![]()
|
|
||||||||
J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 45, 32486-32492, November 5, 1999
From the Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences,
Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Stanford University School of
Medicine, Stanford, California 94305-5235
Muscle cell survival depends upon the presence of
various integrins with affinities for different extracellular matrix
proteins. The absence of either The interactions of cells with extracellular matrix proteins are
mediated primarily by the integrin family of cell-surface receptors
that function as heterodimers of The intracellular signaling cascades that are activated when integrins
bind to their extracellular ligands are varied (6). These biochemical
changes indicate that integrins are true signaling molecules,
transmitting information from the extracellular compartment into the
cell, so-called "outside-in signaling" (1, 7). The specific
pathways appear to differ depending on the specific integrin/ligand
interaction and the type of cell. One of the earliest changes initiated
by integrin engagement is clustering of integrins at focal adhesions
and tyrosine phosphorylation of proteins such as paxillin, talin, and
the cytosolic enzyme focal adhesion kinase (FAK)1 (8-11). FAK
phosphorylation is considered to be a critical step in the downstream
signaling that promotes cell spreading and cell survival. Although the
details of these more distal events remain to be elucidated, there is
evidence that the binding of integrins to their ligands may activate
pathways that prevent apoptosis in a variety of cell types (3, 12).
Protein kinase C (PKC) appears to be one of the key intermediates in
integrin-mediated signaling in many cell types (6, 7). In certain cell
types, inhibition of PKC activity results in the inhibition of cell
attachment and spreading as well as FAK phosphorylation (13, 14).
Activation of PKC can promote the cellular changes mediated by
integrin/matrix interactions (15-17). These results together
demonstrate a specific role of PKC in integrin-mediated signal transduction.
Although integrin engagement leads to signal cascade activation, it is
also clear that the process of cell attachment and spreading involves
an "activation" of integrins themselves ("inside-out signaling") such that there is increased affinity of the integrin for
its extracellular matrix ligand. This activation promotes cell adhesion
and may be an important step in the morphological changes that cells
undergo when spreading on a solid substrate. Several studies have
demonstrated that cell spreading is induced by PKC activation (15, 18).
Vuori and Ruoslahti (15) reported that PKC activity increases preceding
cell spreading on fibronectin, but not on polylysine, indicating that
PKC-mediated cell spreading depends upon the nature of the substrate
with which the cell is in contact, as would be expected for a specific
ligand/receptor interaction.
In this report, we present evidence of outside-in signaling pathways
that are initiated when muscle cells attach to fibronectin via
Cell Culture--
Cells deficient in Adhesion and Spreading--
For assessment of cell adhesion and
spreading on different substrates, 60-mm dishes were coated with
fibronectin (5 µg/ml; Life Technologies, Inc.), the GRGDNP (RGD)
peptide (10-20 µg/ml; Life Technologies, Inc.), or the
DELPQLVTLPHPNLHGPEILDVPST (EILDV) peptide (20 µg/ml;
Sigma) for 24 h at room temperature. One hour before plating, all
dishes were coated with 1% bovine serum albumin (Sigma). Cells were
trypsinized, treated as indicated, and then plated for 30 min. For
study of peptide inhibition of spreading, the RGD or LDV peptide was
preincubated with the cell in suspension for 20 min and plated on
fibronectin in the presence of the respective peptide for 30 min. The
cultures were assessed and photographed using a 40× phase-contrast
immersion objective on a Zeiss Axioskop microscope.
Immunoprecipitation and Western Blot Analysis--
After
trypsinization, cells were plated on fibronectin or the indicated
peptides for 30 min. For PKC activation, phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (PMA; Alexis Biochemicals Corp., San Diego, CA) was added to
the cells in suspension for 10 min at the indicated concentrations. The
cells were spun, and the medium was changed before plating on
respective substrate-coated dishes for 30 min. For PKC inhibition, bisindolylmaleimide I (Calbiochem-Novabiochem) or light-activated calphostin C (Sigma) was added to the cells in suspension for 20 min
prior to plating. The protein kinase A activator dibutyryl cAMP
(Calbiochem-Novabiochem) was added 20 min prior to plating at 100 µM. After 30 min of plating, attached and unattached
cells were collected, spun, and washed with cold phosphate-buffered saline. The cells from both fractions were pooled and lysed in RIPA
buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl,
0.5% deoxycholate, and 1% Nonidet P-40) containing aprotinin (20 µg/ml), leupeptin (20 µg/ml), phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride (10 µg/ml), sodium orthovanadate (1 mM), sodium pyrophosphate
(10 mM), and sodium fluoride (10 mM). Equal
amounts of protein from precleared extracts were immunoprecipitated using a polyclonal anti-FAK antibody (1:100; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA) for 3 h on ice, followed by incubation with
protein G-agarose for 1 h. Proteins from total extracts or after
immunoprecipitation were electrophoresed by 7.5% SDS-polyacrylamide
gel electrophoresis, and phosphotyrosine-containing proteins were
detected with a monoclonal anti-phosphotyrosine antibody (1:5000;
PY-99, Santa Cruz Biotechnology) followed by a horseradish
peroxidase-coupled anti-mouse secondary antibody (Amersham Pharmacia
Biotech). Blots were also probed (or reprobed after stripping) with the
anti-FAK polyclonal antibodies (1:500) followed by a horseradish
peroxidase-coupled anti-rabbit secondary antibody. Specific antibody
binding was detected by an enhanced chemiluminescence system (Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech). Where indicated, the bands were quantitated using a
Bio-Rad Fluor-S MultiImager.
We have shown previously that As further evidence that Fig. 2A shows the effect of
different concentrations of RGD peptide in solution on the
phosphorylation of FAK when
Integrin-mediated Muscle Cell Spreading
THE ROLE OF PROTEIN KINASE C IN OUTSIDE-IN AND INSIDE-OUT
SIGNALING AND EVIDENCE OF INTEGRIN CROSS-TALK*
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
5 or
7 integrins leads to degenerative disorders of skeletal
muscle, muscular dystrophies. To understand the cell survival signals
that are mediated by integrin engagement with matrix proteins, we
studied the early signaling events initiated by the attachment of
muscle cells to fibronectin, an interaction that is mediated primarily
by
5 integrins. Cells that express
5
integrin rapidly spread on fibronectin, and this process is associated
with the phosphorylation of focal adhesion kinase (FAK). Cells
deficient in
5 integrin failed to spread or promote FAK phosphorylation when plated on fibronectin. For
5-expressing cells, both spreading and FAK
phosphorylation could be blocked by inhibitors of protein kinase C
(PKC), indicating that PKC is necessary for this "outside-in
signaling" mediated by
5 integrin. Surprisingly,
activators of PKC could promote spreading and FAK phosphorylation in
5-deficient muscle cells plated on fibronectin. This
PKC-induced cell spreading appeared to be due to activation of
4 integrins ("inside-out signaling") since it could
be blocked by peptides that specifically inhibit
4
integrin binding to fibronectin. A model of integrin signaling in
muscle cells is presented in which there is a positive feedback loop
involving PKC in both outside-in and inside-out signaling, and the
activation of this cycle is essential for cell spreading and downstream
signaling to promote cell survival. In addition, the data indicate a
cross-talk that occurs between integrins in which the outside-in
signaling via one integrin can promote the activation of another
integrin via inside-out signaling.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
and
subunits. Such interactions are important in the regulation of cell proliferation and
differentiation (1). Matrix proteins also function to promote survival
of many cell types via integrins, as disruption of the binding of
integrins to specific components of the extracellular matrix can lead
to cell death (2, 3). The importance of integrin signaling in the
survival of muscle cells is demonstrated by the recent reports of
muscular degenerative disorders in mice with specific integrin
deficiencies (4, 5). Mayer et al. (4) showed that mice that
are homozygous null for the gene encoding
7 integrin
(which is a receptor for laminin) develop normally, but begin to show
signs of muscle cell death by several weeks after birth. The
degenerative process continues throughout life such that by 100 days of
age, over half of all myofibers in limb muscle show signs of previous
cell death and subsequent regeneration. Similarly, Taverna et
al. (5) demonstrated that mice with a deficiency of
5 integrin (which is a receptor for fibronectin) develop
a degenerative disorder of muscle as well. Muscle cells deficient in
5 integrin have impaired survival both in
vivo and in vitro (5). These reports together indicate
that expression of both
5 and
7 integrins
is necessary for long-term integrity of myofibers.
5 integrins (which are primarily, if not exclusively,
5
1 heterodimers). As in other cells, FAK
phosphorylation appears to be an early and critical event in
integrin-mediated signaling that leads to cell spreading and cell
survival. We found that PKC activation is necessary for cell spreading
on fibronectin. Surprisingly, we also found that PKC activation is
sufficient to induce cell spreading on fibronectin even in the absence
of
5 integrins. This appears to be due to inside-out
signaling and activation of
4 integrins, which can then
mediate cell attachment and spreading and FAK phosphorylation. These
results provide evidence of the involvement of PKC in both outside-in
and inside-out integrin signaling in a positive feedback process and of
cross-talk between integrins. A model of integrin signaling pathways
involved in muscle cell spreading and survival is presented.
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
5 integrins
were derived from limb muscles of neonatal mice that were chimeric for
5 integrin expression, as described (5). The muscles
were cultured to isolate pure populations of myoblasts, and
5-deficient cells were selected by maintaining the cells
in G418 for at least 2 weeks (5). Cells expressing
5
integrin were generated by retrovirus-mediated transfer of a human
5 cDNA into
5-deficient cells; as
controls,
5-deficient cells were infected with a control
retrovirus (5). For growth, all cells were plated on dishes coated with
5 µg/ml laminin (Life Technologies, Inc.) and maintained in growth
medium consisting of Ham's F-10 medium (BioWhittaker, Walkersville,
MD) supplemented with 20% fetal bovine serum (Sigma).
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
5-deficient cells
survive poorly and undergo apoptotic cell death when plated on
fibronectin as the sole substrate (5). The poor survival of
5-deficient cells is reflected by the absence of
spreading on fibronectin, whereas cells that express
5
integrin attach and spread readily on fibronectin (Fig.
1A). In many cell types, the
process of attachment and spreading is coincident with the formation of
focal adhesions and the phosphorylation of FAK as well as other
proteins that localize to focal adhesions (8, 9). Indeed,
5-expressing cells demonstrate robust FAK
phosphorylation when plated on fibronectin (Fig. 1B).
Consistent with their inability to attach and spread,
5-deficient cells do not manifest any FAK
phosphorylation on fibronectin (Fig. 1B). However, the
machinery to attach, spread, and form focal adhesions is clearly
present in
5-deficient cells as evidenced by both cell
spreading (Fig. 1A) and robust FAK phosphorylation (Fig.
1B) when plated on laminin. Thus, the morphological and biochemical abnormalities of
5-deficient cells plated on
fibronectin are not the result of a more generalized cellular
defect.

View larger version (51K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
5 integrin mediates
binding to fibronectin and FAK phosphorylation in muscle cells.
A, cells either expressing
5 integrins
(
5(+)) or deficient in
5 integrins
(
5
/
) were plated on fibronectin- or
laminin-coated dishes. Cells were photographed 30 min after plating.
Cells deficient in
5 integrins failed to adhere and
spread specifically on fibronectin. B,
5-expressing and
5-deficient myoblasts
were trypsinized and plated on fibronectin- or laminin-coated dishes.
After 30 min, cells were harvested in RIPA buffer, and 100 µg of
protein from each dish were separated by gel electrophoresis.
Phosphorylation of FAK was determined by immunoblot analysis using an
anti-phosphotyrosine antibody. No FAK phosphorylation was detected in
5-deficient cells plated on fibronectin. Reprobing of
the blots with an anti-FAK antibody (lower panel) confirmed
that an equal amount of FAK protein was present in each lane. The
experiments were carried out three to five times, and
representative results are shown in A and
B.
5
1 integrin is
the primary fibronectin receptor in normal muscle cells that mediates
cell spreading and focal adhesion formation, we inhibited the binding
of
5 integrins to fibronectin. The RGD peptide
represents the region of the fibronectin protein to which
5 integrins bind (19, 20). Of the other known
fibronectin-binding integrins, only
4
1
has been shown to be present in muscle (21); and
4
1 binds to fibronectin via a different
peptide domain, the EILDV domain (22). Thus, we used soluble RGD
peptide to inhibit specifically the interaction of
5
1 with fibronectin. In solution, the RGD
peptide acts as an inhibitor of binding even though the peptide can
itself serve as an effective binding site for
5
1 integrin when immobilized on a solid
surface (23, 24).
5-expressing cells were
plated on fibronectin. There was a dose-dependent
inhibition of FAK phosphorylation by the RGD peptide, reaching 50%
inhibition between 100 and 200 µM. The RGD effect was
also reflected by an inhibition of cell attachment and spreading (data
not shown). Clearly, the interaction of muscle cells with fibronectin
requires an integrin that interacts with fibronectin via the RGD
domain. This is further supported by the data presented in Fig.
2B. Here, the phosphorylation of FAK is compared when
wild-type cells were plated on either fibronectin or immobilized RGD
peptide. Myoblasts plated on the RGD peptide revealed the same extent
of FAK phosphorylation as cells plated on fibronectin. Immobilized RGD
peptide promoted the attachment and spreading of muscle cells as
effectively as did fibronectin, consistent with the results of FAK
phosphorylation. These data using the RGD peptide either as an
inhibitor of fibronectin binding (when in solution) or as a ligand for
5 integrin (when immobilized), together with the data
with
5-deficient cells (Fig. 1), strongly suggest that
5
1 integrin is the primary fibronectin receptor in myoblasts. Any other fibronectin receptors present on the
cell surface are inadequate under such conditions to promote effectively the attachment, spreading, and formation of focal adhesions
on fibronectin.

View larger version (35K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
5
1
integrin is the major fibronectin receptor in muscle.
A, soluble RGD peptide inhibits the
5/fibronectin interaction. Muscle cells expressing
5 integrins were preincubated with increasing
concentrations of RGD peptide (as shown at the top of each lane) before
and during plating on fibronectin. Thirty minutes after plating, the
cells were collected and harvested in RIPA buffer, and the extent of
FAK phosphorylation was determined by immunoblot analysis. Soluble RGD
peptide inhibited the adhesion of the cells to the substrate in a
dose-dependent manner, and this is reflected by the
inhibition of FAK phosphorylation as shown here. Equal expression of
FAK in each lane was confirmed by reprobing the blot with an anti-FAK
antibody (data not shown). FAK phosphorylation was quantitated to
calculate the percentage of inhibition at the different RGD doses (as
shown at the bottom of each lane). B, bound RGD peptide acts
as an active substrate for
5 binding and signaling.
Whereas soluble RGD peptide acted as an inhibitor of the interaction
between
5 integrin and fibronectin (FN)
(A), the peptide was highly effective as a substrate for the
integrin when coated onto tissue culture dishes (10 µg/ml). Cells
expressing
5 integrins adhered as well to solid-phase
RGD peptide as they did to fibronectin, and phosphorylation of FAK was
indistinguishable between the two substrates as shown in this
immunoblot analysis using an anti-phosphotyrosine antibody. FAK
phosphorylation was analyzed 30 min after plating the cells in each
case. Similar results were obtained in three separate experiments, and
a representative result is shown here.
Among the various signaling cascades that have been implicated in cell
spreading and focal adhesion formation on fibronectin, PKC activation
has been reported to be essential in several cell types (13, 15). To
test whether the PKC pathway was necessary for spreading and FAK
phosphorylation of myoblasts plated on fibronectin, we used two
specific PKC inhibitors, calphostin C and bisindolylmaleimide I. Both
inhibitors were effective in blocking cell spreading and FAK
phosphorylation when
5-expressing myoblasts were plated
on fibronectin. However, calphostin C, used in this experiment, was found to be more potent in blocking cell spreading. Fig.
3A shows that the attachment
and spreading of myoblasts was inhibited in the presence of calphostin
C at doses that have been shown to block PKC activity (15). We observed
complete cell spreading inhibition at 1 µM. In addition,
calphostin C produced a dose-dependent inhibition of FAK
phosphorylation in myoblasts plated on fibronectin without causing any
change in the levels of FAK protein (Fig. 3B). Clearly, PKC
activation is necessary for integrin-mediated cell spreading in muscle
cells.
|
Because PKC activity appears to be critical to
5
integrin-mediated muscle cell spreading and because PKC activation has
been shown to promote and/or enhance cell spreading of different cell types (15, 18), we investigated the effect of PKC activation on both
5-expressing and
5-deficient myoblasts on
fibronectin. As in other cells, activation of PKC with PMA led to more
rapid spreading and FAK phosphorylation of
5-expressing
cells (data not shown). To our surprise, PKC activation also led to
rapid spreading (Fig. 4A) and
phosphorylation of FAK (Fig. 4B) in
5-deficient cells. This was clearly dependent on a
fibronectin receptor because in dishes coated with only bovine serum
albumin, PMA was ineffective in promoting spreading or FAK
phosphorylation (Figs. 4, A and B). This was
intriguing because whatever other fibronectin receptors might be
present on
5-deficient cells, they were clearly
inadequate to promote attachment and spreading without concurrent PKC
activation (Figs. 1 and 2). The results of Fig. 4 (A and
B) indicate that PKC activation might not only mediate
downstream events of
5-mediated outside-in signaling
(Fig. 3), but might also be acting in inside-out signaling to promote
cell attachment to fibronectin through another fibronectin receptor.
This action was specific for PKC activation because it was blocked by
the PKC inhibitor bisindolylmaleimide I (Fig. 4C).
Furthermore, activation of protein kinase A with dibutyryl cAMP had no
effect (Fig. 4C), showing that it was not a nonspecific
consequence of serine/threonine kinase activation. The puzzle was which
fibronectin-binding protein might be mediating this interaction.
|
As mentioned previously, of the known fibronectin-binding integrins,
the only one that has been shown to be expressed by muscle cells other
than
5
1 is
4
1, albeit in low abundance (21). We
hypothesized that PMA might increase the affinity of
4
integrins on the cell surface for fibronectin via an inside-out
signaling pathway. Thus, when sufficiently activated,
4
integrins would then be competent to mediate cell spreading and focal
adhesion formation on fibronectin. To test whether
PKC-dependent spreading of
5-deficient cells
on fibronectin was indeed mediated by
4 integrins, we
blocked the binding of
4 integrins to fibronectin with a
specific peptide inhibitor. The cells were treated in solution with the
EILDV peptide, which, as mentioned above, represents the
4 integrin-binding domain on fibronectin. In the
presence of the EILDV peptide, PMA treatment was ineffective in
promoting spreading or FAK phosphorylation of
5-deficient cells on fibronectin (Fig.
5A).
|
As an additional test of the hypothesis that, upon PKC activation, the
effective adhesion and spreading of
5-deficient cells on
fibronectin are mediated by
4 integrin activation, we
tested untreated and PMA-treated
5-deficient cells on
different substrates (Fig. 5, B and C). As shown
above, PMA stimulation promoted adhesion and FAK phosphorylation on
fibronectin. Consistent with the idea that this interaction is mediated
by
4 integrins, immobilized EILDV peptide was as
effective as fibronectin in promoting spreading and FAK phosphorylation
(Fig. 5C). Immobilized RGD peptide was ineffective as a
substrate, indicating that other fibronectin-binding integrins that
interact with the RGD domain of fibronectin (e.g.
3
1 or
v
6 (1)) either
were not present or were not activated upon PMA stimulation. Thus,
whereas we cannot conclude that
4 integrin is the only
integrin activated by increased PKC activity in
5-deficient myoblasts, it certainly appears that
4 is the critical integrin that promotes spreading on
fibronectin under these conditions.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Using both pharmacological and genetic approaches, we have
demonstrated that
5 integrins mediate muscle cell
spreading via PKC activation (outside-in signaling) and that PKC
activation promotes muscle cell spreading on fibronectin by enhancing
the binding of either
5 or
4 integrins
(inside-out signaling). Below we present a model of integrin signaling
that involves these distinct but interacting pathways (Fig.
6).
|
Upon integrin engagement with extracellular matrix proteins, there is a
clustering of the integrins at focal adhesions (25). This aggregation
leads in turn to the phosphorylation of various proteins, including
FAK, talin, vinculin, and paxillin, and also to their localization to
focal adhesions (10, 23, 25). We have demonstrated that activation of
PKC is necessary for the interaction of
5 integrin with
fibronectin to promote FAK phosphorylation and spreading of muscle
cells. This adds to the growing body of evidence of the importance of
PKC in outside-in integrin signaling. Woods and Couchman (13) showed
that kinase inhibitors prevent focal adhesion formation in fibroblasts
plated on fibronectin. They also found that activation of PKC leads to
the localization of proteins such as talin and vinculin to focal
adhesions. Paxillin may in fact be a substrate for PKC, as it is
phosphorylated on serine residues in a PKC-dependent manner
(26, 27). Using specific PKC inhibitors, Haimovich et al.
(14) showed that PKC plays a crucial role in integrin signaling and FAK
phosphorylation in platelets. Haller et al. (18) showed that
PKC
and PKC
translocate to nuclear structures and focal adhesions
upon the binding of vascular smooth muscle cells to fibronectin. These
results together suggest that PKC is an essential component in the
proximal signaling pathway triggered by the binding of integrins to
their ligands in certain cell types.
Inside-out signaling is considered to be the main mechanism by which
cells regulate integrin function (1, 6, 7, 28, 29). Integrins in an
inactive state have a low affinity for their ligands; activation of
integrins in response to specific physiological stimuli is associated
with, or even defined as, an increased affinity for their ligands (29).
Our studies with genetically deficient cells allow us to study
inside-out and outside-in integrin signaling independently of one
another and suggest that PKC activation can mediate inside-out
signaling in muscle cells. Whereas
5-deficient cells
failed to spread on fibronectin, treatment of the cells with PMA to
activate PKC led to rapid and robust spreading and FAK phosphorylation.
These events appear to have been mediated by the activation of
4 integrins since they were blocked by soluble EILDV
peptide and promoted by immobilized EILDV peptide in place of
fibronectin. The subsequent phosphorylation of FAK observed under these
conditions would thus be due to the initiation of outside-in signaling
via activated
4/fibronectin interactions. Several
reports previously demonstrated enhancement of spreading on
fibronectin by activation of PKC (15, 30, 31). Vuori and
Ruoslahti (15) showed that activation of PKC activity is
necessary for the adhesion, spreading, and migration of cells. Although
T cells have integrins that bind fibronectin and laminin, it was shown
that they will attach to these matrix molecules only upon PKC
activation (32).
Positive Feedback Loop and Integrin Cross-talk-- These data reveal two important characteristics of integrin signaling. First, because PKC activation is both necessary for outside-in signaling and sufficient to promote inside-out signaling, a positive feedback loop is created. Indeed, the gradual morphological changes associated with cell spreading suggest a multistep process involving first the detection of the extracellular environment by the cell and then a progressive change of the cell membrane to interact with that environment. This is demonstrated most clearly by the fact that the changes do not occur when cells are plated in the absence of immobilized matrix proteins to which integrins can bind (10, 15, 16). The presence of such proteins initiates a signaling cascade inside the cells, and the cells in turn both alter their membrane properties to interact with the ligands and organize the ligands into a complex matrix. A positive feedback loop is intrinsic to such a process.
The other interesting system characteristic that is highlighted by our
data is cross-talk between integrins. In our cells, the consequences of
outside-in signaling via
5 integrins lead to activation
of
4 integrins. Lichtner et al. (33) provided evidence of negative cooperativity between integrins with regard to
affinity for extracellular matrix proteins. Kolanus and Seed (34)
pointed out that multiple signaling pathways, in particular PKC, not
only converge from different integrins, but also modulate integrin
affinity, thus supporting direct cross-talk between different integrins
in the cell.
Model of Integrin Signaling-- The model suggested by these data is a positive feedback loop of integrin engagement, signaling, and activation. In this model (Fig. 6), integrins exist in a dynamic equilibrium between an active state and an inactive state. When there is a sufficient number of active integrins for effective engagement with their extracellular ligands, outside-in signaling is initiated, leading to an increase in PKC activity, a further increase in integrin activation and affinity (inside-out signaling), and further outside-in signaling. This positive feedback loop promotes biochemical changes, including FAK phosphorylation and focal adhesion formation, which in turn lead to a downstream cascade of biochemical changes and changes in gene expression. The property of integrin cross-talk is demonstrated by the fact that initiation of the signaling pathway of one integrin can lead directly to the activation of another integrin. Clearly, these pathways would depend upon the specific cell type since different cells have different patterns of integrin expression and may have different balances between active and inactive states of those integrins. The use of genetically deficient cells in combination with specific integrin agonists and antagonists as we have used here will further reveal the details of these complex interactions.
Integrin Signaling and Muscle Cell Survival--
We previously
demonstrated that a deficiency of
5 integrin leads to
apoptotic death of muscle cells (5). Vachon et al. (35)
showed that blockage of the binding of
1 integrins leads to apoptotic death of myotubes in culture. Other investigators have
likewise demonstrated apoptosis of cells in which the interactions between integrins and matrix proteins have been disrupted (2, 3, 12,
36, 37). These data suggest that integrin signaling induces cell
survival pathways, whereas a relative deficiency of those signals may
initiate cell death pathways.
The role of integrin signaling in muscle cell survival is most clearly
demonstrated by the muscle degenerative disorders that develop in mice
deficient in either
5 or
7 integrins (4, 5). A muscular degenerative disorder in humans was recently shown to be
due to a mutation in the
7 integrin gene (38). Clearly,
muscle cells possess multiple integrins with different matrix binding
capacities, and those integrins function to maintain the integrity of
differentiated muscle fibers. It is thus easy to understand why a
deficiency of a single integrin does not prevent muscle growth,
differentiation, and maturation. However, over time, a deficiency of
specific integrins can result in a gradual, progressive death of muscle
cells (4, 5), as might be expected when there is a deficiency of one
survival pathway amid many. The phenotype is not one of arrested
development or immediate and widespread death. Rather, the phenotype
represents a tilt in the balance between survival and death reflected
in the gradual and stochastic loss of cells over time. Such a shift in
balance in cellular signaling and gradual muscle cell loss may also be a model for the mechanism of muscle cell death in muscular dystrophies due to genetic defects in other membrane-associated proteins such merosin, dystrophin, and the sarcoglycans (39). Like the multicomponent complex of proteins associated with integrins, these proteins form a
stable complex at the membrane with links to the extracellular matrix
and cytoskeletal structures. Less is known about the possible cell
survival signals mediated by these proteins, although the muscle-specific form of laminin, merosin, has been shown to promote muscle cell survival (40), and a reduction in
-dystroglycan leads to
muscle cell apoptosis (41). Thus, muscular dystrophies due to
abnormalities of integrin pathways may serve as a useful paradigm for
similar investigations of pathogenetic mechanisms in other muscular dystrophies.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT |
|---|
We thank Dr. Daria Mochly-Rosen for critical reading of the manuscript.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported in part by National Institutes of Health Grant RO1 NS-36409 (to T. A. R.).The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Recipient of a Frederick E. Terman fellowship. To whom
correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University Medical Center, Room A-343, Stanford, CA
94305-5235. Tel.: 650-858-3976; Fax: 650-858-3935; E-mail: rando@stanford.edu.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are: FAK, focal adhesion kinase; PKC, protein kinase C; PMA, phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate; RIPA, radioimmune precipitation assay.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Hynes, R. O. (1992) Cell 69, 11-25[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 2. | Bates, R. C., Lincz, L. F., and Burns, G. F. (1995) Cancer Metastasis Rev. 14, 191-203[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 3. |
Zhang, Z.,
Vuori, K.,
Reed, J. C.,
and Ruoslahti, E.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
6161-6165 |
| 4. | Mayer, U., Saher, G., Faessler, R., Bornemann, A., Echtermeyer, F., von der Mark, H., Miosge, N., Poeschi, E., and von der Mark, K. (1997) Nat. Genet. 17, 318-323[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 5. |
Taverna, D.,
Disatnik, M.-H.,
Rayburn, H.,
Bronson, R. T.,
Yang, J.,
Rando, T. A.,
and Hynes, R. O.
(1998)
J. Cell Biol.
143,
849-859 |
| 6. |
Clark, E. A.,
and Brugge, J. S.
(1995)
Science
268,
233-239 |
| 7. |
Juliano, R. L.,
and Haskill, S.
(1993)
J. Cell Biol.
120,
577-585 |
| 8. |
Schaller, M. D.,
Borgman, C. A.,
Cobb, B. S.,
Vines, R. R.,
Rynolds, A. B.,
and Parsons, J. T.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
5192-5196 |
| 9. |
Hanks, S. K.,
Calalb, M. B.,
Harper, M. C.,
and Patel, S. K.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
8487-8491 |
| 10. |
Kornberg, L.,
Earp, H. S.,
Parsons, J. T.,
Schaller, M.,
and Juliano, R. L.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
23439-23442 |
| 11. | Rozengurt, E., and Rodríguez-Fernández, J. L. (1997) Essays Biochem. 32, 73-86[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 12. |
Ilic, D.,
Almeida, E. A. C.,
Schlaepfer, D. D.,
Dazin, P.,
Aizawa, S.,
and Damsky, C. H.
(1998)
J. Cell Biol.
143,
147-160 |
| 13. |
Woods, A.,
and Couchman, J. R.
(1992)
J. Cell Sci.
101,
277-290 |
| 14. | Haimovich, B., Kaneshiki, N., and Ji, P. (1996) Blood 1, 152-161 |
| 15. |
Vuori, K.,
and Ruoslahti, E.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
21459-21462 |
| 16. |
Chen, Q.,
Kinch, M. S.,
Lin, T. H.,
Burridge, K.,
and Juliano, R. L.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
26602-26605 |
| 17. |
Short, S. M.,
Talbott, G. A.,
and Juliano, R. L.
(1998)
Mol. Biol. Cell
9,
1969-1980 |
| 18. |
Haller, H.,
Lindschau, C.,
Maash, C.,
Olthoff, H.,
Kurscheid, D.,
and Luft, F. C.
(1998)
Circ. Res.
82,
157-165 |
| 19. | Pierschbacher, M. D., and Ruoslahti, E. (1984) Nature 309, 30-33[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 20. |
Yamada, K. M.,
and Kennedy, D. W.
(1984)
J. Cell Biol.
99,
29-36 |
| 21. | Rosen, G. D., Sanes, J. R., LaChance, R., Cunnigham, J. M., Roman, J., and Dean, D. C. (1992) Cell 69, 1107-1119[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 22. | Guan, J. L., and Hynes, R. O. (1990) Cell 60, 53-61[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 23. |
Burridge, K.,
Turner, C. E.,
and Romer, L. H.
(1992)
J. Cell Biol.
119,
893-903 |
| 24. |
Hocking, D. C.,
Sottile, J.,
and McKeown-Longo, P. J.
(1998)
J. Cell Biol.
141,
241-253 |
| 25. | Burridge, K., and Chrzanowska-Wodnicka, M. (1996) Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 12, 463-518[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 26. |
De Nichilo, M. O.,
and Yamada, K. M.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
11016-11022 |
| 27. |
Emkey, R.,
and Kahn, C. R.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
31172-31181 |
| 28. | Rosales, C., O'Brien, V., Kornberg, L., and Juliano, R. L. (1995) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1242, 77-98[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 29. | Faull, R. J., and Ginsberg, M. H. (1996) J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 7, 1091-1097[Abstract] |
| 30. | Brown, P. J. (1988) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 155, 603-607[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 31. |
Danilov, Y. N.,
and Juliano, R. L.
(1989)
J. Cell Biol.
108,
1925-1933 |
| 32. | Shimizu, Y., Van Seventer, G. A., Horgan, K. J., and Shaw, S. (1990) Nature 345, 250-253[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 33. | Lichtner, R. B., Howlett, A. R., Lerch, M., Xuan, J. A., Brink, J., Langton-Webster, B., and Schneider, M. R. (1998) Exp. Cell Res. 240, 368-376[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 34. | Kolanus, W., and Seed, B. (1997) Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 9, 725-731[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 35. | Vachon, P. H., Xu, H., Liu, L., Loechel, F., Hayashi, Y., Arahata, K., Reed, J. C., Wewer, U. M., and Engvall, E. (1997) J. Clin. Invest. 100, 1870-1881[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 36. | Meredith, J. E., Fazeli, B., and Schwartz, M. A. (1993) Mol. Biol. Cell 4, 953-961[Abstract] |
| 37. |
Frisch, S. M.,
and Francis, H.
(1994)
J. Cell Biol.
124,
619-626 |
| 38. | Hayashi, Y. K., Chou, F. L., Engvall, E., Ogawa, M., Matsuda, C., Hirabayashi, S., Yokochi, K., Ziober, B. L., Kramer, R. H., Kaufman, S. J., Ozawa, E., Gotto, Y., Nonaka, I., Tsukahara, T., Wang, J. Z., Hoffman, E. P., and Arahata, K. (1998) Nat. Genet. 19, 94-97[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 39. | Matsumura, K., and Campbell, K. (1994) Muscle Nerve 17, 2-15[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 40. |
Vachon, P. H.,
Loechel, F.,
Xu, H.,
Wewer, U. M.,
and Engvall, E.
(1996)
J. Cell Biol.
134,
1483-1497 |
| 41. |
Montanaro, F.,
Lindenbaum, L.,
and Carbonetto, S.
(1999)
J. Cell Biol.
145,
1325-1340 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
R. Pasvolsky, V. Grabovsky, C. Giagulli, Z. Shulman, R. Shamri, S. W. Feigelson, C. Laudanna, and R. Alon RhoA Is Involved in LFA-1 Extension Triggered by CXCL12 but Not in a Novel Outside-In LFA-1 Activation Facilitated by CXCL9 J. Immunol., March 1, 2008; 180(5): 2815 - 2823. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Chigaev, A. Waller, G. J. Zwartz, T. Buranda, and L. A. Sklar Regulation of Cell Adhesion by Affinity and Conformational Unbending of {alpha}4beta1 Integrin J. Immunol., June 1, 2007; 178(11): 6828 - 6839. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. R. Barton Impact of sarcoglycan complex on mechanical signal transduction in murine skeletal muscle Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, February 1, 2006; 290(2): C411 - C419. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. J. Engler, M. A. Griffin, S. Sen, C. G. Bonnemann, H. L. Sweeney, and D. E. Discher Myotubes differentiate optimally on substrates with tissue-like stiffness: pathological implications for soft or stiff microenvironments J. Cell Biol., September 13, 2004; 166(6): 877 - 887. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M.-H. Disatnik, S. C. Boutet, W. Pacio, A. Y. Chan, L. B. Ross, C. H. Lee, and T. A. Rando The bi-directional translocation of MARCKS between membrane and cytosol regulates integrin-mediated muscle cell spreading J. Cell Sci., September 1, 2004; 117(19): 4469 - 4479. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
|