Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M001857200 on May 5, 2000
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 28, 21435-21443, July 14, 2000
Platelet-Endothelial Cell Adhesion Molecule-1 (CD31), a
Scaffolding Molecule for Selected Catenin Family Members Whose
Binding Is Mediated by Different Tyrosine and Serine/Threonine
Phosphorylation*
Neta
Ilan
,
Larry
Cheung,
Emese
Pinter, and
Joseph A.
Madri§
From the Department of Pathology, Yale University School of
Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut 06520
Received for publication, March 6, 2000, and in revised form, April 13, 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
Platelet-endothelial cell adhesion molecule
(PECAM)-1 is a 130-kDa glycoprotein commonly used as an
endothelium-specific marker. Evidence to date suggests that PECAM-1 is
more than just an endothelial cell marker but is intimately involved in
signal transduction pathways. This is mediated in part by
phosphorylation of specific tyrosine residues within the ITAM domain of
PECAM-1 and by recruitment of adapter and signaling molecules. Recently
we demonstrated that PECAM-1/
-catenin association functions to
regulate
-catenin localization and, moreover, to modulate
-catenin tyrosine phosphorylation levels. Here we show that: 1) not
only
-catenin, but also
-catenin is associated with PECAM-1
in vitro and in vivo; 2) PKC enzyme directly
phosphorylates purified PECAM-1; 3) PKC-derived PECAM-1 serine/threonine phosphorylation inversely correlates with
-catenin association; 4) PECAM-1 recruits
-catenin to cell-cell junctions in
transfected SW480 cells; and 5)
-catenin may recruit PECAM-1 into an
insoluble cytoskeletal fraction. These data further support the
concept that PECAM-1 functions as a binder and modulator of catenins and provides a molecular mechanism for previously
reported PECAM-1/cytoskeleton interactions.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Platelet-endothelial cell adhesion molecule (PECAM-1,
CD31)1 is a 130-kDa
glycoprotein belonging to the Ig superfamily of cell adhesion
molecules. PECAM-1 expression is restricted to cells of the vascular
system platelets, monocytes, neutrophils, selected T cells, and
endothelial cells (1). In the latter, PECAM-1 is localized to cell-cell
borders of confluent monolayers and, in addition, to lumen-facing areas
of blood vessels or tube-like endothelial structures formed in
vitro (2). PECAM-1 becomes diffusely distributed on the cell
surface of sparse cell cultures or at the leading fronts of migrating
cells (3). PECAM-1 has been shown to be a key player in the adhesion
cascade leading to extravasation of leukocytes during inflammation.
Pretreatment of monocytes or neutrophils, as well as endothelial cells,
with anti-PECAM-1 antibodies effectively inhibited transmigration
in vitro (4) and in vivo (5), indicating that
PECAM-1 molecules on both the endothelial cells and the leukocytes
contribute to the transmigration process. This was further supported by
a genetic approach in PECAM-1 knockout mice, in which leukocytes are
transiently arrested between the vascular endothelium and the basement
membrane of inflammatory sites (6). In addition, PECAM-1 knockout mice have been noted to suffer from prolonged bleeding times, which is at
least in part due to disrupted endothelial-platelet interactions (53),
supporting the role of PECAM-1 as mediator of cell adhesion/activation. PECAM-1 has been shown to be more than just a passive player in adhesive interactions and indeed is actively involved in signal transduction pathways. PECAM-1 was demonstrated to undergo
phosphorylation on tyrosine residues following mechanical (7) or
biochemical (8-10) stimulation. Specifically, an immunoreceptor
tyrosine-based activation motif (ITAM) domain was recently identified
in the cytoplasmic tail of PECAM-1 (11). Phosphorylation of specific tyrosine residues within the ITAM domain were found to mediate selective recruitment of adapter and signaling molecules. These include
SH-2-containing protein-tyrosine phosphatase (SHP)-1 (12) and -2 (9),
SHIP, phospholipase C-
(13), and phosphoinositide 3-kinase (14).
Another set of proteins found to associate with PECAM-1 is represented
by
-catenin (15). Recently, we reported that PECAM-1/
-catenin
association is regulated by
-catenin tyrosine phosphorylation (2).
Moreover, PECAM-1 overexpression resulted in recruitment of
-catenin
into cell-cell junctions and a decrease in
-catenin tyrosine
phosphorylation levels, suggesting that PECAM-1 plays active roles as a
-catenin modulator (2). Here we present evidence that not only
-
but also
-catenin associates with PECAM-1. Interestingly, however,
serine/threonine, rather than tyrosine, phosphorylation was found to be
the major regulatory mechanism responsible for PECAM-1/
-catenin
association. We demonstrate a shift in
-catenin localization from
nuclear to cell-cell junctions upon stable PECAM-1 expression in SW480
colon carcinoma cells and, moreover, suggest that
-catenin mediates
recruitment of PECAM-1 into an insoluble, cytoskeletal fraction. These
results confirm and further expand the concept of PECAM-1 being a
binder and modulator of catenins.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Cells and Cell Cultures--
Human umbilical vein endothelial
cells (HUVEC) were obtained from Jordan Pober (Yale Medical School) and
were cultured in gelatin-coated flasks as described (2, 16).
Hemangioendothelioma (EOMA) cells were obtained from Robert Auerbach
(University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI) and were grown in complete
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented with 10% fetal
bovine serum and antibiotics (17). MCF7 human breast adenocarcinoma
cells were obtained from the American Type Culture Collection (HTB-22). The cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium
supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum and 10 µg/ml insulin
(bovine; Sigma) and transiently transfected as described (2). SW480
human colon carcinoma cells stably expressing PECAM-1 cDNA were
generated as described (2) and were grown in Dulbecco's modified
Eagle's medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum. Embedding
and culturing of HUVEC in three-dimensional type-I collagen gels was performed as described (16).
For cell migration assays, HUVEC were grown to confluency in 100-mm
dishes. A 15-well minigel comb was used as a rake in a circular pattern
to scrape cells from the dish leaving concentric rings of cells
separated by intermittent cell-free regions. Cells were then allowed to
migrate for 2 days before analyzed.
Murine Conceptuses--
Harvesting and in vitro
culturing of murine conceptuses was performed as described previously
(22, 23). Briefly, conceptuses were collected from timed pregnant mice
(CD1, Charles River, Wilmington, MA) using a dissecting microscope.
Yolk sacs and embryos were separated in day 9.5 p.c. specimens.
Groups of 50-60 embryos of day 7.5 p.c. conceptuses and 15 for
day 9.5 p.c. conceptuses were analyzed.
For glucose treatment, embryos were collected at day 7.5 p.c. and
cultured in rat serum and in the absence or presence of 25 mM D-glucose as described (23). After 48 h, the yolk sacs were separated, lysed, and used for biochemical studies.
Cell Lysate Preparation, Immunoprecipitation, and Protein
Blotting--
Cell cultures were pretreated with 1 mM
orthovanadate for 15 min at 37 °C, washed twice with ice-cold
phosphate-buffered saline containing 1 mM orthovanadate and
scraped into lysis buffer (50 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 1% Triton X-100, 1% Nonidet P-40, 0.5%
deoxycholate, 1 mM orthovanadate, 1 mM
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, and a mixture of proteinase inhibitors;
Roche Molecular Biochemicals). Soluble and insoluble cell fractions
were made according to Simcha et al. (49). Total cellular
protein concentration was determined by the BCA assay (Pierce)
according to the manufacturer's instructions. 20 µg of cellular
protein were fractionated on SDS-polyacrylamide gels, and protein
immunoblotting was performed as described (16). For
immunoprecipitation, 100 µg of cellular protein were brought to
volume of 1.0 ml in buffer containing 50 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 0.4 M NaCl, 5 mM EDTA, and 0.5% Nonidet P-40,
preabsorbed with normal rabbit serum followed by protein A/G-Sepharose
(Santa Cruz) precipitation. The cleared supernatant was incubated with
the appropriate antibody for 2 h on ice followed by protein
A/G-Sepharose immunoprecipitation. Beads were washed three times with
the same buffer supplemented with 5% sucrose and once with the same
buffer without sucrose and reduced salt concentration (50 mM NaCl). Sample buffer was then added, and after boiling,
samples were subjected to gel electrophoresis and immunodetection as described.
Antibodies and Reagents--
Rabbit polyclonal antibodies to
human (BooBoo), and mouse (Sleet) PECAM-1 have been described
previously (8, 22, 23). Polyclonal antibodies to desmoplakin 1 and 2 were purchased from Serotec (Oxford, UK). Anti-phosphotyrosine (PY99),
anti-PECAM-1 (C-20), anti-phosphorylated MAPK (E-4), and anti-Erk 2 (C14) antibodies were purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology.
Polyclonal antibodies to PKC and phospho PKC (pan) were purchased from
Upstate Biotechnology, Inc. (Lake Placid, NY). Monoclonal antibodies to

catenin and SHP-2 (also known as PTP1D) were purchased from
Transduction Laboratories (Lexington, KY). Other monoclonal antibodies
included anti-vimentin (clone Vim 3B4, Dako), anti-
-catenin (clone
15F11, Sigma) used for immunoblotting and anti-
-catenin (clone
PG-11E4, Zymed Laboratories Inc.) used for immunostaining.
PP1, bisindolylmaleimide GF 109203x, staurosporine, and
1,2-dioctanoyl-sn-glycerol, a diacylglycerol analog
(Calbiochem, La Jolla, CA), were dissolved in Me2SO to a
concentration of 5 mM and used at final concentrations of
1, 1, 0.1, and 5 µM, respectively. Matching volumes of
Me2SO were added to cell cultures as controls.
PECAM-1 Gene Constructs and Transfection--
Wild type or Tyr
to Phe mutations at Tyr663, Tyr686, and
Tyr701 of the full-length (8) or truncated (lacking the
ectodomain (41)) human PECAM-1 cDNA in the expression vector
pcDNA3 were used. For stable expression of PECAM-1, SW480 and 293 cells were transfected with the FuGENE 6 reagent (Roche Molecular
Biochemicals), and cells were selected with G418 (400 µg/ml) for 4 weeks, expanded, and stained with anti-PECAM-1,
-catenin, and
-catenin antibodies as described (2).
Ex Vivo PECAM-1 Phosphorylation--
10 µl of PECAM-1/GST
fusion protein, comprised of the full cytoplasmic PECAM-1 domain fused
to GST as described (11), were incubated with 1.5 units of Src kinase
(Upstate Biotechnology, Inc.) in kinase buffer (20 mM
Hepes, pH 7.4, 10 mM MgCl2, 10 mM MnCl2, 10% glycerol, and 30 µM ATP) for 20 min at 30 °C.
PECAM-1/GST fusion protein was similarly phosphorylated with purified 1 unit of nPKC
enzyme (Life Technologies, Inc.) with a PKC
phosphorylation kit according to the manufacturer's (Upstate Biotechnology, Inc.) instructions. One-tenth of the reaction was used
for immunoblotting with anti-phosphotyrosine antibodies or for
autoradiography (when using [32P]ATP; Amersham Pharmacia
Biotech), and the rest of the reaction products were used for pull-down experiments.
PECAM-1/GST Fusion Protein Pull-down
Experiments--
PECAM-1/GST fusion protein coupled to
glutathione-agarose beads (10 µl) was added to 1 ml of binding buffer
(50 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl, 5 mM EDTA, 0.5% Nonidet P-40, and 0.1 mg/ml bovine serum
albumin) and incubated on ice for 10 min before the addition of 100 µg of HUVEC lysate. Samples were incubated on ice for additional 30 min, with occasional mixing by inversion, followed by centrifugation.
The supernatant was saved, and 20 µl were run in parallel with the
bead pellets. The pellet beads were washed twice with binding buffer
supplemented with 0.4 M NaCl (final concentration) and once
with binding buffer before the addition of sample buffer, boiling, and
SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis.
Histology and Immunohistochemistry--
HUVEC three-dimensional
cultures were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde in phosphate-buffered
saline overnight, dehydrated in a series of 50-100% ethanol, cleared
in xylene, and embedded in paraffin. 5-µm sections were cut, mounted
onto slides, deparaffinized, rehydrated, and stained.
Immunohistochemical analysis of the standard 5-µm sections was done
as described (2). Briefly, sections were subjected to antigen
retrieval, blocked with 10% normal donkey serum and double-stained
overnight using a goat anti-human PECAM-1 (C-20, Santa Cruz) antibodies
and a monoclonal antibody to vimentin. Sections were then extensively
washed with TBS-Triton X-100 (0.01%) and subjected to secondary,
donkey anti-goat fluorescein isothiocyanate, and donkey anti-mouse
CY3-conjugated antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch, West Grove, PA) for
1 h, washed, and coverslipped.
Cultures of HUVEC or SW480 cells, grown on glass coverslips, were fixed
with 4% paraformaldehyde for 20 min, permeabilized for 1 min with
0.5% Triton X-100, and immunofluorescence stained as described (2).
For migrating cell staining, cells were grown on the coverslip to
confluency and scraped in the middle in a cross-like pattern. Cells
were allowed to migrate for 2 days before staining. All experiments
were repeated at least twice with similar results.
Data Base Search--
The PECAM-1 cytoplasmic domain sequence
was examined for consensus PKC substrate sites using the
ScanProsite-Protein against PROSITE program (ISREC bioinformatics
server, Lausanne, SW).
 |
RESULTS |
-Catenin Co-immunoprecipitates with PECAM-1 and Tyrosine
Phosphorylation Is Not Important for This Interaction--
We had
recently reported that PECAM-1 functions as a reservoir for and a
modulator of tyrosine phosphorylated
-catenin (2). Given the
structural and functional similarities between
-catenin and
-catenin (plakoglobin), we asked whether
-catenin would similarly
associate with PECAM-1 and investigated potential mechanisms that might
be involved in the regulation of such an interaction. Previously, we
found that PECAM-1/
-catenin interactions correlate with
-catenin
tyrosine phosphorylation. As illustrated in Fig. 1,
-catenin association with PECAM-1
was higher in EOMA cells compared with HUVEC, whereas no association
was detected in transfected MCF7 cells (Ref. 2 and Fig. 1A).
Interestingly, in the same cell culture model system,
PECAM-1/
-catenin association showed the exact opposite phenotype,
being highest in HUVEC (Fig. 1A). This would suggest that
not only
-catenin but also
-catenin is a PECAM-1 partner and that
PECAM-1 interaction with the two catenins is differentially regulated.
It has been reported that Arm catenins (p120,
-catenin, and
-catenin) are a major substrate targets for receptor and Src family
kinases (18). Therefore, to further study the potential role of
-catenin tyrosine phosphorylation in its ability to associate with
PECAM-1, HUVEC were treated with PP1, a specific inhibitor of Src
kinase family members (19). Immunoprecipitation (IP) studies revealed
that although
-catenin tyrosine phosphorylation levels were
significantly reduced in PP1- treated HUVEC (Fig. 1B,
top panel), its association with PECAM-1 remain unchanged
(Fig. 1B, third panel). In contrast,
-catenin
association with PECAM-1 was completely abolished after PP1 treatment
(Fig. 1B, fourth panel), supporting the concept that
-catenin tyrosine phosphorylation is the major factor for its
interaction with PECAM-1. Interestingly, low but detectable levels of
desmoplakin were co-IP with PECAM-1 independently of
-catenin
phosphotyrosine state, (Fig. 1B, fifth panel),
suggesting that
-catenin interactions with PECAM-1 may mediate
complex interactions with other structural protein families (see
below).

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Tyrosine phosphorylation-independent
PECAM-1/ -catenin co-immunoprecipitation.
A, breast epithelial MCF7 cells were transiently transfected
with a PECAM-1 cDNA gene construct and transfected
(PECAM) or nontransfected (NT) MCF7, HUVEC, and
EOMA cells were IP for PECAM-1, followed by -catenin (top
panel) and -catenin (bottom panel) immunoblotting.
The same membrane was used after stripping and reblotting.
B, HUVEC were left untreated or were treated with 1 µM PP1 for 30 min. Total cell lysates were IP for
-catenin followed by immunoblotting with anti-phosphotyrosine
antibodies (P-Y, top panel), stripped, and
reblotted for -catenin (second panel). The same lysates
were IP for PECAM-1 followed by -catenin (third panel),
-catenin (fourth panel), and desmoplakin (bottom
panel) immunoblotting. The same membrane was used for the
different antibodies after stripping and reblotting. C,
PECAM-1/GST fusion protein coupled to agarose beads was incubated
without ( ) or with (+) purified Src enzyme, and aliquots (one-tenth
of the reactions) were immunoblotted with anti-phosphotyrosine
antibodies (P-Y, third panel). The membrane was
stripped and reprobed with anti-PECAM-1 antibodies (bottom
panel). HUVEC lysate (100 µg) was incubated with the
phosphorylated or nonphosphorylated PECAM-1/GST fusion protein, and
following centrifugation, beads (P) or the supernatant
(S) samples were immunoblotted for -catenin (top
panel) and -catenin (second panel).
|
|
To further analyze the potential role of PECAM-1 tyrosine
phosphorylation for its interaction with
-catenin, purified
GST-PECAM-1 fusion protein was phosphorylated ex vivo with
Src enzyme (Ref. 11 and Fig. 1C, third panel).
Pull-down experiments of HUVEC lysates were than performed with
phosphorylated or nonphosphorylated GST-PECAM-1 fusion protein. As
shown in Fig. 1C (top panel), PECAM-1 tyrosine
phosphorylation had no effect on
-catenin recruitment, suggesting
that neither
-catenin (Fig. 1B) or PECAM-1 (Fig.
1C) tyrosine phosphorylation is necessary for their
interaction. Interestingly, although
-catenin was mainly present in
the pellet fraction,
-catenin was unable to interact with PECAM-1
and was mainly detected in the supernatant fraction (Fig.
1C, second panel), suggesting that under these
conditions
-catenin but not
-catenin is the major PECAM-1
partner, and in agreement with our previous IP experiments (Fig.
1A).
PECAM-1/
-Catenin Association Is Modulated by PECAM-1
Serine/Threonine Phosphorylation--
Although much of the recent
interest in PECAM-1 function arose from its tyrosine-based ITAM domain
(11), PECAM-1 was initially characterized to be phosphorylated mainly
on serine residues (20). However, the role of serine/threonine
phosphorylation for PECAM-1 function at the cellular or molecular level
has not yet been reported. Incubation of our GST-PECAM-1 fusion protein
with purified PKC enzyme resulted in significant PECAM-1
phosphorylation (Fig. 2A, bottom panel), whereas no 32P incorporation was
observed with GST alone (data not shown). To our knowledge, this is the
first evidence that PKC can directly phosphorylate PECAM-1. Pull-down
experiments with the PKC-derived phosphorylated and nonphosphorylated
GST-PECAM-1 fusion protein and endothelial cell lysates indicated a
significant decrease (more than 6-fold based on densitometric analysis,
Fig. 2B) in the ability of
-catenin to bind PECAM-1 (Fig.
2A, top panel). In agreement with our previous
finding (Fig. 1C),
-catenin was only detected in the
supernatant fractions (Fig. 2A, second panel), suggesting that PKC exclusively modulates
-catenin but not
-catenin interactions with PECAM-1.

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
PECAM-1/ -catenin
association is modulated by PKC-derived PECAM-1 serine/threonine
phosphorylation. A, PECAM-1/GST fusion protein was
incubated without ( ) or with (+) nPKC purified enzyme in the
presence of [32P]ATP, and one-half of the reaction was
analyzed for PECAM-1 phosphorylation by autoradiography (bottom
panel). Pull-down experiments with phosphorylated (cold) or
nonphosphorylated PECAM-1/GST fusion protein were performed with HUVEC
as described in Fig. 1C, followed by immunoblotting for
-catenin (top panel), -catenin (second
panel), and PECAM (third panel). B,
densitometric analysis of PKC-derived PECAM-1 phosphorylation and
PECAM-1/ -catenin co-IP (average of two independent experiments)
indicates a 6-fold decrease following PECAM-1 phosphorylation.
C, HUVEC were left untreated (Con) or treated
with diacylglycerol (DAG, a PKC inducer, 5 µM)
or staurosporine (St, a PKC inhibitor, 0.1 µM)
for 45 min. Total cell lysates were IP for PECAM-1 followed by
immunoblotting for -catenin (top panel), stripped, and
reprobed for PECAM-1 (bottom panel). D,
densitometric analysis of PECAM-1/ -catenin co-IP after
diacylglycerol and staurosporine treatments (an average of two
independent experiments). Note the 3-fold decrease in
PECAM-1/ -catenin association after PKC activation. E,
EOMA cells were left untreated (Con.) or treated with the
PKC inhibitor bisindolylmaleimide GF 109203x (bis., 1 µM) for 60 min. Total cell lysates were IP for PECAM-1
followed by -catenin ( -cat, top
panel), -catenin ( -cat, middle
panel), and SHP-2 (bottom panel) immunoblotting. The
same membrane was used for all antibodies after stripping and
reblotting. Note the reciprocal association of - and -catenin
with PECAM-1 upon PKC inhibition.
|
|
To further evaluate the role of PKC on PECAM-1/
-/
-catenin
interactions in the context of a cell system, we took advantage of the
cell culture model presented in Fig. 1A. High levels of PECAM-1/
-catenin association in HUVEC may be due to low PKC activity in these cells. Indeed, exposure of HUVEC to a physiologic PKC inducer,
diacylglycerol analog, significantly decreased PECAM-1/
-catenin interactions (Fig. 2C), more than 3-fold based on
densitometric analysis (Fig. 2D). Staurosporine, a potent
PKC inhibitor, did not affect PECAM-1/
-catenin interactions (Fig.
2C), further supporting the concept that PKC activity in
HUVEC is low. In contrast, exposure of EOMA cells to
bisindolylmaleimide GF-109203x (bis), a potent and selective PKC
inhibitor (21), resulted in a substantial increase in
PECAM-1/
-catenin association (Fig. 2E, top
panel). Interestingly, the increase in
-catenin binding was
accompanied by a comparable decrease in
-catenin association with
PECAM-1 (Fig. 2E, middle panel). This lends
further support to our pull-down (Figs. 1C and
2A) and IP (Fig. 1A) experiments in which
-catenin had a higher affinity for PECAM-1. In contrast, the
PECAM-1/SHP-2 interaction remained unchanged (Fig. 2E,
third panel), suggesting that although
-catenin and
-catenin may compete for a common binding site/domain, the
SHP-2-binding site is different (tyrosine residues 663/686 in the ITAM
domain) and is not influenced by the catenins binding on PECAM-1. Taken
together, our in vitro model systems support the concept of
an inverse correlation between PECAM-1 serine/threonine phosphorylation
and its ability to associate with
-catenin and, moreover, may
indicate that PECAM-1 is an in vivo PKC substrate.
Differential PECAM-1/
-Catenin Association during Vasculogenesis
of the Murine Conceptus--
Given the ex vivo and in
vitro ability of PECAM-1 to bind
-catenin, we sought an
analogous interaction in vivo. Significant increases in
extraembryonic and embryonic vasculogenesis, with a concomitant
decrease in PECAM-1 tyrosine phosphorylation levels have been
characterized between days 7.5 and 9.5 p.c. of the developing murine conceptus (22). Lysates, made from the whole conceptus at days
7.5 and 8.5 p.c. or yolk sac lysates from day 9.5 p.c. embryos were IP for PECAM-1, followed by
-catenin immunoblotting.
-Catenin was noted to be associated with PECAM-1 at all stages (Fig.
3A, top panel).
However, an increase in PECAM-1/
-catenin association occurred
between days 7.5 and 9.5 p.c., a stage during which there is an
increase in yolk sac blood island formation and simultaneous formation
of embryonic vasculature. Interestingly, immunoblot analysis of the
same lysate samples revealed a marked decrease in phospho PKC
reactivity (Fig. 3A, third panel), whereas PKC
expression levels were similar (Fig. 3A, fourth
panel). As a control, the same membrane was striped and reprobed
with an antibody for the phosphorylated MAPK. No changes in
phosphorylated MAPK levels were detected between days 7.5 and 8.5 p.c. (Fig. 3A, fifth panel), suggesting that the
observed decrease in P-PKC reactivity is specific. Densitometric
analysis of PECAM-1/
-catenin co-IP and P-PKC reactivity during these
stages of murine conceptuses development are summarized in Fig.
3B. These observations further support the ex
vivo/in vitro inverse correlation between PECAM-1 serine/threonine phosphorylation and its ability to bind
-catenin.

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Glucose modulates
PECAM-1/ -catenin association in
vivo. A, murine embryos were harvest at the
indicated days (p.c.), and lysate samples were IP for
PECAM-1, followed by immunoblotting for -catenin
( -cat, top panel) and PECAM-1
(second panel). The same lysate samples were blotted with
anti-phospho pan PKC antibodies (P-PKC, third panel), total
PKC (fourth panel), phosphorylated MAPK (P-MAPK,
fifth panel), and total ERK 2 (bottom panel).
B, densitometric analysis summarizing PECAM-1/ -catenin
co-IP (filled bars) and P-PKC reactivity (empty
bars), shown in A, after normalizing for PECAM-1 IP
(A, second panel) and total PKC (A,
fourth panel). C, embryos were harvest at day
7.5 p.c. and maintained in culture in the absence ( ) or presence
(+) of 25 mM D-glucose. After 2 days, yolk sacs
were harvested and lysed, and samples were IP for PECAM-1, followed by
immunoblotting for -catenin (top panel) and SHP-2
(second panel). The same lysate samples were immunoblotted
with anti-phospho PKC antibodies (bottom panel).
|
|
We have recently reported that hyperglycemia causes yolk sac and
embryonic vasculopathy in cultured murine conceptuses (23). Moreover,
PECAM-1 was found to be hyper-phosphorylated on tyrosine residues in
hyperglycemic day 9.5 p.c. yolk sacs compared with control embryos
(23). Other reports have documented a glucose-induced PKC activity, and
PECAM-1 phosphorylation in cultured endothelial cells (24). To evaluate
the potential glucose effect on PECAM-1/
-catenin interactions,
control, or glucose-treated day 9.5 p.c. yolk sac samples were IP
for PECAM-1 followed by
-catenin immunoblotting (Fig.
3C). A two-fold decrease in PECAM-1/
-catenin association was noted in the glucose-treated samples (Fig. 3C, top
panel). In contrast, a significant increase in PECAM-1/SHP-2
association was detected after glucose exposure (Fig. 3C,
middle panel), in agreement with the glucose-induced
increase in PECAM-1 tyrosine phosphorylation levels previously reported
(23). In addition, glucose treatment induced a 4 fold increase in PKC
phosphorylation, as judged by anti-phospho PKC immunoblotting (Fig.
3C, bottom panel), while PKC expression profile
was similar (not shown). Thus, our ex vivo, in
vitro, and in vivo studies all confirm the ability of
-catenin to be associated with PECAM-1 and point to PECAM-1
serine/threonine phosphorylation, mediated, at least in part, by PKC as
a major regulatory mechanism.
PECAM-1 Recruits
-Catenin to Areas of Cell-Cell Junctions in
Transfected SW480 Cells--
Having demonstrated the
PECAM-1/
-catenin interaction biochemically, we were interested in
the possible function of such an association. We have previously
demonstrated that stable expression of PECAM-1 in colon carcinoma SW480
cells results in recruitment of
-catenin to cell-cell junctions (2).
Immunofluorescent staining of these SW480 cells confirmed similar
findings for
-catenin as well (Fig.
4A). In the Vo cells, areas of
cell-cell interaction were completely devoid of
-catenin, which
seemed to be mainly localized to the nucleus (Fig. 4A,
panel a). In contrast, upon PECAM-1 expression,
-catenin
was found mainly at cell-cell junctions (Fig. 4A, b), co-localizing
with PECAM-1 (Fig. 4A, panel d). Thus, one
possible function of the PECAM-1/
-catenin association is to maintain
-catenin localization to cell-cell junctions and to prevent its
nuclear translocation. It has been recently reported (25, 26) that one
downstream target of the
-catenin·lymphoid enhancer binding factor
(LEF) complex is up-regulation of cyclin D1 expression. Interestingly,
stable PECAM-1 expression in SW480 cells (Fig. 4, A,
panel c, and B, top panel)
significantly attenuated cyclin D1 protein expression (Fig.
4B, fourth panel). In contrast, neither cyclin D3
(Fig. 4B, bottom panel),
-catenin, or
-catenin (Fig. 4B, second and third
panels) expression levels were changed, suggesting that the
decrease in cyclin D1 levels may be specific for inhibition of
catenin-regulated transcription. Therefore, PECAM-1-mediated
recruitment of both
- (2) and
-catenin (Fig. 4A,
panels b and d) to cell-cell junctions decreases
their nuclear accumulation and gene regulation.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Recruitment of
-catenin to cell-cell junctions upon stable PECAM-1
expression in SW480 cells. A, SW480 cells transfected
with Vo (panel a) or PECAM-1 (panels b-d) were
stained for -catenin (panels a and b) or
PECAM-1 (panel c). Co-localization of PECAM-1 with
-catenin is demonstrated in panel d. Scale
bar, 50 µm. B, lysate samples from subconfluent Vo or
PECAM-1-expressing (PEC.) SW480 cells were analyzed by
immunoblotting for the expression of PECAM-1 (top panel),
-catenin ( -cat, second panel),
-catenin ( -cat, third panel),
cyclin D1 (CD1, fourth panel), and cyclin D3 (CD3,
bottom panel).
|
|
PECAM-1/
-Catenin Association, a Possible Link to the
Cytoskeleton--
Platelet activation was reported to induce PECAM-1
serine phosphorylation and PECAM-1 redistribution from the soluble to a cytoskeletal insoluble fraction (20). Fractionation of confluent HUVEC
cultures into soluble and insoluble fractions indicated that most of
the PECAM-1 reactivity is present in the soluble fraction (~70%;
Fig. 5A, third
panel, Con; Ref. 27). In contrast,
-catenin was
mainly detected in the insoluble fraction (Fig. 5A,
top panel), whereas
-catenin (Fig. 5A,
second panel) and
-catenin (data not shown) were equally
distributed. Similarly, most of the PECAM-1-associated
-catenin was
detected in the soluble fraction (~80%, Fig. 5A,
fourth panel). However, significant redistribution of cell
adhesion components were observed when HUVEC were stimulated to
migrate. For example, a significant amount of
-catenin was shifted
to the soluble fraction (Fig. 5A, top panel,
Mig), suggesting less cadherin-actin interactions and hence
decreased cell adhesion, as would be expected under migratory
conditions (28). Interestingly, however, PECAM-1 expression exhibited
the opposite trend and was now equally distributed between soluble and
insoluble fractions (Fig. 5A, third panel).
Moreover, under migration conditions, PECAM-1/
-catenin association
was mainly detected in the insoluble fraction (Fig. 5A,
fourth panel), whereas overall
-catenin distribution between the two fractions did not change (Fig. 5A,
second panel, compare Con with Mig).
Densitometric analysis of PECAM-1/
-catenin association under
confluency or during HUVEC migration is summarized in Fig.
5B. Thus, although the overall amount of PECAM-1-associated
-catenin was not significantly changed, the distribution shifted from a ratio of 80% (soluble) to 20% (insoluble) in confluent cultures to a ratio of 35% (soluble) to 65% (insoluble) during migration.

View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
PECAM-1/ -catenin
association is mainly detected in the insoluble fraction during
endothelial cell migration. A, lysate samples from
soluble (S) and insoluble (I) fractions of
control (Con) or migrating (Mig) HUVECs were
analyzed by immunoblotting for the expression of -catenin
( -cat, top panel) and -catenin
( -cat, second panel). The same
samples were IP for PECAM-1, followed by immunoblotting for PECAM-1
(third panel), stripping, and reprobing for -catenin
( -cat, bottom panel). B,
densitometric analysis (an average of two independent experiments) of
PECAM-1/ -catenin co-IP distribution between soluble (Sol)
and insoluble (IS) fraction in confluent versus
migrating HUVECs. C, confluent (panels a-c) or
migrating (panels d-i) HUVECs were stained for PECAM-1
(panels a, d, and g), vimentin
(panels b and e) and desmoplakin (panel
h). The merged staining of PECAM-1 and vimentin is shown in
panels c and f, and that of PECAM-1 and
desmoplakin is shown in panel i. Note partial
PECAM-1/vimentin co-localization in migrating but not confluent HUVECs
and partial PECAM-1/desmoplakin co-localization at the cell edges.
Scale bar, 50 µm.
|
|
The increase in insoluble PECAM-1 fraction may be explained by
interaction with the actin-based cytoskeleton or with intermediate filaments, vimentin in the case of endothelial cells. Both cytoskeletal components utilize
-catenin as a molecular linker (29, 30). Co-immunoprecipitation of PECAM-1 with desmoplakin (Fig. 1B,
fifth panel), a component involved in connecting desmosomal
cadherins, via
-catenin, to intermediate filaments (30), suggests
that PECAM-1, in part, may become associated with vimentin.
Immunofluorescent staining indicated a significant rearrangement of
PECAM-1, as well vimentin, during migration (Fig. 5C). At
confluency, PECAM-1 and vimentin are localized to two distinct cellular
compartments that do not seem to interact with each other at this level
of resolution (Fig. 5C, panels a-c, and Ref.
31). However, during migration PECAM-1 is diffusely localized on the
cell surface (Fig. 5C, panel d), whereas vimentin
filaments are present up to the leading edges of the migrating cells
(Fig. 5C, panel e, and Ref. 32). Under these
conditions, partial PECAM-1/vimentin co-localization was detected (Fig.
5C, panel f). Moreover, under migratory
conditions we were able to detect partial colocalization of PECAM-1
with desmoplakin (Fig. 5C, panels g-i), mainly
at the cell periphery/edges. In addition, a significant co-localization
of PECAM-1 and vimentin was observed when HUVEC were grown in type I,
three-dimensional, collagen gels (Fig.
6A). These conditions are
thought to provide an environment more closely mimicking in
vivo conditions compared with cells grown on tissue culture
plastic (2D). Indeed, a robust increase in PECAM-1/
-catenin
association was observed under three-dimensional conditions (Fig.
6B), more than 7-fold, based on densitometric analysis (Fig.
6C). However, desmoplakin expression levels in endothelial
cells are low (Ref. 31 and data not shown) and, in addition, mainly
exhibit a diffuse cytoplasmic localization (Ref. 31 and Fig.
5C, panels g-i). Therefore, to better study the
possible PECAM-1/desmoplakin colocalization, we stably expressed PECAM-1 in HEK 293 cells (Fig. 7).
PECAM-1 expression was noted to be at levels similar to or lower than
endogenous PECAM-1 expression in HUVEC, and, therefore, represent
physiological levels (not shown). In these cells, desmoplakin was
mainly detected at cell-cell borders (Fig. 7, panel b),
partially colocalizing with PECAM-1 in a spotted pattern that is
characteristic for desmoplakin (Fig. 7, panel c, and Refs.
33 and 34). Thus, based on biochemical data (Figs. 1B and 5,
A and B) and immunofluorescent staining (Figs.
5C, 6A, and 7), we suggest that PECAM-1 can
interact with the vimentin cytoskeleton and that this type of
interaction is mediated by
-catenin. This observation may support
and further expand the desmoplakin-based complexus adherens junctions
suggested for endothelial cells (35).

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
PECAM-1/vimentin co-localization in HUVEC
three-dimensional cultures correlates with a dramatic increase in
PECAM-1/ -catenin association.
A, HUVEC were grown in three-dimensional collagen gels for 1 day, formalin-fixed, and embedded in paraffin. 5-µm sections were
double-stained for PECAM-1 (panel a) and vimentin
(panel b). The merged images are shown in panel
c, demonstrating co-localization of both proteins. Scale
bar, 50 µm. B, HUVEC were grown to confluency
on gelatin-coated flasks (2D) or embedded in collagen gels
(3D) for 1 day. Lysate samples were IP for PECAM-1 and
blotted for -catenin ( -cat, top
panel), stripped, and reprobed for PECAM-1 (bottom
panel). C, densitometric analysis (an average of two
independent experiments) demonstrating a 7-fold increase in
PECAM-1/ -catenin association when grown under
three-dimensional conditions.
|
|

View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
PECAM-1 colocalizes with desmoplakin in HEK
293 cells expressing PECAM-1. Stable PECAM-1 expression elicits a
partial co-localization with desmoplakin in HEK 293 cells.
PECAM-1-expressing 293 cells were double stained for desmoplakin
(panel a) and PECAM-1 (panel b). A punctate
pattern of desmoplakin staining, showing colocalization with
PECAM-1 is shown in the merged images (panel c).
Scale bar, 50 µm.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Based on morphological and biochemical criteria two major groups
of cell-cell junctions are commonly distinguished: desmosomes and
adherens junctions. These two cellular structures are biochemically distinct and have only one component in common, i.e.
-catenin. Morphologically, endothelial cell-cell junctions primarily
consist of an extended adherens junctional zone in which tight
junctions and gap junctions are inserted (36). Endothelial cells do not have structures similar to desmosomes or hemidesmosomes, nor do they
express desmosomal cadherins (37). A third category of adherens
junction has been described (complexus adherens), which occurs in
certain vascular endothelia and was found to be negative for desmosomal
cadherins,
-actinin and vinculin but rich in
-catenin and
desmoplakin (35). Recent studies have demonstrated that the
amino-terminal domain of desmoplakin binds directly to
-catenin (38)
and that desmoplakin binds directly to intermediate filaments including
keratins, desmin, and vimentin (39). Desmoplakin expression was
observed in lymphatic endothelia (35) and in HUVEC cultures (31),
co-localizing with VE-cadherin but not with PECAM-1 under confluent
conditions (31). Indeed, we could not detect co-localization of PECAM-1
with vimentin (Fig. 5C, panels a-c) or
desmoplakin (not shown) under the same conditions. However, partial
PECAM-1 co-localization with vimentin (Fig. 5C, panels
d-f) and desmoplakin (Figs. 5C, panels
g-i, and 7, panels a-c) was observed in HUVEC migration or transfected HEK 293 cells and, most importantly, in HUVEC
three-dimensional cultures (Fig. 6A). The latter was accompanied by a dramatic increase in PECAM-1/
-catenin association (Fig. 6, B and C). Thus, based on biochemical
recruitment into an insoluble fraction (Fig. 5, A and
B) and partial co-localization with vimentin (Figs.
5C, panels d-f, and 6A, panels
a-c) and desmoplakin (Figs. 5C, panels
g-i, and 7, panels a-c), we suggest that one possible
role for PECAM-1/
-catenin association is to mediate PECAM-1
interaction with a cytoskeletal element, presumably vimentin. An
increase in insoluble PECAM-1 fraction was observed following transforming growth factor-
1 treatment of promonocytic U-937 cells
(40). Interestingly, cytochalasin B, an inhibitor of actin polymerization, treatment had no effect on PECAM-1 recruitment into the
insoluble cytoskeletal-associated fraction, supporting the notion that
vimentin, rather that actin, is the relevant cytoskeletal element.
Therefore, PECAM-1 may be a dynamic part of the endothelial complexus
adherens. The role for such possible PECAM-1/vimentin interactions is
not yet known, but it may to mediate a physical link between the cell
surface and the nuclear envelope. This may transmit mechanical or
biochemical signals that may modulate the migratory phenotype of the
endothelial cells. PECAM-1 overexpression has been shown to inhibit
migration of endothelial (41) and nonendothelial (3) cells and was
attributed to an increase in cell adhesion. Our present results may
suggest an additional mechanism, i.e. that possible
PECAM-1/
-catenin/desmoplakin/vimentin interactions may transmit
signal(s) that regulate cell migration.
A structural role for PECAM-1/
-catenin association is, however, only
one aspect for such an interaction.
-Catenin, like
-catenin,
interacts with a multitude of proteins, including classical cadherins,
-catenin, fascin, axin, adenomatous polyposis coli (APC), and
lymphoid enhancer binding factor/T cell factor (LEF/TCF) transcriptional factors (42). Elevated levels of
- and
-catenin were observed when the ubiquitin-proteasome degradation system was
inhibited, and this was followed by nuclear accumulation of both
catenins (44). Indeed, recent studies have provided compelling evidence
that catenins can play a central role in signal transduction and the
regulation of gene expression (42, 43). The downstream gene targets
were recently found to include c-Myc (45), the metalloproteinase
matrilysin (46), the AP-1 transcription complex components c-Jun and
Fra-1, urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor, ZO-1 (47), and
cyclin D1 (25, 26). Stable PECAM-1 expression in SW480 cells recruited
- (2) and
-catenin to areas of cell-cell junctions (Fig.
4A) and prevented their nuclear accumulation. Interestingly,
this correlated with decrease in cyclin D1, but not cyclin D3,
expression levels (Fig. 4B). Thus, PECAM-1 apparently
functions to maintain
- and
-catenin localization at areas of
cell-cell borders and prevent their signaling abilities, properties
that were previously noted for E-cadherin (48), N-cadherin, or
-catenin (49). In endothelial cells, cadherin-based adherens junctions comprise a dynamic compartment, and its composition rapidly
changes according to the functional state of the cells (28). For
example, when cells are released from tight confluence and migrate,
VE-cadherin is mostly linked to p120 and
-catenin, and only small
amount of the complex is bound to the actin cytoskeleton (50). Once the
junctions stabilize, p120 and
-catenin tend to detach from the
complex and are substituted by
-catenin (28). Therefore, such an
increase in the free
-catenin pool during cell migration and a
decrease in cytoplasmic as well as membrane-associated PKC activity
during cell migration2 both
may account for PECAM-1·
-catenin complex recruitment into an
insoluble fraction (Fig. 5, A and B). Thus,
although PECAM-1 has not been considered to be part of adherens
junctions (27), its physical close proximity and its function as a
catenin binder and modulator may suggest common features of PECAM-1 and
VE-cadherin in endothelial cell adhesion. Interestingly, the observed
decrease in cyclin D1 expression did not attenuate cell
proliferation,3 suggesting
that catenin-mediated transcription by itself is not responsible or
sufficient for SW480 or other epithelial cell growth regulation
(51).
-Catenin and
-catenin have a high degree of homology, especially
in their central domain, the so-called armadillo repeats, and share
some overlapping, as well as distinct, properties. Importantly, the
mechanisms responsible for
- and
-catenin binding to PECAM-1 were
significantly different. We could not detect association of PECAM-1
with the third Arm repeats-containing protein-p120, suggesting that the
catenin binding to PECAM-1 is specific and is not mediated by the Arm
repeats per se. Although PECAM-1/
-catenin association is
primarily due to
-catenin tyrosine phosphorylation state (Fig.
1B, fourth panel, and Ref. 2),
PECAM-1/
-catenin association was found to be mainly regulated by
PECAM-1 serine/threonine phosphorylation. This was demonstrated
directly (Fig. 2, A and B) and indirectly (Fig.
2, C-E) in ex vivo, in vitro, and
in vivo systems. An increase in PECAM-1 serine/threonine
phosphorylation was observed in glucose-treated (24) and
CoCl2-treated (as an hypoxia mimetic; Ref. 52) HUVEC, in
thrombin-stimulated platelets (20), and in tumor growth
factor-
1-stimulated promonocytic U-937 cells (40). Such increases in
PECAM-1 serine/threonine phosphorylation could be inhibited by PKC
inhibitors (GF109203x; Refs. 24 and 52) and was therefore attributed to
PKC activation. However, no direct evidence for PECAM-1 phosphorylation
by PKC has been documented to date. The ability of nPKC
(Fig.
2A, bottom panel), as well as cPKC (
,
)
isoforms (data not shown) to directly phosphorylate GST-PECAM-1 fusion
protein is therefore novel. Interestingly, scanning the PECAM-1
cytoplasmic domain for PKC substrate consensus sites using the
ScanProsite program resulted in the identification of a consensus PKC
phosphorylation site at residue S674 in the sequence
764SHK, which is located in the intervening sequence
between the two ITAM tyrosines Tyr663 and
Tyr686. Moreover, we found PKC-mediated PECAM-1
phosphorylation to play a key role in modulating PECAM-1/
-catenin
association. This is best demonstrated in our pull-down experiment
(Fig. 2, A and B). In addition, the ability to
regulate PECAM-1/
-catenin association by PKC modulators in HUVEC
(Fig. 2, C and D) and EOMA (Fig. 2E) cells is consistent with the notion that PECAM-1 is an in
vivo PKC-substrate. We initially observed PECAM-1 to
preferentially bind
-catenin in EOMA cells and correlated it with
hyper
-catenin tyrosine phosphorylation levels (2). Interestingly,
PKC inhibition in EOMA cells resulted in an increase in
-catenin and
a comparable decrease in
-catenin association with PECAM-1 (Fig.
2E), suggesting that
-catenin has a higher affinity for
PECAM-1 that would compete-off
-catenin. The higher affinity of
-catenin toward PECAM-1 was supported by our pull-down experiments
(Figs. 1C and 2, A and B). Experiments
using surface plasmon resonance are currently underway aimed to
quantitate and compare the affinity of catenin toward PECAM-1. Taken
together, the results presented herein support and further expand the
concept that PECAM-1 is not only involved in cell adhesion but is
intimately involved in signaling, for example by binding and modulating
- and
-catenin localization. Our results also point to protein
phosphorylation as the major regulatory mechanism responsible for the
different sets of PECAM-1 interactions, suggesting dynamic tyrosine and
serine/threonine phosphorylation/dephosphorylation events.
Fig. 8 is our current working hypothesis.
In hemangioma-derived EOMA cell cultures, PKC activity is high (as
evident by low PECAM-1/
-catenin association and modulation by PKC
inhibitor), and
-catenin as well as PECAM-1 tyrosine phosphorylation
levels are also high. This results in the interaction of PECAM-1 with
-catenin and SHP-2 and
-catenin dephosphorylation, whereas
-catenin association is minimal (Fig. 8A). However,
exposure of EOMA cells to PKC inhibitor would cause an increase in
-catenin association with PECAM-1, a decrease in
-catenin
association with PECAM-1, but no change in SHP-2 association with
PECAM-1, suggesting that
-catenin is capable of competing off even
tyrosine-phosphorylated
-catenin (Fig. 8B). In
primary HUVEC cultures, PKC activity as well as
-catenin tyrosine
phosphorylation levels are low, and
-catenin is the major PECAM-1
partner (Fig. 8C). Exposure of HUVEC cultures to a PKC
inducer causes increased PECAM-1 serine/threonine phosphorylation,
which results in decreased PECAM-1/
-catenin interactions (Fig.
8D).

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
A schematic representation of our current
working model for PECAM-1 interaction with SHP-2,
-catenin, and
-catenin. A, EOMA cells are known
to have a relatively high degree of -catenin and PECAM-1 tyrosine
phosphorylation (2) and therefore exhibit robust PECAM-1/ -catenin
and SHP-2/PECAM-1 interactions (upward arrows). In contrast,
EOMA cells exhibit only modest -catenin/PECAM-1 interactions.
B, when EOMA cells are treated with a PKC inhibitor, PECAM-1
serine/threonine phosphorylation is reduced, resulting in an increased
PECAM-1/ -catenin interaction (thick upward arrow).
Although SHP-2 binding does not appear to be perturbed ( ), an
increased -catenin/PECAM-1 interaction is noted (thick upward
arrow), and this appears to inhibit and reduce -catenin/PECAM-1
interactions (thick downward arrow). C, in
contrast, HUVEC cells are known to have a lower degree of -catenin
and PECAM-1 tyrosine phosphorylation and thus exhibit low
-catenin/PECAM-1 and SHP-2/PECAM-1 interactions (thin downward
arrows) and a robust -catenin/PECAM-1 interaction (thick
upward arrow). D, when HUVEC cells are treated with a
PKC inducer PECAM-1 serine/threonine phosphorylation is increased,
resulting in a decreased -catenin/PECAM-1 interaction (thick
downward arrow) with no apparent changes in -catenin/PECAM-1 or
SHP-2/PECAM-1 interactions ( ).
|
|
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported in part by U.S. Public Health
Service Grants R37-HL28373 and PO1-DK38979 (to J. A. M.), a
Charles H. Hood grant (to E. P.), and a Reed Foundation Fellowship (to N. I.).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.
Current address: Insight Ltd., P. O. Box 2128, Rabin Science Park,
Rehovat 76121, Israel.
§
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Pathology,
Yale University School of Medicine, 310 Cedar St., P.O. Box 208023, New
Haven, CT 06520-8023. Tel.: 203-785-3763; Fax: 203-785-7303; E-mail:
joseph.madri@yale.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, May 5, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M001857200
2
M. Barreuther, D. Gratzinger, A. Tucker, and
J. A. Madri, manuscript in preparation.
3
N. Ilan, L. Cheung, A. Moshenin, and J. A. Madri, submitted for publication.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
PECAM, platelet-endothelial cell adhesion molecule;
ITAM, immunoreceptor
tyrosine-based activation motif;
SHP, SH-2-containing protein-tyrosine
phosphatase;
HUVEC, human umbilical vein endothelial cell(s);
p.c., post coitus;
PKC, protein kinase C;
MAPK, mitogen-activated protein
kinase;
GST, glutathione S-transferase;
IP, immunoprecipitation;
PP1, 4-amino-5-(4
methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo[3,4-D]pyrimidine.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Newman, P. J.
(1997)
J. Clin. Invest.
99,
3-8
|
| 2.
|
Ilan, N.,
Mahooti, P.,
Rimm, D. L.,
and Madri, J. A.
(1999)
J. Cell Sci.
112,
3005-3014
|
| 3.
|
Schimmenti, L. A.,
Yan, H.-C.,
Madri, J. A.,
and Albelda, S. M.
(1992)
J. Cell. Physiol.
153,
417-428
|
| 4.
|
Muller, W. A.,
Weigel, S. A.,
Deng, X.,
and Phillips, D. M.
(1993)
J. Exp. Med.
178,
449-460
|
| 5.
|
Vaporciyan, A. A.,
DeLisser, H. M.,
Yan, H.,
Mendiguren, I. I.,
Thom, S. R.,
Jones, M. L.,
Ward, P. A.,
and Albelda, S. M.
(1993)
Science
262,
1580-1582
|
| 6.
|
Duncan, G. S.,
Andrew, D. P.,
Takimoto, H.,
Kaufman, S. A.,
Yoshida, H.,
Spellberg, J.,
de la Pompa, J. L.,
Elia, A.,
Wakeham, A.,
Karan-Tamir, B.,
Muller, W. A.,
Senaldi, G.,
Zukowski, M. M.,
and Mak, T. W.
(1999)
J. Immunol.
162,
3022-3030
|
| 7.
|
Osawa, M.,
Masuda, M.,
Harada, N.,
Lopes, R. B.,
and Fujiwara, K.
(1997)
Eur. J. Cell Biol.
72,
229-237
|
| 8.
|
Lu, T. T.,
Yan, L. G.,
and Madri, J. A.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
11808-11813
|
| 9.
|
Jackson, D. E.,
Ward, C. M.,
Wang, R.,
and Newman, P. J.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
6986-6993
|
| 10.
|
Sagawa, K.,
Kimura, T.,
Swieter, M.,
and Siraganian, R. P.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
31086-31091
|
| 11.
|
Lu, T. T.,
Barreuther, M.,
Davis, S.,
and Madri, J. A.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
14442-14446
|
| 12.
|
Hua, C. T.,
Gamble, J. R.,
Vadas, M. A.,
and Jackson, D. E.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
28332-28340
|
| 13.
|
Pumphrey, N. J.,
Taylor, V.,
Freeman, S.,
Douglas, M. R.,
Bradfield, P. F.,
Young, S. P.,
Lord, J. M.,
Wakelam, M. J. O.,
Bird, I. N.,
Salmon, M.,
and Buckley, C. D.
(1999)
FEBS Lett.
450,
77-83
|
| 14.
|
Pellegatta, F.,
Chierchia, S. L.,
and Zocchi, M. R.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
27768-27771
|
| 15.
|
Matsumura, T.,
Wolff, K.,
and Petzelbauer, P.
(1997)
J. Immunol.
158,
3408-3416
|
| 16.
|
Ilan, N.,
Mahooti, S.,
and Madri, J. A.
(1998)
J. Cell Sci.
111,
3621-3631
|
| 17.
|
Obeso, J.,
Weber, J.,
and Auerbach, R.
(1990)
Lab. Invest.
63,
259-269
|
| 18.
|
Daniel, J. M.,
and Reynolds, A. B.
(1997)
Bio Essays
19,
883-891
|
| 19.
|
Hanke, J. H.,
Gardner, J. P.,
Dow, R. L.,
Changelian, P. S.,
Brissette, W. H.,
Weringer, E. J,
Pollok, B. A.,
and Connelly, P. A.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
695-701
|
| 20.
|
Newman, P. J.,
Hillery, C. A.,
Albrecht, R.,
Parise, L. V.,
Berndt, M. C.,
Mazurov, A. V.,
Dunlop, L. C.,
Zhang, J.,
and Rittehouse, S. E.
(1992)
J. Cell Biol.
119,
239-246
|
| 21.
|
Toullec, D.,
Pianetti, P.,
Cosre, H.,
Bellevergue, P.,
Grand-Perret, T.,
Ajakane, M.,
Baudet, V.,
Boissin, P.,
Boursier, E.,
Loriolle, F.,
Duhamel, L.,
Charon, D.,
and Kirilovsky, J.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
15771-15781
|
| 22.
|
Pinter, E.,
Barreuther, M.,
Lu, T.,
Imhof, B. A.,
and Madri, J. A.
(1997)
Am. J. Pathol.
150,
1523-1530
|
| 23.
|
Pinter, E.,
Mahooti, S.,
Wang, Y.,
Imhof, B. A.,
and Madri, J. A.
(1999)
Am. J. Pathol.
154,
1367-1379
|
| 24.
|
Rattan, V.,
Shen, Y.,
Sultana, C.,
Kumar, D.,
and Kalra, V.
(1996)
Am. J. Physiol.
271,
E711-E717
|
| 25.
|
Tetsu, O.,
and McCormic, F.
(1999)
Nature
398,
422-426
|
| 26.
|
Shtutman, M.,
Zhurinsky, J.,
Simcha, I.,
Albanese, C.,
D'Amico, M.,
Pestell, R.,
and Be Ze'ev, A.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
5522-5527
|
| 27.
|
Ayalon, O.,
Sabani, H.,
Lampugnani, M.-G.,
Dejana, E.,
and G |