![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 33, 25451-25459, August 18, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the
Received for publication, March 14, 2000, and in revised form, May 19, 2000
After an initial burst of cell proliferation, the
type 1 insulin-like growth factor receptor (IGF-IR) induces
granulocytic differentiation of 32D IGF-IR cells, an
interleukin-3-dependent murine hemopoietic cell line devoid of
insulin receptor substrate-1 (IRS-1). The combined expression of the
IGF-IR and IRS-1 (32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells) inhibits IGF-I-mediated
differentiation, and causes malignant transformation of 32D cells.
Because of the role of IRS-1 in changing the fate of 32D IGF-IR cells
from differentiation (and subsequent cell death) to malignant
transformation, we have looked for differences in IGF-IR signaling
between 32D IGF-IR and 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells. In this report, we have
focused on p70S6K, which is activated by the IRS-1
pathway. We find that the ectopic expression of IRS-1 and the
inhibition of differentiation correlated with a sustained activation of
p70S6K and an increase in cell size. Phosphorylation
in vivo of threonine 389 and, to a lesser extent, of
threonine 421/serine 424 of p70S6K seemed to be a
requirement for inhibition of differentiation. A role of IRS-1 and
p70S6K in the alternative between transformation or
differentiation of 32D IGF-IR cells was confirmed by findings that
inhibition of p70S6K activation or IRS-1 signaling, by
rapamycin or okadaic acid, induced differentiation of 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1
cells. We have also found that the expression of myeloperoxidase
mRNA (a marker of differentiation, which sharply increases in 32D
IGF-IR cells), does not increase in 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells, suggesting
that the expression of IRS-1 in 32D IGF-IR cells causes the extinction of the differentiation program initiated by the IGF-IR, while leaving
intact its proliferation program.
The type 1 insulin-like growth factor receptor
(IGF-IR),1 activated by its
ligands plays an important role in the growth of cells in at least four
different ways. It is mitogenic, both in vivo and in
vitro, it is quasi-obligatory for transformation, it can protect
cells from a variety of apoptotic injuries, and it can also induce
differentiation in certain types of cells (1). The fact that the IGF-IR
can induce cell differentiation (that eventually results in inhibition
of growth and cell death) is in clear contradiction to its other
properties, which are more of a growth-promoting type. The mechanism by
which the IGF-IR switches from one signaling to another is in itself of
considerable interest.
We have recently shown that, in the case of the IGF-IR, the choice
between stimulation of cell proliferation or differentiation depends on
the availability of the immediate substrates of the IGF-IR (2). In
those experiments, we used as a model 32D cells (3), which are diploid
murine hemopoietic cells. 32D cells have an absolute requirement for
interleukin-3 (IL-3) for growth, and undergo apoptosis when IL-3 is
withdrawn (4-6). IGF-I (7, 8) or overexpression of the IGF-IR (9-11)
prevent apoptosis caused by IL-3 withdrawal. Furthermore, IGF-I can
induce in these cells a differentiation program along the granulocytic
pathway (2). A characteristic of 32D cells is that they are devoid of
insulin receptor substrate-1 (IRS-1) and IRS-2 (12-14), whereas Shc
proteins are strongly expressed. This unbalance between the two major
substrates of the IGF-IR suggested that the absence of IRS-1 could play
a role in the induction of differentiation by IGF-I in 32D IGF-IR
cells. Indeed, re-introduction of IRS-1 in these cells resulted in
inhibition of IGF-I-mediated differentiation, which was also inhibited
by a dominant negative mutant of Shc (2). It seems therefore that
proliferation or differentiation of 32D IGF-IR cells depends on the
availability of substrates, with IRS-1 favoring proliferation and Shc
proteins favoring differentiation. An important aspect of those
experiments was that the IGF-IR, by itself, causes 32D cells to grow
very rapidly for the first 48 h. During this 48-h period, there is
no appreciable difference in the rate of growth between 32D IGF-IR
cells and 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells (Refs. 2 and 11, and this paper). This
is in agreement with the established fact that differentiation of
cells, especially hemopoietic cells, requires a short period of cell
proliferation (5, 15). A typical example is the granulocyte
colony-stimulating factor, which induces both the proliferative and the
differentiating programs, with the latter eventually prevailing.
In previous papers (2, 10), we reported that IRS-1 greatly increases PI
3-kinase and Akt activation in 32D cells. Since this pathway connects
with the activation of p70S6K (16), we have focused, in the
present investigation, on p70S6K (17). We have found that
sustained activation of p70S6K (in vivo
phosphorylation of threonine 389 and threonine 421/serine 424)
correlates with the inhibition of differentiation (and therefore with
the transformed phenotype). In addition, rapamycin and okadaic acid
(OKA), both of which inhibit p70S6K activation, induce
differentiation of 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells. Inhibition of differentiation
is accompanied by an increase in size of the cells, which is in
agreement with the effect of homologues of IRS-1 (18) and
p70S6K (19) on cell size in Drosophila. By
determining the expression of myeloperoxidase (MPO) mRNA, we also
find that the differentiation program is already activated in 32D
IGF-IR cells while they are still actively proliferating. MPO mRNA,
however, does not increase in 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells. These results
suggest that IRS-1 may indeed extinguish the differentiation program of
32D IGF-IR cells (without affecting its proliferative program), and
that this effect may be mediated by the sustained activation of
p70S6K.
Finally, we report here that 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells, in addition to be
able to grow in the absence of IL-3 without differentiating, can also
form tumors in mice. These latter experiments confirm and extend
previous reports that overexpression of IRS-1 results in transformation
(20, 21).
Cell Lines--
32D IGF-IR cells were obtained from the murine
hematopoietic cell line 32D clone 3 (3) by stable transfection with the human wild type IGF-I receptor. 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 are 32D IGF-IR overexpressing the wild type IRS-1 and 32D IGF-IR/vector are 32D IGF-IR
cells stably transfected with the empty vector used to deliver IRS-1.
These three cell lines are mixed populations obtained by retroviral
infection and have already been described by Valentinis et
al. (2) and Peruzzi et al. (11). Cells were grown in
RPMI 1640 medium supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (Life Technologies, Inc.), 10% WEHI cell conditioned medium as a
source of IL-3 and the required antibiotics to maintain the selective
pressure (250 µg/ml G418, from Life Technologies, Inc., or 250 µg/ml hygromycin, from Calbiochem). For brevity, the WEHI cell
conditioned medium will be referred to as IL-3.
Growth and Differentiation Analysis--
Cells exponentially
growing were collected, washed three times, and seeded in IL-3-free
medium (RPMI 1640 medium containing only 10% heat-inactivated fetal
bovine serum) supplemented with 50 ng/ml IGF-I. In some experiments,
inhibitors (10 nM or 20 nM okadaic acid
(Sigma), or 2.5 or 10 ng/ml rapamycin (Sigma)) were added. Cells were
seeded at a density of 5 × 104 cells/ml. After 4 and
6 days, viable cells were counted by trypan blue exclusion (Life
Technologies, Inc.) and cytospins were performed for morphological
analysis. To establish the ability for IL-3-independent growth, cells
from the same experiments at day four were re-plated in fresh IL-3-free
medium with IGF-I (50 ng/ml) at a density of 5 × 104
cells/ml. Cells were counted by trypan blue exclusion after 4 additional days (for a total of 8 days of culture). To evaluate the
degree of granulocytic differentiation, cytospins were stained with
Wright-Giemsa and the cells in the different stages of differentiation counted at the microscope. Differentiation was expressed as percentage of bands and polymorphonuclear cells in the total number of scored cells.
Immunoblots--
For the detection of phosphorylated proteins,
exponentially growing cells were washed three times and incubated in
serum-free medium (RPMI 1640 medium supplemented with 0.1% bovine
serum albumin (Sigma)) for 4 h before stimulation with 20 ng/ml
IGF-I (Life Technologies, Inc.). When inhibitors were used, cells were
pre-incubated with the inhibitors for 1 h (okadaic acid) or 15 min
(rapamycin) before stimulation with IGF-I. At the desired time point,
cells were collected, washed with cold phosphate-buffered saline, and resuspended in lysis buffer in ice for 30 min. Cell lysates were clarified by centrifugation at 13,000 rpm for 15 min, and equal amounts
of proteins were resolved by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis and transferred to a nitrocellulose filter. For
immunoblotting, membranes were blocked with 5% nonfat dry milk in
buffer consisting of 10 mM Tris (pH 8.0), 150 mM NaCl, and 0.1% Tween 20 overnight at 4 °C and probed
with the indicated primary antibodies, followed by incubation with
horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-rabbit or anti-mouse
immunoglobulin (Oncogene Science). Blots were developed with the
enhanced chemiluminescence system according to the manufacturer's
instruction (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech)
Antibodies--
The phosphorylation of specific amino acids in
p70S6K (phospho-Thr389,
phospho-Thr421/Ser424, and
phospho-Ser411) was detected with antibodies purchased from
New England Biolabs. The total amount of p70S6K loaded was
monitored after stripping of the filters by immunoblotting with an anti
p70S6K antibody (C-18, Santa Cruz). IRS-1 was detected with
an antibody to its carboxyl-terminal (Upstate Biotechnology, Inc., Lake
Placid, NY).
Determination of Cell Size--
Exponentially growing cells were
prepared and seeded under the same conditions used for growth analysis.
After 24 and 48 h, cells were collected and immediately analyzed
for size and cell cycle distribution by flow cytometry. Cell size was
determined by forward scattering (FS). Cell cycle distribution was
analyzed by staining the cells with 10 µg/ml Hoechst 33342 (Molecular
Probes) at 37 °C for 30 min. The cell suspension was analyzed using
an Elite ESP-EPICS flow cytometer (Coulter Corp., Hialeah, FL).
Software was Elite version 4.5.
Northern Blots--
For the detection of the MPO mRNA level,
exponentially growing cells were prepared and seeded under the same
conditions used for growth analysis. At the indicated time points,
cells were collected and total RNA was extracted with the Tri-Reagent
solution (Sigma) following the manufacturer's instructions. Ten µg
of total RNA for each sample were run on a 1% agarose formaldehyde
gel, blotted onto a nitrocellulose membrane, and hybridized with a 1.45-kilobase myeloperoxidase cDNA fragment obtained from the pUC19-MMPO6 plasmid (a kind gift of Dr. Mauro Valtieri). The cDNA probe was labeled with [ Tumor Formation in Nude Mice--
Cells exponentially growing
were collected, washed with phosphate-buffered saline and injected
intraperitoneally into NIH Swiss nude mice. Each animal was
injected with 10 × 106 cells and sacrificed after 6 weeks, and its organs were isolated, weighed, and fixed in 10%
buffered formalin. Histological sections of the organs were stained
with hematoxylin and eosin and examined for the presence of
infiltrating 32D cells.
The parental 32D cells cl. 3 (5) have an absolute requirement for
IL-3 for growth, and undergo apoptosis within 24 h after IL-3
withdrawal (11, 13, 22). 32D IGF-IR cells and 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells
have been described previously (2, 11). Both 32D IGF-IR cells and 32D
IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells grow at similar rates in IGF-I-supplemented medium
for the first 48 h and do not show any morphological sign of
differentiation (2, 11). We have monitored the deoxybromouridine labeling of these cells, growing in IGF-I, between IL-3 withdrawal (0 time) and 24 h, and between 24 and 48 h. With both cell
lines, and for both time intervals, the labeling with deoxybromouridine was 100% (data not shown). Thus, in the first 48 h, the two cell lines are essentially indistinguishable, although 32D IGF-IR cells eventually differentiate and decrease in number.
In a previous paper (2), we had shown that tyrosyl phosphorylation of
Shc was essentially similar in the 2 cell lines, and that IRS-1 was
tyrosyl-phosphorylated when 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells were stimulated with
IGF-I. Soon et al. (10) have shown that, in the absence of
IRS-1, PI 3-kinase activity is undetectable in 32D IGF-IR cells, which
survive and grow (for at least 48 h) in the presence of PI
3-kinase inhibitors (11). Ectopic expression of IRS-1 causes a dramatic
increase in PI 3-kinase activity, and these findings of Soon et
al. (10) have been confirmed (data not shown). Akt/PKB is strongly
activated by IGF-I in 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells, but only weakly activated
in 32D IGF-IR cells (2). This is not surprising since Akt activation is
markedly increased by PI 3-kinase (23-26), whose activity, in turn, is
strongly increased by IRS-1 (27). In this report, we have focused our
attention on p70S6K, whose activity is strongly dependent
on the activation of PI 3-kinase (16) and the Akt/PKB pathway (28).
Activation of p70S6K--
The analysis of the specific
phosphorylated amino acid was performed on samples run on a 4-15%
gradient gel. We used one membrane for each blot of p70S6K
phospho-amino acid to detect a clear, specific signal without interference from the stripping of the membrane. The time of
observation ranged from 0 to 60 min. To show the mobility shift of
p70S6K, that is generally accepted as an indicator of
p70S6K activity (16, 29), samples were run on a 7.5% gel.
Using the antibody to phosphothreonine 421/phosphoserine 424 (30),
p70S6K phosphorylation is clearly detectable, after IGF-I
stimulation, in 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells, but not in 32D IGF-IR cells
(Fig. 1, panel C).
A difference was also detected using an antibody to phospho-threonine
389 (Fig. 1, panel A), which is the residue whose
dephosphorylation most closely parallels loss of kinase activity (28).
The response to IGF-I stimulation was stronger and more prolonged in
32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells than in 32D IGF-IR cells. The antibody to
phosphoserine 411 of p70S6K could not detect clearly
reproducible differences between the two cell lines, after stimulation
with IGF-I (Fig. 1, panel E). Panels
B, D, and F show the total amounts of
p70S6K in each lane. A mobility shift blot is shown in Fig.
1 (panel G); a shift is detectable in both cell
lines, but it is more accentuated, especially at 30 min, and more
sustained in 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells. However, it is evident that the
IGF-IR can activate p70S6K even in the absence of
IRS-1.
Effect of Rapamycin on 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 Cells--
Threonine 389 belongs to the group of serine/threonines of p70S6K that
are rapamycin-sensitive. In fact, they were originally considered to be
the only residues that were rapamycin-sensitive, with the residues in
the C terminus (like threonine 421 and serine 424) considered
insensitive (29, 31, 32). More recent reports have questioned this
difference (33-35). Although rapamycin actually targets mTOR, its
effect is most crucial on the phosphorylation of threonine 389 (28). We
reasoned that, if rapamycin-sensitive residues are less activated in
32D IGF-IR cells, then rapamycin, at appropriate concentrations, ought
to induce differentiation of 32D/IGF-IR/IRS1 cells.
For this purpose, 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells were treated with rapamycin in
the presence of IGF-I. As shown in Fig. 2
(panel A), the proliferation of 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1
cells is inhibited by rapamycin (at concentrations of 2.5 and 10 ng/ml). After 4 days, the cell number of rapamycin-treated 32D
IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells is essentially the same as in untreated 32 IGF-IR
cells. At the same time, differentiation resumes under rapamycin
treatment reaching the same percentage observed for 32D IGF-IR cells
(panel B).
The effect of rapamycin on p70S6K activation is summarized
in Fig. 3. In the presence of rapamycin,
IGF-I fails to phosphorylate threonine 389 (panel
A) and also, to a lesser extent, serine 411 (panel E). Despite some difficulty in identifying
the phospho-p70S6K in panel C, one
can say that rapamycin also inhibits phosphorylation of threonine
421/serine 424. This well known inhibition by rapamycin (see
"Discussion") was confirmed by mobility shift (Fig. 3,
panel G). The amounts of p70S6K
protein in each lane are shown in Fig. 3 (panels
B, D, and F). These experiments
confirm that the p70S6K pathway plays a major role in
determining the fate of 32D IGF-IR cells (differentiation
versus transformation).
Cell Size--
It has recently been reported that, in
Drosophila, both the IRS homologue CHICO (18) and the S6
kinase homologue (19) regulate cell size. We compared the cell size of
32D IGF-IR and 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells, by forward scatter analysis.
Since the cell cycle distribution of a cell population affects cell
size, we also stained the cells with Hoechst 33342 and determined the cell cycle distribution. There was no difference between the two cell
lines (data not shown). We then compared cell size of subpopulations in
different phases of the cell cycle (see "Experimental Procedures"). Fig. 4 (panel A)
compares the cell size distribution generated by FACS analysis for
subpopulations of 32D IGF-IR and 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells in
G1, S, and G2/M phases of the cell cycle
48 h after IL-3 withdrawal and supplementation with IGF-I. In all
three phases of the cell cycle, the mean of the forward scatter of 32D
IGF-IR/IRS1 cells was 15-20% higher than the mean of 32D IGF-IR
cells. This difference was highly reproducible in repeated experiments.
Similar results, but somewhat less pronounced, were detected at 24 h after IL-3 withdrawal and IGF-I supplementation. Fig. 4
(panels B-D), shows three necessary controls. In
panel B, the subpopulation of 32D IGF-IR cells in
the G2/M phase was analyzed in either IL-3 or IGF-I. The
cells have a larger size in IL-3, indicating that 32D IGF-IR cells are
not just smaller than 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells. In the experiment shown in
panel C, we compared 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells (again
in G2/M) in either IGF-I or in IGF-I plus rapamycin. Rapamycin decreases the size of the cells, almost to the level of
untreated 32D IGF-IR cells. Finally, in panel D,
we show the size difference of 32D IGF-IR cells in the G1
and G2 phases of the cell cycle. Since cells in
G2 are generally twice as big as cells in G1,
this experiment shows that modest differences in scattering revealed by
FACS analysis can actually equal almost a doubling in size.
Differentiation Markers--
Since 32D IGF-IR cells proliferate
for at least 48 h, one can assume that the IGF-IR activates both
the proliferation program and the differentiation program, the latter
eventually prevailing (see Introduction). We have hypothesized that
IRS-1 extinguishes the differentiation program, leaving the
proliferation program intact. As a first approach to test this
hypothesis, we have examined the appearance of a known differentiation
marker, the MPO mRNA in our 2 cell lines. The results of one such
experiment are shown in Fig. 5, where we
examined MPO mRNA levels in cells in IL-3 or in IGF-I at various
intervals after IL-3 withdrawal. MPO mRNA levels remain high in 32D
IGF-IR cells 24 h after IL-3 withdrawal and increase at 48 h.
MPO mRNA levels are decreased in 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells and diminish
further by 48 h. Thus, the hypothesis is supported by these
findings. 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells do not seem to activate the
differentiation program, that is, instead, activated in 32D IGF-IR
cells. We have also examined 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells treated with
rapamycin, which induces differentiation (see above). The MPO mRNA
levels now increase even in 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells (last two lanes of Fig. 5), especially at 48 h.
Effect of Okadaic Acid--
We have determined the effect of OKA
on the growth and differentiation of 32D IGF-IR and 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1
cells. OKA is a potent inhibitor of serine phosphatases (36), and the
serine phosphatase PP2A interacts directly with p70S6K
(37). Among the many effects of OKA, it induces apoptosis, and its
apoptotic effect is counteracted by the IGF-IR (38). OKA also induces
serine phosphorylation of IRS-1 (39), which causes inhibition of IRS-1
signaling (40). We reasoned that OKA ought to inhibit the activation of
p70S6K, reduce the growth and induce the differentiation of
32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells. Fig. 6
(panel A) shows that OKA inhibits the
proliferation of 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells, and that this inhibition is
complete at a concentration of only 20 nM.
At the same time, we examined the extent of differentiation of 32D
IGF-IR/IRS1 cells in the presence or absence of OKA. At a concentration
of 20 nM, OKA induces differentiation of 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells (Fig. 6, panel B). The effect is only
partial, when compared with 32D IGF-IR cells (closed
bars), but it is nevertheless significant. Increasing the
concentration of OKA unfortunately results in massive cell death, which
obscures its differentiating effect. We monitored the effect of OKA on
IRS-1, by studying its shift in mobility (38, 39), due to the extensive
phosphorylation of serine residues. OKA induced a mobility shift of
IRS-1 in our cell lines, as expected (data not shown).
We tested the effect of OKA on the phosphorylation and activation of
p70S6K in 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells. OKA inhibits the long
term phosphorylation of threonine 389 (Fig.
7, panel A).
Panel B shows the amounts of p70S6K
in each lane. The samples shown in panel C were
run on a 7.5% gel (see above). OKA causes a decrease in mobility shift
of p70S6K, especially visible at 30 min after IGF-I
stimulation (panel C). The experiments of Figs. 7
were repeated several times, with similar results.
IL-3 Independence Test--
In a previous paper (2), we reported
that 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells grew, in a medium supplemented with 10%
fetal bovine serum and IGF-I, for at least 4 days, whereas 32D IGF-IR
cells had stopped growing at 48 h and had begun to differentiate.
We have asked whether 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells are transformed cells. The
first prerequisite of a transformed 32D cells is its ability to grow indefinitely in the absence of IL-3 (41). To determine IL-3 independence, we tested the cell lines after re-plating. For this experiment, we also added as a control 32D IGF-IR cells transduced with
the vector used to introduce IRS-1 (empty vector). As described under
"Experimental Procedures," the cell lines were grown for 4 days
without IL-3 but with IGF-I, and the cell number was determined. Then,
the same number of viable cells from each cell line was re-incubated in
IL-3-deficient, IGF-I-supplemented medium. Cell number was determined
after an additional 4 days in culture. The results are shown in Fig.
8. 32D IGF-IR and 32D IGF-IR/vector cells
grew in the first 4 days after IL-3 withdrawal (albeit with considerable less efficiency than 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells) and showed
differentiation (36% and 37%, respectively). After re-plating, only a
few cells (61% of them differentiated) were left at the end of the
experiment on day 8. In contrast, 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells grew again in
the absence of IL-3, without any evidence of differentiation. These
experiments therefore show that 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells have become
IL-3-independent and can be passaged in its absence.
Finally, all these cell lines have repeatedly tested negative for
mycoplasma. This is important, because Feng et al. (42) have
recently reported that mycoplasma infection induces malignant transformation of 32D cells.
Tumor Formation in Animals--
IL-3 independence has been often
taken as a measure of transformation of 32D cells (41). However, a more
stringent criterion for transformation is the ability to form tumors in
animals. We tested both 32D IGF-IR and 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells for their
ability to form tumors in nude mice (see "Experimental
Procedures"). Because 32D cells are of hemopoietic origin, and
because they were injected intraperitoneally, we expected them to
localize predominantly in the abdominal organs, especially spleen and
liver (which, incidentally, is the major site of IGF-I production in
the animal body). The results are shown in Fig.
9, where we compare the pathology of mice
injected with either 32D IGF-IR cells and 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells.
However, the parental 32D cells behaved, as expected, like the 32D
IGF-IR cells (data not shown). 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells form tumors in
nude mice, causing marked increases in weight of both liver and spleen
(Fig. 9, compare panels A and B). On
average, the livers doubled their weight, while the weight of spleen
increased 10-fold. Histologically (Fig. 9), the structures of both
liver and spleen are obliterated by the infiltration of leukemic cells. Only remnants of hepatocytes can be seen in the liver (compare panels C and D). In the spleen, the
small lymphocytes of the normal spleen (panel F)
have been replaced by larger leukemic cells (panel E). 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells can also form tumors in syngeneic
mice, but only when the cells are injected intravenously (data not
shown). Therefore, even by the quite stringent criterion of tumor
formation in animals, 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells are transformed.
As previously reported, in the absence of IRS-1, the IGF-IR
induces only a burst of cell proliferation (about 48 h), after which, the cells (32D IGF-IR cells) undergo granulocytic
differentiation (Ref. 2 and this paper). The novel findings in this
report can be summarized as follows. 1) A comparison of signaling
between the 2 cell lines shows that in 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells, the
phosphorylation of threonine 389 and threonine 421/serine 424 of
p70S6K is stronger and more sustained, when compared with
the 32D IGF-IR cells. 2) In support of a role of p70S6K in
the transformation of 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells, we show that rapamycin,
which inhibits the activation of p70S6K (Refs. 29, 32, and
43, and this paper) causes differentiation of 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells. 3)
The ectopic expression of IRS-1 and the sustained activation of
p70S6K result in an increase in cell size of 32D
IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells, increase that is inhibited by rapamycin. 4) Despite
the fact that, in the first 48 h, both 32D IGF-IR and 32D
IGF-IR/IRS1 cells proliferate very actively (Ref. 11 and this paper), a
differentiation marker, MPO mRNA, is already prominent at 24 h
in 32D IGF-IR cells. MPO mRNA levels do not increase in 32D
IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells, but they do so in the same cells treated with
rapamycin. Secondary findings include the following. 5) OKA, which also
inhibits the activation of p70S6K, causes differentiation
of 32D IGF-IR cells. 6) 32D cells expressing both the IGF-IR and IRS-1
(32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells) have a transformed phenotype, as evidenced by
IL-3 independent growth and the ability to form tumors in animals.
There are several reports in the literature that cells in general, and
hemopoietic cells in particular, must undergo one or two rounds of DNA
synthesis before they can differentiate (5, 15). Therefore, it is not
surprising that 32D IGF-IR cells do grow for 48 h before they
begin to differentiate. The question is how IRS-1 can inhibit the
differentiation program in these cells, and actually transform them. It
is generally assumed that the IGF-IR and the insulin receptor use for
mitogenesis 3 main pathways (44-47). The first is through IRS-1 to
PI-3 kinase to p70S6K (16, 30); the second is through IRS-1
to Grb2 to Ras and Erk, and the third one is from Shc to Grb2, to Ras
again. Both p70S6K and ERK are required for mitogenesis
(17, 44, 48). Although IGF-IR signaling is certainly more complicated
than this, this simplification gives an operational scheme for any
attempt to elucidate pathways involved in two different and
contradictory programs. The first exception to this scheme is provided
by the observation that the IGF-IR (but not the IR) does not need IRS-1 for mitogenesis and survival in 32D cells (2, 9-11), at least for the
first 48 h. It seems that the IGF-IR has pathways for protection
from apoptosis, cell proliferation and differentiation that are
IRS-1-independent (2, 10) and are not shared with the IR (11).
One reasonable target of IRS-1 is p70S6K, which is
activated by IRS-1 (16, 49), although it may be also activated by other transducing molecules (50). In a hierarchical model of kinase activation, the activation of p70S6K is apparently
dependent on the phosphorylation of a putative auto-inhibitory C
terminus, which causes a change in conformation, which, in turn, allows
the catalytic domain to be activated (28, 51). Our results show that
the presence of IRS-1 causes a sustained phosphorylation of threonine
389, and of threonine 421/serine 424, phosphorylation that is shorter
and less intense in 32D IGF-IR cells. This difference is highly
reproducible, and results also in a difference in the mobility of the
p70S6K protein. A mobility shift of p70S6K has
often been taken as an indication of activation (16, 29, 52). In
addition, phosphorylation of threonine 389 is largely obliterated when
32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells are treated with rapamycin, which induces
differentiation. As mentioned above, threonine 389 belongs to the group
of serine/threonines of p70S6K that are
rapamycin-sensitive. Indeed, they were originally considered to be the
only residues that were rapamycin-sensitive, while the residues in the
C terminus (like threonine 421 and serine 424) were considered
insensitive (29, 31, 32). More recent reports have questioned this
difference (33-35). Incidentally, the induction of differentiation in
32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells by rapamycin, a specific inhibitor (through
mTOR) of p70S6K (28), at concentrations that do not cause
apoptosis, provides evidence for a role of p70S6K in this
model that goes beyond a simple correlative finding.
In no way should our findings be construed as indicating that
p70S6K activation is not needed for proliferation of 32D
cells. The abundant literature on the subject shows that
p70S6K is required for the G1 to S transition
(17), and indeed we show that p70S6K is activated in both
32D IGF-IR and 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells, that proliferate for the first
48 h. The difference between our two cell lines is in the
sustained stimulation of p70S6K, a difference confirmed
when the 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells are induced to differentiate by
rapamycin (or OKA). One corollary of these findings is that the IGF-IR
can activate p70S6K in the absence of IRS-1. The human
insulin receptor fails to activate p70S6K in the absence of
IRS-1 (52). These studies also emphasize the need to examine
phosphorylation of p70S6K with different phosphospecific
antibodies and at different intervals after stimulation. Weng et
al. (34) carried out an extensive study of p70S6K
phosphorylation and activation, using several phosphospecific antibodies. Their time courses (their Fig. 2) extended to 30 min after
insulin stimulation, with no suggestion of a decrease at that time
(unless rapamycin or wortmannin were added). The cells used by Weng
et al. (34) were CHO-IR cells, which have IRS-1 and
overexpress the insulin receptor. Han et al. (29) also
looked at p70S6K activity at times up to 1 h after
stimulation, and showed that the inhibitor SQ20006 caused inhibition.
Our results seem to indicate that if we had examined p70S6K
phosphorylation only at 15 min after IGF-I stimulation, the difference between the two cell lines would have been much less convincing. It is
only at later times that differences emerge, and these differences are
corroborated by changes in mobility shifts.
As to the mechanism(s) by which IRS-1 and p70S6K bring
about the transformed phenotype, we have explored in this paper two
possibilities. The first possibility is an effect on cell size. An
effect of IGF-IR signaling on cell size was suggested by the
experiments of Surmacz et al. (53), who showed that IGF-I
could activate the ribosomal DNA promoter, and further supported by the
finding that p70S6K knock-out mice are somewhat smaller
than their wild type littermates (54). But the importance of IRS-1 and
p70S6K in cell size regulation was demonstrated more
rigorously by the recent reports that homologues of both IRS-1 and the
S6 kinase regulate cell size in Drosophila (18, 19). We show
here that cell size is increased in 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells, but not
when the cells are treated with rapamycin. The increase in the mean of
the forward scatter is small but highly reproducible, and, for a proper
assessment, one should compare our data with Fig. 2 of Bohni et
al. (18). In this figure, Bohni et al. (18) used, like
us, FACS analysis to estimate the effect of CHICO on cell size in
Drosophila. Their difference (also measured by forward scattering) was 10-14%, the same difference we have noticed in our
cells. Furthermore, our comparison of the G1 and
G2 subpopulations of the same cell line (Fig. 4,
panel D) shows that the small difference revealed
by forward scattering reflects a considerable difference in actual size.
The second possibility (the two possibilities are not mutually
exclusive) is based on a simple hypothesis. This hypothesis calls for
the IGF-IR to send signals for two separate programs: differentiation
and mitogenesis (see above). In this scenario, the main function of
IRS-1 would be to extinguish the differentiation program. It has been
reported that certain markers of differentiation in hemopoietic cells
can be detected very early, while the cells are still proliferating
(55). If our hypothesis is correct, a marker of differentiation would
be visible at early times in 32D IGF-IR cells, but not in 32D
IGF-IR/IRS1 cells. Our results with an early differentiation marker,
the MPO mRNA, are compatible with this hypothesis. The levels of
MPO mRNA are high in 32D IGF-IR cells at 24 h after IL-3
withdrawal (with the cells rapidly proliferating), while they are much
lower in 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells. In further support of our hypothesis
is the finding that MPO mRNA is also increased in 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1
cells treated with rapamycin. Incidentally, 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells have
not lost the capacity to undergo granulocytic differentiation. They are
induced to do so not only by OKA and rapamycin, but also by granulocyte
colony-stimulating factor (data not shown).
Since PI 3-kinase plays an important role in activation of
p70S6K (see above), it is reasonable to ask whether
inhibitors of PI 3-kinase have any effect on the growth of these cells.
Addition of PI 3-kinase inhibitors has little effect on the growth of
32D IGF-IR cells (10, 11). It seems therefore that the IGF-IR can
stimulate growth by a mechanism by passing PI 3-kinase. However, Akt is
weakly but reproducibly activated by IGF-I in 32D IGF-IR cells (2). An
obvious next step is to determine whether the activation of
p70S6K by the IGF-IR, in the absence of IRS-1, may directly
involve PDK1 (28).
An intriguing conclusion of this paper is that IRS-1 can make the
difference between terminal differentiation (and death) and malignant
transformation in 32D cells expressing the IGF-IR. Although 32D IGF-IR
cells are stimulated to proliferate by IGF-I for the first 48 h
(Ref. 11 and this paper), only 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells can form tumors in
nude and syngeneic mice (or grow continuously in the absence of IL-3).
There is often a discrepancy between decreased growth factor
requirements and ability to form tumors in experimental animals (56).
For this reason, we wish to document here that the 32D IGF-IR/IRS1
cells not only have lost the IL-3 requirement, but are also capable of
forming tumors in mice.
Finally, there are two other considerations that should be discussed at
this point. The first is the use of a dominant negative mutants of
p70S6K. It would have confirmed the data obtained with
rapamycin, but the problem with dominant negative mutants of
p70S6K is the existence of a similar kinase, S6K2, that
can, at least partially, replace the p70S6K function (28,
54). A second legitimate concern is the connection between an effect
seen at 60 min (sustained activation of p70S6K) and an
event (differentiation) that materializes only after 48 h or even
later. This is a problem with all signal transduction events when one
wishes to correlate them to later processes, such as proliferation or
transformation. However, Rose et al. (57), in an elegant
experiment, have shown that some transducing signals are required
throughout the cell cycle, while other are required only for the first
15 min after growth factor stimulation. We may also add that the
extinction of the differentiation program (see Fig. 5) must occur early
after IGF-I stimulation.
In conclusion, our experiments offer a valuable model for the study of
transformation versus differentiation in murine hemopoietic cells expressing the IGF-IR. The presence or absence of IRS-1 determines whether the cells will transform or differentiate, respectively. The mechanism requires the sustained activation of the
p70S6K pathway. We would like to speculate (see above) that
the main function of IRS-1 in this model is to inhibit the activation
of the differentiation program, resulting in continuous cell
proliferation. Our results with the MPO mRNA suggest that this
hypothesis may be correct. It is therefore possible that the
differences reported in this paper between 32D IGF-IR cells and 32D
IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells may already be programmed in the early stages of
IGF-I stimulation, before the fate of the cells actually diverges. The
next step would be to investigate how the various transcription factors that are involved in myeloid differentiation are affected by IRS-1 in
the various conditions described in this paper.
*
This work was supported by Grants GM 33694 and CA 78890 from
the National Institutes of Health.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.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, June 8, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M002271200
The abbreviations used are:
IGF-IR, insulin-like
growth factor I receptor;
IGF-I, insulin-like growth factor I;
OKA, okadaic acid;
MPO, myeloperoxidase;
PAGE, polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis;
IRS, insulin receptor substrate;
PI, phosphoinositol;
IL, interleukin;
FACS, fluorescence-activated cell sorting.
Insulin Receptor Substrate-1, p70S6K, and Cell Size
in Transformation and Differentiation of Hemopoietic Cells*
,
,
,
,
,
,
, and
Kimmel Cancer Center and the
§ Department of Pathology, Thomas Jefferson University,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107 and the ¶ Instituto Regina Elena,
Centro Ricerca Sperimentale, Laboratorio Oncogenesi Molecolare, Via
delle Messi D'Oro, 156, 00158 Rome, Italy
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-32P]dCTP by the Random Primed
DNA labeling kit (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) and purified using the
QuickSpinn G-50 Sephadex columns (Roche Molecular Biochemicals).
Hybridization was performed in 5× SSC, 50% formamide, 0.1% SDS, 100 µg/ml salmon sperm DNA at 42 °C for 16 h.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (40K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Activation of p70S6K in 32D
IGF-IR and 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells. Cells exponentially growing
were seeded in serum-free medium for 4 h before stimulation with
20 ng/ml IGF-I (see "Experimental Procedures"). Lysates were
prepared from cells at the times indicated (in min) after IGF-I
stimulation. From the same experiments, equal amounts of proteins were
subjected to three separate 4-15% gradient gel SDS-PAGE and
transferred to nitrocellulose membranes, and each filter was blotted
with a different phospho-p70S6K antibody:
phospho-Thr389 (panel A),
phospho-Thr421/Ser424 (panel
C), and phospho-Ser411 (panel
E). The membranes were stripped and re-blotted with an
anti-p70S6K antibody to assess total level of protein
(panels B, D, and F). The
Western blot shown in panel G was performed on a
7.5% gel that allows a better separation of the different
phosphorylated forms of p70S6K (mobility shift). A
representative experiment is shown. Identical results were obtained
using lysates from three different experiments.

View larger version (24K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Effect of rapamycin on the proliferation and
differentiation of 32D-derived cells. 32D IGF-IR
(closed bars) and 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1
(gray bars) were seeded in IL-3-free medium
supplemented with 50 ng/ml IGF-I at a density of 1 × 105 cells in 2 ml total volume. 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 were also
incubated with 50 ng/ml IGF-I and 2.5 ng/ml rapamycin (open
bars) or 10 ng/ml rapamycin (striped
bars). Cells were analyzed for growth and differentiation
after 4 days of culture. Panel A, cell
proliferation was evaluated by counting the total number of viable
cells. Panel B, Wright-Giemsa-stained cells were
evaluated for the presence of morphological characteristics of
differentiation (percentage of bands and polymorphonuclear cells on the
total number of cells scored). A representative experiment (duplicate
with range) is shown.

View larger version (44K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Effect of rapamycin on p70S6K
activation in 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells. 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells were
incubated in serum-free medium for 4 h. Samples treated with
rapamycin were pre-incubated with 10 ng/ml of rapamycin for 15 min
before stimulation with IGF-I 20 ng/ml. The incubations were stopped at
the times indicated (in min), and the lysates obtained were run on four
separate gel-SDS-PAGE. The membranes were blotted with the three
different anti-phospho-p70S6K antibodies described in
panels A, C, and E. After
stripping, the filters were re-blotted with an anti-p70S6K
antibody to monitor the total levels of protein (panels
B, D, and F). The samples in
panel G were run on a 7.5% gel to enhance the
mobility shift of the total p70S6K (see previous
figures).

View larger version (40K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Cell size analysis of 32D-derived cells.
Cell size was analyzed by FS as described under "Experimental
Procedures." The differences in size are presented as the
superimposed histograms generated by FACS analysis. Panel
A gives a comparison between 32D IGF-IR and 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1
cells in three different phases of the cell cycle (48 h after IL-3
withdrawal and supplementation with IGF-I). The lower
panels (B-D) give three controls.
Panel B, FS for the G2/M
subpopulation of 32D IGF-IR cells in IL-3 or in IGF-I (48 h).
Panel C, FS for the G2/M
subpopulation of 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 cells in IGF-I or in IGF-I plus
rapamycin (48 h). Panel D is a comparison of FS
for the 32D IGF-IR cells in the G1 or G2/M
phases of the cell cycle (48 h in IGF-I). These experiments were
repeated three times.

View larger version (60K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Expression of myeloperoxidase mRNA in
32D-derived cells. RNAs were prepared from cells seeded in
IL-3-free medium (0 h) or supplemented with 50 ng/ml IGF-I (24 and
48 h) alone or in combination with rapamycin (10 ng/ml). The RNAs
were subjected to Northern blot as described under "Experimental
Procedures." The autoradiograph obtained after hybridization with
the probe for the myeloperoxidase mRNA is shown in panel
A. The 28 S ribosomal RNA stained with ethidium bromide is
reported to monitor the total amount of RNA present on the filter
(panel B).

View larger version (25K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Effect of okadaic acid on the proliferation
and differentiation of 32D-derived cells. 32D IGF-IR
(closed bars) and 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1
(gray bars) were seeded in IL-3-free medium
supplemented with 50 ng/ml IGF-I at the density of 1 × 105 cells in 2 ml total volume. 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 were also
incubated in 50 ng/ml IGF-I and 10 nM OKA (open
bars) or 20 nM OKA (striped
bars). Cells were analyzed for growth and differentiation
after 4 and 6 days of culture. Panel A, cell
proliferation was evaluated by counting the total number of viable
cells. Panel B, Wright-Giemsa-stained cells were
evaluated for the presence of morphological characteristics of
differentiation (percentage of bands and polymorphonuclear cells on the
total number of cells scored). A representative experiment (duplicate
with range) is shown.

View larger version (32K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
Effect of okadaic acid on p70S6K
activation in 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells. 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells were
incubated in serum-free medium for 4 h. Samples treated with OKA
were pre-incubated with 500 nM OKA for 60 min before
stimulation with IGF-I (20 ng/ml). Control cells were incubated only
with IGF-I. Lysates obtained at the times indicated (in min) were run
on three separate gels (SDS-PAGE) and the membranes blotted with the
three different anti-phospho-p70S6K antibodies. For
convenience, we show only the results obtained with the
anti-phosphothreonine 389 antibody (panel A) and
the total level of protein (panel B). The blot
shown in panel C was run on a 7.5% gel to
enhance the mobility shift of the total p70S6K (see
"Experimental Procedures").

View larger version (21K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 8.
Growth of 32D-derived cells in the absence of
interleukin-3. 32D IGF-IR (striped bars),
32D IGF-IR/vector (open bars), and 32D
IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells (closed bars) were seeded in
IL-3-free medium supplemented with 50 ng/ml IGF-I at the density of
5 × 10 4 cells/ml in a total volume of 2 ml. At day 4 viable cells were counted by trypan blue exclusion, and 10 × 10 4 cells for each cell line were re-plated in 2 ml of fresh
IL-3-free medium with IGF-I (50 ng/ml). Cells were counted after 4 additional days for a total of 8 days of culture. Data are the average
of three separate experiments (with standard deviations).

View larger version (94K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 9.
Pathology of liver and spleen in Mice
injected with 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells. The animals and the
cell lines are described under "Experimental Procedures".
Panel A, a representative picture of liver,
spleen, and kidneys from nude mice injected with 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1
cells. Panel B, same for mice injected with 32D
IGF-IR cells. Panel C, histology of liver in mice
injected with 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells. Panel D,
liver section of animals injected with 32D IGF-IR cells.
Panels E and F, spleen sections of
mice injected with 32D IGF-IR/IRS1 or 32D IGF-IR cells, respectively.
All magnifications for histology are ×400. The only tissues markedly
increased in weight in mice injected with the 32D IGF-IR/IRS-1 cells
were the liver and spleen.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
FOOTNOTES
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Kimmel Cancer
Center, Thomas Jefferson University, 233 S. 10th St., 624 BLSB, Philadelphia, PA 19107. Tel.: 215-503-4507; Fax: 215-923-0249; E-mail: r_ baserga@lac.jci.tju.edu.
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Baserga, R.,
Hongo, A.,
Rubini, M.,
Prisco, M.,
and Valentinis, B.
(1997)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1332,
105-126
2.
Valentinis, B.,
Romano, G.,
Peruzzi, F.,
Morrione, A.,
Prisco, M.,
Soddu, S.,
Cristofanelli, B.,
Sacchi, A.,
and Baserga, R.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
12423-12430
3.
Greenberger, J. S.,
Sakakeeny, M. A.,
Humphries, R. K.,
Eaves, C. J.,
and Eckner, R. J.
(1983)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
80,
2931-2935
4.
Metcalf, D.
(1985)
Blood
65,
357-362
5.
Valtieri, M.,
Tweardy, D. J.,
Caracciolo, D.,
Johnson, K.,
Mavilio, F.,
Altmann, S.,
Santoli, D.,
and Rovera, G.
(1987)
J. Immunol.
138,
3829-3835
6.
Askew, D. S.,
Ashmun, R. A.,
Simmons, B. C.,
and Cleveland, J. L.
(1991)
Oncogene
6,
1915-1922
7.
McCubrey, J. A.,
Stillman, L. S.,
Mayhew, M. W.,
Algate, P. A.,
Dellow, R. A.,
and Kaleko, M.
(1991)
Blood
78,
921-929
8.
Rodriguez-Tarduchy, G.,
Collins, M. K. L.,
Garcia, I.,
and Lopez-Rivas, A.
(1992)
J. Immunol.
149,
535-540
9.
Prisco, M.,
Hongo, A.,
Rizzo, M. G.,
Sacchi, A.,
and Baserga, R.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
1084-1092
10.
Soon, L.,
Flechner, L.,
Gutkind, J. S.,
Wang, L. H.,
Baserga, R.,
Pierce, J. H.,
and Li, W.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
3816-3828
11.
Peruzzi, F.,
Prisco, M.,
Dews, M.,
Salomoni, P.,
Grassilli, E.,
Romano, G.,
Calabretta, B.,
and Baserga, R.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
7203-7215
12.
Wang, L. M.,
Myers, M. G., Jr.,
Sun, X. J.,
Aaronson, S. A.,
White, M.,
and Pierce, J. H.
(1993)
Science
261,
1591-1594
13.
Zhou-Li, F.,
Xu, S. Q.,
Dews, M.,
and Baserga, R.
(1997)
Oncogene
15,
961-970
14.
Yenush, L.,
Zanella, C.,
Uchida, T.,
Bernal, D.,
and White, M. F.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
6784-6794
15.
Ward, A. C.,
Smith, L.,
de Koning, J. P.,
van Aesch, Y.,
and Touw, I. P.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
14956-14962
16.
Myers, M. G., Jr.,
Grammer, T. C.,
Wang, L. M.,
Sun, X. J.,
Pierce, J. H.,
Blenis, J.,
and White, M. F.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
28783-28789
17.
Lane, H. A.,
Fernandez, A.,
Lamb, N. J. C.,
and Thomas, G.
(1993)
Nature
363,
170-172
18.
Bohni, R.,
Riesco-Escovar, J.,
Oldham, S.,
Brogiolo, W.,
Stocker, H.,
Andruss, B. F.,
Beckingham, K.,
and Hafen, E.
(1999)
Cell
97,
865-875
19.
Montagne, J.,
Stewart, M. J.,
Stocker, H.,
Hafen, E.,
Kozma, S. C.,
and Thomas, G.
(1999)
Science
285,
2126-2129
20.
D'Ambrosio, C.,
Keller, S. R.,
Morrione, A.,
Lienhard, G. E.,
Baserga, R.,
and Surmacz, E.
(1995)
Cell Growth Diff.
6,
557-562
21.
Tanaka, S.,
Ito, T.,
and Wands, J. R.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
14610-14616
22.
Zamorano, J.,
Wang, H. Y.,
Wang, L.-M.,
Pierce, J. H.,
and Keegan, A. D.
(1996)
J. Immunol.
157,
4926-4934
23.
Franke, T. F.,
Kaplan, D. R.,
Cantley, L. C.,
and Toker, A.
(1997)
Science
275,
665-668
24.
Kennedy, S. G.,
Wagner, A. J.,
Conzen, S. D.,
Jordan, J.,
Bellacosa, A.,
Tsichlis, P. N.,
and Hay, N.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
701-713
25.
Dudek, H.,
Datta, S. R.,
Franke, T. F.,
Birnbaum, M. J.,
Yao, R.,
Cooper, G. M.,
Segal, R. A.,
Kaplan, D. R.,
and Greenberg, M. E.
(1997)
Science
275,
661-665
26.
Kulik, G.,
Klippel, A.,
and Weber, M. J.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
1595-1606
27.
Myers, M. J.,
Sun, X. J.,
Cheatham, B.,
Jachna, B. R.,
Glasheen, E. M.,
Backer, J. M.,
and White, M. F.
(1993)
Endocrinology
132,
1421-1430
28.
Dufner, A.,
and Thomas, G.
(1999)
Exp. Cell Res.
253,
100-109
29.
Han, J. W.,
Pearson, R. P.,
Dennis, P. B.,
and Thomas, G.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
21396-21403
30.
Chung, J.,
Grammer, T. C.,
Lemon, K. P.,
Kazlauskas, A.,
and Blenis, J.
(1994)
Nature
370,
71-75
31.
Pearson, R. P.,
Dennis, P. B.,
Han, J. W.,
Williamson, N. A.,
Kozma, S. C.,
Wettenhall, R. E.,
and Thomas, G.
(1995)
EMBO J.
14,
5279-5287
32.
Dennis, P. B.,
Pullen, N.,
Kozma, S. C.,
and Thomas, G.
(1996)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16,
6242-6251
33.
Hara, K. K.,
Yonezawa, K.,
Weng, Q. P.,
Kozlowski, M. T.,
Belham, C.,
and Avruch, J.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
14484-14494
34.
Weng, Q. P.,
Kozlowski, M.,
Belham, C.,
Zhang, A.,
Comb, M. J.,
and Avruch, J.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
16621-16629
35.
Khaleghpour, K.,
Pyronnet, S.,
Gingras, A. C.,
and Sonenberg, N.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
4302-4310
36.
Cohen, P.,
Holmes, C. F. B.,
and Tsukitami, Y.
(1990)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
15,
98-102
37.
Peterson, R. T.,
Desai, B. N.,
Hardwick, J. S.,
and Schreiber, S. L.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
4438-4442
38.
D'Ambrosio, C.,
Valentinis, B.,
Prisco, M.,
Reiss, K.,
Rubini, M.,
and Baserga, R.
(1997)
Cancer Res.
57,
3264-3271
39.
Mothe, I.,
and van Obberghen, E.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
11222-11227
40.
Hotamisligil, G. S.,
Murray, D. L.,
Choy, L. N.,
and Spiegelman, B. M.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
4854-4858
41.
Kruger, A.,
and Anderson, S. M.
(1990)
Oncogene
6,
245-256
42.
Feng, S. H. H.,
Tsai, S.,
Rodriguez, J.,
and Lo, S. C.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
7995-8002
43.
Jefferies, H. B. J.,
Fumagalli, S.,
Dennis, P. B.,
Reinhard, C.,
Pearson, R. B.,
and Thomas, G.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
3693-3704
44.
Hugl, S. R.,
White, M.,
and Rhodes, C. J.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
17771-17779
45.
White, M. F.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biochem.
182,
3-11
46.
Avruch, J.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biochem.
182,
31-48
47.
Ogawa, W.,
Matozaki, T.,
and Kasuga, M.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biochem.
182,
13-22
48.
Weng, Q. P.,
Andrabi, K.,
Klippel, A.,
Kozlowski, M. T.,
Williams, L. T.,
and Avruch, J.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
5744-5748
49.
Giorgetti, S.,
Ballotti, R.,
Kowalski-Chauvel, A.,
Tartare, S.,
and Van Obberghen, E.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
7358-7364
50.
Mukhopadhyay, N. K.,
Price, D. J.,
Kyriakis, J. M.,
Pelech, S.,
Sanghera, J.,
and Avruch, J.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
3325-3335
51.
Dennis, P. B.,
Pullen, N.,
Pearson, R. B.,
Kozma, S. C.,
and Thomas, G.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
14845-14852
52.
Yenush, L.,
Fernandez, R.,
Myers, M. G., Jr.,
Grammer, T. C.,
Sun, X. J.,
Blenis, J.,
Pierce, J. H.,
Schlessinger, J.,
and White, M. F.
(1996)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16,
2509-2517
53.
Surmacz, E.,
Kaczmarek, L.,
Ronning, O.,
and Baserga, R.
(1987)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
7,
657-663
54.
Shima, H.,
Pende, M.,
Chen, Y.,
Fumagalli, S.,
Thomas, G.,
and Kozma, S. C.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
6649-6659
55.
Borregaard, N.,
and Cowland, J. B.
(1998)
Blood
89,
3503-3521
56.
Baserga, R.
(1985)
The Biology of Cell Reproduction
, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
57.
Rose, D. W.,
Xiao, S.,
Pillay, T. S.,
Kolch, W.,
and Olefsky, J. M.
(1998)
Oncogene
17,
889-899
Copyright © 2000 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
W. Feng, R. E. Brown, C. D. Trung, W. Li, L. Wang, T. Khoury, S. Alrawi, J. Yao, K. Xia, and D. Tan Morphoproteomic Profile of mTOR, Ras/Raf Kinase/ERK, and NF-{kappa}B Pathways in Human Gastric Adenocarcinoma Ann. Clin. Lab. Sci., January 1, 2008; 38(3): 195 - 209. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. Shi, L. Sepp-Lorenzino, M. Prisco, P. Linsley, T. deAngelis, and R. Baserga Micro RNA 145 Targets the Insulin Receptor Substrate-1 and Inhibits the Growth of Colon Cancer Cells J. Biol. Chem., November 9, 2007; 282(45): 32582 - 32590. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. G. Simmons, Y. Ling, H. Wilkins, C. R. Fuller, A. J. D'Ercole, J. Fagin, and P. K. Lund Cell-specific effects of insulin receptor substrate-1 deficiency on normal and IGF-I-mediated colon growth Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol, November 1, 2007; 293(5): G995 - G1003. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
O. Dalmizrak, A. Wu, J. Chen, H. Sun, F. E. Utama, D. Zambelli, T. H. Tran, H. Rui, and R. Baserga Insulin Receptor Substrate-1 Regulates the Transformed Phenotype of BT-20 Human Mammary Cancer Cells Cancer Res., March 1, 2007; 67(5): 2124 - 2130. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |