of NuMA. In further support of this hypothesis, it has been shown that, in cells engineered to express NuMA in the cytoplasm, NuMA is assembled in extensive filamentous structures similar to the cytoplasmic, microspeckled pattern that we observed in COS NuMA-RAR
V5 cells (Fig. 5B
; Ref. 81
).
The distinct intracellular localization patterns, and potential deregulation of RAR
partner protein function, may play a role in generating subtle differences in APL phenotypes. When the clinical presentations of APL patients bearing variant RAR
translocations are closely studied, subtle differences can be discerned. For example, the patient carrying the NuMA-RAR
gene fusion was initially diagnosed with CML, the patient carrying the STAT5b-RAR
gene fusion had acute myeloid leukemia M1, whereas the PLZF-RAR
and NPM-RAR
gene fusion cases had APL M3v morphology (2)
. These observations also parallel those found in the study of APL transgenic mice models. Transgenic mice expressing PML-RAR
develop an APL-like syndrome after a preleukemic phase characterized by the accumulation of myeloid precursors in the bone marrow (82
, 83)
. In contrast, transgenic mice expressing PLZF-RAR
develop leukemia with symptoms resembling CML (37
, 84)
, whereas mice expressing NPM-RAR
develop leukemia with features ranging from APL-like to CML-like (84)
. Together with the observation that X-RAR
proteins have distinct intracellular localization patterns, we hypothesize that the deregulation of individual RAR
partner genes may play a role in the variation observed in the clinical presentation of APL patients.
In conclusion, we have demonstrated that X-RAR
can all be detected in the nucleus of COS cells: a critical event that supports the widespread view that X-RAR
regulate the expression of RA-responsive genes in a dominant negative, ligand-dependent manner. The COS X-RAR
V5 lines provide a valuable model by which to study intracellular localization patterns and protein/protein interactions. Specifically, we observed that X-RAR
localize in distinct intracellular patterns. NPM-RAR
is predominantly nuclear, like PML-RAR
and PLZF-RAR
, and is the only X-RAR
protein associated with the nucleolus. In contrast, NuMA-RAR
is predominantly cytoplasmic. Like PML-RAR
and PLZF-RAR
, NPM-RAR
and NuMA-RAR
can potentially deregulate the function of their wild-type partners through sequestration to novel nuclear and or cytoplasmic compartments. These data also suggest that the deregulation of RAR
partner proteins may play a role in APL pathogenesis, and contribute to the subtle phenotypic differences observed in variant APL cases.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
.
cDNA with a primer 5' of the RAR
RsrII restriction site (5'-GGAGGTGCCCAAGCCCGAGT-3') and a 3' primer containing a mutated stop codon (5'-GGGGAGTGGGTGGCCGGG-3'). This PCR generated a 3'
stop RAR
fragment. Four pBluescript X-RAR
constructs were digested with BamHI, polished with Klenow fragment, then digested with RsrII to remove the wild-type RAR
-3' fragment containing the stop codon. Next, PCR fragments were polished with Klenow fragment, digested with RsrII, then ligated into the RsrII/blunt-prepared pBluescript X-RAR
constructs. Finally, EcoRI/blunt, full-length X-RAR
cDNAs lacking the RAR
stop codon were subcloned from their pBluescript background into EcoRI/EcoRV prepared pV5 (pcDNA3.1V5/HIS; Invitrogen). By this technique, X-RAR
cDNAs, containing an in-frame COOH-terminal V5 epitope tag, were created.
COS-7 Transfections.
Using Effectene (Qiagen), a non-liposomal DNA carrier, COS-7 cells were transfected with linearized pX-RAR
V5 constructs. The manufacturers suggested protocol was followed for a maximum of 500 µg of plasmid DNA for each transfection. For transient transfections,
2 x 105 COS cells/well were seeded in 6-well plates and cultured in
MEM supplemented with 5% fetal bovine serum, 0.05 units/ml penicillin, 0.05 µg/ml streptomycin, 0.5 µg/ml Fungizone, and 2 mM L-glutamine) for 16 h at 32°C and 5% CO2. Transiently transfected COS cells were harvested for X-RAR
V5 expression analysis (see below). In addition to the transient analyses, transfected COS cells were cultured in the presence of G418 (Life Technologies, Inc.) to generate PML-RAR
V5, PLZF-RAR
V5, NPM-RAR
V5, and NuMA-RAR
V5 expressing colonies. To generate these lines,
5 x 105 COS cells/dish were seeded in 100-mm culture dishes and cultured for 16 h at 32°C and 5% CO2. After the transfection period, the COS cells were cultured in 500 µg/ml G418 supplemented medium, sufficient to eliminate cells not expressing the neor gene carried on the pV5 plasmid within 1014 days. Individual COS X-RAR
V5, G418-resistant colonies were isolated by trypsinization within glass cloning rings (Bellco). These colonies were expanded under G418 selection pressure, through 24- and 6-well plates and then up to T25 culture flasks (Nunc) for X-RAR
V5 expression analysis and cryopreservation.
Protein Extraction, Intracellular Fractionation, and Western Blotting.
When protein was required, COS cells were washed twice in PBS, trypsinized from culture flasks, resuspended in fresh medium, and pelleted. After a final wash in PBS, cells were pelleted once more. Native-state proteins were extracted either as whole cell lysates [Native buffer: 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8), 150 mM NaCl, 10 mM EDTA, and 0.5% Triton X] or as intracellular cytoplasmic (buffer A: 10 mM HEPES, 10 mM KCl, 0.1 mM EDTA, 0.1 mM EGTA, and 1 mM DTT) and nuclear fractions (buffer C: 20 mM HEPES, 400 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM EGTA, and 1 mM DTT). Protein samples were separated by SDS-PAGE in 8% gels and transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride membrane (Bio-Rad). Blots were blocked in PBS + 4% skim milk + 0.1% Tween + 1:500 preimmune goat serum, then immunoprobed with V5 monoclonal antibody (Invitrogen) in PBS + 3% FCS at 1:1500 dilution. Electrochemical luminescent detection (NEN Life Sciences) of LacZV5 (Mr
130,000), PML-RAR
V5 (Mr
95,000), PLZF-RAR
V5 (Mr
100,000), NPM-RAR
V5 (Mr
60,000), and NuMA-RAR
V5 (Mr
230,000), from transiently transfected COS cells as well as from COS X-RAR
V5 lines, was carried out with an antimouse-HRP-conjugated secondary antibody at 1:7000 dilution (Santa Cruz Biotechnology). A polyclonal RAR
antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) at 1:500 dilutions, in conjunction with an antirabbit-HRP-conjugated secondary at 1:7000 dilutions (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), was also used to detect X-RAR
proteins.
Immunofluorescent Confocal Microscopy.
LAB-TEK chambered glass microscope slides (Nunc) were used to grow COS parental and COS pcDNA empty vector control cells, as well as the COS X-RAR
V5 lines. Cells were seeded at medium density and paraformaldehyde fixed at
70% confluency. Fixed cells were washed in Tris-buffered saline (TBS) + 3% BSA + 0.5% Triton X for 5 min, and then washed in TBS + BSA. Slides were blocked with 1% preimmune goat serum in PN buffer (0.1 M Na2HPO4/NaH2PO4 and 0.1% Tween 20) for 1 h at 37°C. After two PN buffer washes, individual chambers were incubated for 2 h at 37°C with single monoclonal V5 (1:2000) or monoclonal NuMA (1:500 COOH-terminal Nu1 antibody; Oncogene Science) antibodies, or combinations of V5 with polyclonal NPM (1:1000) antibody or V5 with polyclonal NuMA (1:2000) antibody. The polyclonal NPM (kind gift M. O. J. Olson, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS) was raised against recombinant NPM containing the COOH-terminal portion (85
, 86)
. The polyclonal NuMA (kind gift of D. Compton, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH, and D. Cleveland, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Baltimore, MD) antibody was able to detect endogenous NuMA, but not NuMA-RAR
V5 in Western blot analyses performed in our laboratory. For red and green immunofluorescent detection, rhodamine-conjugated goat antirabbit (Calbiochem) and FITC-conjugated goat antimouse (Oncogene Science) were added and incubated for 1 h at 37°C. After two PN buffer washes, the chamber covers were removed and slides were mounted in vectashield antifade (Vector). Immunofluorescent confocal microscopy was performed under a ZEISS laser scanning confocal microscope.
Immunoprecipitation and GST Pull-Downs.
For immunoprecipitation and coimmunoprecipitation analyses, native-state protein from COS X-RAR
V5 cells was extracted as described above. A typical immunoprecipitation reaction contained 10 µl of V5 monoclonal antibody (Invitrogen) added to 500 µl of protein extract. After a 2-h rotating incubation at room temperature, 20 µl of A/G PLUS-Agarose (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) was added, and the mixture was further incubated for 1 h. The agarose beads were spun down at 2500 rpm at 4°C for 5 min, and the supernatant was collected. The bead fraction was washed three times in 500 µl of Native buffer, and then resuspended in 50 µl of SDS loading dye for Western analysis. Blots were immunoprobed with a monoclonal antibody that specifically targets the COOH terminus of NuMA (Nu1; Oncogene Sciences) to test for coimmunoprecipitation.
For GST pull-down reactions, GST fusion proteins were generated from a full-length, wild-type NPM construct (GST-NPMwt), and a mutated NPM construct with
75% of the multimerization domain deleted (GST-NPM
md; kind gift K. Fukasawa, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH), as recommended by the manufacturer (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). 4B Sepharose-conjugated GST fusion proteins were resuspended in GST protein/protein binding buffer [GBB: 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8), 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, and 0.5% NP40] and quantitated against BSA standards by SDS-PAGE and Coomassie Blue staining. LacZV5 and NPM-RAR
V5 were generated in the cell-free Quick Coupled Transcription/Translation system as recommended by the manufacturer (TNT-Promega). Binding reactions were carried out in 300 µl of GBB in which 1 µl from a 50-µl in vitro TNT reaction was added to equimolar amounts of GST fusion protein.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
and NPM-RAR
cDNAs; and Soheila A. Hamadanizadeh (Institute of Medical Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada) for supplying the U937 NuMA-RAR
cell line. | Footnotes |
|---|
1 Supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute of Canada (to S. K-R.), the Canadian Institute of Health Research (to S. K-R.), and the Leukemia Research Fund of Canada (to S. K-R.), and by the Ontario Graduate Scholarship Program (to J. L. H.). ![]()
2 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at Princess Margaret Hospital, Ontario Cancer Institute, Room 9-622, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2M9. Phone: (416) 946-2806; E-mail: s.kamel.reid{at}utoronto.ca ![]()
3 The abbreviations used are: APL, acute PML; PML, promyelocytic leukemia; RA, retinoic acid; RAR
, RA receptor
; PLZF, promyelocytic zinc finger; NPM, nucleophosmin; NuMA, nuclear mitotic apparatus; STAT5b, signal transducer and transcriptional activator 5b; ATRA, all-trans RA; RARE, RA response element; RXR
, retinoid X receptor
; CML, chronic myeloid leukemia; GST, glutathione S-transferase; TNT, transcribed/translated. ![]()
Received for publication 11/15/01. Revision received 2/19/02. Accepted for publication 2/20/02.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
, its fusion partners, and their roles in the pathogenesis of acute promyelocytic leukemia. Blood, 93: 3167-215, 1999.
gene to a novel transcribed locus. Nature (Lond.), 347: 558-561, 1990.[Medline]
with a novel putative transcription factor, PML. Cell, 66: 663-674, 1991.[Medline]
cDNA and characterization of its retinoid-binding and transactivation properties. Oncogene, 6: 1285-1292, 1991.[Medline]
locus due to a variant t(11;17) translocation associated with acute promyelocytic leukaemia. EMBO J., 12: 1161-1167, 1993.[Medline]
to NuMA, the nuclear mitotic apparatus protein, by a variant translocation in acute promyelocytic leukaemia. Nat. Genet., 17: 109-113, 1997.[Medline]
in acute promyelocytic-like leukaemia. Hum. Mol. Genet., 8: 1741-1749, 1999.
and RARß. Biochem. J., 272: 391-397, 1990.[Medline]
- or ß-
ligands. Mol Pharmacol., 40: 556-562, 1991.[Abstract]
2 isoform is transcribed from a promoter that contains a retinoic acid response element. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 88: 10138-10142, 1991.
2 expression is regulated through a retinoic acid response element embedded in Sp1 sites. Mol. Cell. Biol., 12: 2976-2985, 1992.
fusion proteins generated from the variant t(11;17)(q23;q21) translocation in acute promyelocytic leukemia inhibit ligand-dependent transactivation of wild-type retinoic acid receptors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 91: 1178-1182, 1994.
chimera generated in t(11;17)-associated acute promyelocytic leukemia. Oncogene, 12: 323-336, 1996.[Medline]
, PML-, PLZF- and NPM-RAR
fusion proteins towards transcriptional co-activator, RIP-140, on retinoic acid responses in acute promyelocytic leukemia. Leukemia (Baltimore), 14: 77-83, 2000.[Medline]
patient. Leukemia (Baltimore), 8: 312-317, 1994.[Medline]
(RAR
) and PLZF-RAR
oncoproteins associated with acute promyelocytic leukemia. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 94: 9028-9033, 1997.
recruit histone deacetylase in promyelocytic leukaemia. Nature (Lond.), 391: 815-818, 1998.[Medline]
underlie molecular pathogenesis and treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia. Blood, 91: 2634-2642, 1998.
and PLZF-RAR
with co-repressors determine differential responses to RA in APL. Nat. Genet., 18: 126-135, 1998.[Medline]
fusion proteins in acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL): structural similarities with a new family of oncoproteins. EMBO J., 11: 629-642, 1992.[Medline]
in acute promyelocytic leukemia cells. Cell, 76: 345-356, 1994.[Medline]
fusion protein. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 93: 3624-3629, 1996.
rearrangement associated with t(15;17) acute promyelocytic leukaemia. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol., 220: 81-112, 1997.[Medline]
high molecular weight nuclear complexes through the PML coiled-coil region is essential for the PML/RAR
- mediated retinoic acid response. Oncogene, 18: 6313-6321, 1999.[Medline]
fusion protein in acute promyelocytic leukemia cells and interference with retinoid and peroxisome-proliferator signaling pathways. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 92: 7401-7405, 1995.
fusion product of acute promyelocytic leukemia. Exp. Hematol., 24: 544-551, 1996.[Medline]
fusion protein. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 94: 10901-10906, 1997.
fusion gene transforms haematopoietic progenitors in vitro and induces acute leukaemias. EMBO J., 15: 2707-2716, 1996.[Medline]
co-operates with the v-erbB oncogene to transform early haematopoietic progenitors in vitro and in vivo. Oncogene, 14: 1471-1479, 1997.[Medline]
fusion partners. PML and PLZF, heterodimerize and colocalize to nuclear bodies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 94: 10255-10260, 1997.
fusion protein, without inducing terminal differentiation or apoptosis, in a RA-therapy resistant t(11;17)(q23;q21) APL patient. Oncogene, 18: 1113-1118, 1999.[Medline]
transcripts that encode aberrant PML proteins and PML/RAR
isoforms in acute promyelocytic leukaemia. EMBO J., 11: 1397-1407, 1992.[Medline]
and promyelocytic leukemia zinc finger genes resulting from t(11;17)(q23;q21) in a patient with acute promyelocytic leukemia. J. Clin. Investig., 91: 2260-2267, 1993.
protein depend on the fusion of the PML protein dimerization and RAR
DNA binding domains. EMBO J., 15: 4949-4958, 1996.[Medline]
transgene initiates murine acute promyelocytic leukemia. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 94: 2551-2556, 1997.
transgenic mice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 94: 5302-5307, 1997.
and NPM-RAR
. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 96: 6318-6323, 1999.This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. J. McConnell, N. Chevallier, W. Berkofsky-Fessler, J. M. Giltnane, R. B. Malani, L. M. Staudt, and J. D. Licht Growth Suppression by Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia-Associated Protein PLZF Is Mediated by Repression of c-myc Expression Mol. Cell. Biol., December 15, 2003; 23(24): 9375 - 9388. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cell Growth & Differentiation |