Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M006964200 on September 18, 2000
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 50, 39146-39151, December 15, 2000
Growth Inhibition by Insulin-like Growth Factor-binding
Protein-3 in T47D Breast Cancer Cells Requires Transforming Growth
Factor-
(TGF-
) and the Type II TGF-
Receptor*
Susan
Fanayan,
Sue M.
Firth,
Alison J.
Butt, and
Robert C.
Baxter
From the Kolling Institute of Medical Research, University of
Sydney, Royal North Shore Hospital, St. Leonards, New South Wales 2065, Australia
Received for publication, August 2, 2000, and in revised form, August 31, 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
This study explores the relationship between
anti-proliferative signaling by transforming growth factor-
(TGF-
) and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) in
human breast cancer cells. In MCF-7 cells, the expression of
recombinant IGFBP-3 inhibited proliferation and sensitized the cells to
further inhibition by TGF-
1. To investigate the mechanism, we used
T47D cells that lack type II TGF-
receptor (TGF-
RII) and are
insensitive to TGF-
1. After introducing the TGF-
RII by
transfection, the basal proliferation rate was significantly decreased.
Exogenous TGF-
1 caused no further growth inhibition, but
immunoneutralization of endogenous TGF-
1 restored the proliferation
rate almost to the control level. The addition of IGFBP-3 did not
inhibit the proliferation of control cells but caused
dose-dependent inhibition in TGF-
RII-expressing cells
when exogenous TGF-
1 was also present. Similarly,
receptor-expressing cells showed dose-dependent sensitivity to exogenous TGF-
1 only in the presence of exogenous IGFBP-3. This
indicates that in these cells, anti-proliferative signaling by
exogenous IGFBP-3 requires both the TGF-
RII and exogenous TGF-
1.
To investigate this synergism, the phosphorylation of TGF-
signaling
intermediates, Smad2 and Smad3, was measured. Phosphorylation of each
Smad was stimulated by TGF-
1 and, independently, by IGFBP-3 with the
two agents together showing a cumulative effect. These data suggest
that IGFBP-3 inhibitory signaling requires an active TGF-
signaling
pathway and implicate Smad2 and Smad3 in IGFBP-3 signal transduction.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Transforming growth factor-
(TGF-
)1 is a member of a
family of structurally homologous dimeric proteins, which are
multifunctional growth factors (1). TGF-
has been shown to display a
variety of biological activities including the negative and positive
regulations of cell growth, stimulation of extracellular matrix
formation, stimulation of angiogenesis, and induction of
differentiation of several cell lineages (2, 3). All human breast tumor cell lines secrete all three isoforms of TGF-
, namely TGF-
1, TGF-
2, and TGF-
3 (4, 5), and levels are elevated with increased
malignancy (6).
TGF-
is synthesized and secreted as a high molecular weight latent
complex that restricts its in vivo availability (7, 8).
TGF-
must be released from this complex before it can exert its
actions, which is an important regulatory step in the action of this
growth factor. Biological activities of TGF-
are believed to be
mediated through specific cell surface receptors (9). A number of
different size receptors have been identified in cultured cells and
tissues, which include types I, II, III, IV, V, and VI receptors (10,
11). Of them, only type I receptor (TGF-
RI) and type II receptor
(TGF-
RII) have been shown to be directly involved in signal
transduction (12). This is supported by the observation that the lack
of response to TGF-
in some types of cancer cell lines correlates
with the loss or low expression levels of TGF-
RI and/or TGF-
RII
(13, 14).
Smads are molecules of relative molecular mass 42-60 kDa with two
regions of homology at the NH2- and COOH-terminals
termed Mad homology domains (MH1 and MH2, respectively), connected with a proline-rich linker sequence (15). They fall into three classes based
on sequence similarity and function. Class I Smads or
pathway-restricted Smads couple to different receptors. Of these, Smad2
and Smad3 are phosphorylated after stimulation by TGF-
(16) or
activin (17), whereas Smad1 and Smad5 are involved in bone
morphogenetic protein signaling (18). In the COOH-terminal region,
pathway-restricted Smads have a characteristic Ser-Ser-X-Ser
motif, the two most COOH-terminal serine residues of which are
phosphorylated by activated TGF-
RI (18, 19). Class II Smads that are
represented by Smad4 (20) appear to be a general partner for the
pathway-restricted Smads by bringing the cytoplasmic Smads into the
nucleus where they can activate transcriptional responses (16, 21).
Class III Smads, which include Smad6 and Smad7, are known as the
inhibitory Smads because they bind to TGF-
RI and interfere with the
phosphorylation of the pathway-restricted Smads (22, 23).
After the binding of TGF-
to TGF-
RII, a constitutively active
serine-threonine kinase, TGF-
RI is recruited into the complex where
it is phosphorylated by the type II receptor. The activated TGF-
RI
then interacts with and phosphorylates Smad2 and Smad3, thus inducing
their association with Smad4 followed by the translocation of the
heteromeric complex to the nucleus where they can potentiate the
transcription of target genes (21, 24).
Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) is a
member of a family of six well characterized IGF-binding proteins,
IGFBP-1 to IGFBP-6 (25). IGFBP-3 is the most abundant IGFBP in the
circulation, serves as a storage depot for IGFs (26), and has been
shown to have both IGF-dependent and IGF-independent effects on cell proliferation. In its IGF-dependent
actions, IGFBP-3 modulates the interaction between IGFs and their cell
surface receptors, resulting in either inhibition or stimulation of
cellular growth (27, 28). IGFBP-3 has also been shown to act as a
growth inhibitor in the absence of IGFs (29), an effect that may be mediated by putative IGFBP-3 receptor(s) on the cell surface. No
signaling receptor for IGFBP-3 has yet been unequivocally identified.
MCF-7 human breast cancer cells express intact TGF-
signaling
machinery and have been shown to be responsive to TGF-
growth inhibition. On the other hand, T47D human breast cancer cells lack
TGF-
RII and are unresponsive to TGF-
treatment (30). We have
found that T47D cells also fail to respond to exogenous IGFBP-3,
although we previously showed that transfection with IGFBP-3 is growth
inhibitory to these cells (31). In this study, we demonstrate that
restoration of active TGF-
signaling is required for T47D cells to
respond to exogenous IGFBP-3 and that IGFBP-3 stimulates the
phosphorylation of the signaling intermediates Smad2 and Smad3,
suggesting a previously unrecognized pathway of IGFBP-3 signaling.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Materials--
T47D and MCF-7 cells were purchased from the
American Type Culture Collection (Rockville, MD). Anti-human TGF-
RII
polyclonal antibody (C-16) was purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology
(Santa Cruz, CA). Anti-human TGF-
1 monoclonal antibody (MAB240) was purchased from R & D Systems (Minneapolis, MN). Anti-human Smad2 (LPB2), anti-human Smad3 (LPC3), and anti-phosphoserine (Poly-Z-PS1) polyclonal antibodies were purchased from Zymed
Laboratories, Inc. (San Francisco, CA). Recombinant human
TGF-
1 was purchased from Austral Biologicals (San Ramon, CA).
IGFBP-3 was isolated from Cohn fraction IV of human plasma (32).
Cell Culture--
Stock cultures of T47D and MCF-7 cells were
routinely maintained in RPMI 1640 medium (Cytosystems, North Ryde,
Australia) supplemented with 10 µg/ml insulin, 2.92 mg/ml glutamine,
and 10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum.
Transfection--
A 1.7-kilobase pair TGF-
RII
cDNA fragment (a gift from J. P. Pujol, Caen, France) was
cloned into the expression vector pcDNA3 (Invitrogen, Leek, The
Netherlands) to generate pcDNA3/TGF-
RII. A 1.1-kilobase pair
EcoRI-PvuII fragment isolated from pibp.118 (33), which contains the full coding sequence of hIGFBP-3
(provided by W. I. Wood, Genentech, San Francisco, CA), was
inserted into the vector pOP13 (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) to generate
pOP13/IGFBP-3. Transfections were performed by the
LipofectAMINE-mediated procedure as recommended by the manufacturer
(Life Technologies, Inc.). Transfected cells were maintained in media
containing Geneticin (500 µg/ml for T47D, 800 µg/ml for MCF-7) for
21 days post-transfection to select for stable transfectants.
Experiments were performed on mixed population cultures of transfectants.
Northern Blot--
Total cellular RNA was extracted from cells
by the guanidine isothiocyanate/acid-phenol technique (34). Total RNA
samples (20 µg) were electrophoresed in 1% agarose gels containing
2.2 M formaldehyde. The RNA was transferred by capillary
blotting to Zeta-Probe GT membrane (Bio-Rad) and cross-linked by baking at 80 °C. The full-length 1.7-kilobase pair TGF-
RII
cDNA probe was labeled using Ready-to-Go random priming kit
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) and [
-32P]deoxy-CTP
(PerkinElmer Life Sciences). The membrane was prehybridized and
hybridized (2 × 106 cpm/ml) and then washed using
0.1× SSC (150 mM NaCl, 15 mM
Na3C6H5O7) at 42 °C.
The signals were quantified using a PhosphorImager (Molecular Dynamics,
Sunnyvale, CA).
Immunoprecipitation of Cell Lysates--
Cells in 80-90%
confluent cultures were lysed with ice-cold phosphate-buffered
saline (5.8 mM Na2HPO4, 1.7 mM NaH2PO4, 6.8 mM
NaCl), containing 1% (v/v) Triton X-100, 0.5% (w/v) sodium deoxycholate, and 0.1% (w/v) SDS at 4 °C for 10 min. To precipitate Smads, cell lysates were incubated with antibodies, as indicated in the
text, together with packed beads of protein A and protein G plus
agarose (Oncogene, Cambridge, MA) following manufacturer's instructions. To precipitate IGFBP-3, lysates were treated with rabbit
anti-human IGFBP-3 antiserum R-30 that was coupled to agarose beads.
After centrifugation, the immunoprecipitated samples were resuspended
in sample buffer (1.25 mM Tris, 30 g/liter SDS, 10% (v/v)
glycerol) and boiled 5 min before electrophoresis.
Western Immunoblot Analysis--
Samples were fractionated on
8% SDS-polyacrylamide gels overnight, and proteins were transferred to
nitrocellulose membrane as described previously (35). The membrane was
then incubated overnight at 4 °C with the detecting antibody in TBS
(150 mM NaCl, 10 mM Tris) containing 1% (w/v)
bovine serum albumin and 0.05% (v/v) Nonidet P-40. After washes in
cold TBS, the membrane was incubated for 2 h at 22 °C with
radioiodinated protein A followed by several washes with TBS buffer.
The dried membrane was exposed to Hyperfilm-MP for 48-72 h before developing.
TGF-
1 Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay of Conditioned
Media--
Cells were plated in six-well plates in the presence of
10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum. After reaching 80-90% confluence,
cultures were changed to serum-free media for 96 h. Conditioned
media were then collected and assayed for both active and total
TGF-
1, using TGF-
1 Emax ImmunoAssay System (Promega, Madison, WI)
that measures both naturally processed (endogenous active) and
acid-treated (total) TGF-
1. To measure total TGF-
1, 100 µl of
conditioned medium was first acid-treated with 5 µl of 1 M HCl for 15 min at 22 °C and then neutralized with 5 µl of 1 M NaOH.
Measurement of Cell Growth--
Cells were seeded at 5 × 104 cells/well in 12-well plates in the presence of 10%
(v/v) fetal bovine serum. After 3 days, cells were washed with
serum-free media and treated with various concentrations of TGF-
1 in
the absence or presence of exogenous IGFBP-3 for 4 days. Cell
monolayers were then trypsinized, and the viable cell numbers were
counted in a hemocytometer.
Statistical Analysis--
Statistical analysis was carried out
using StatView 4.02 (Abacus Concepts, Inc., Berkeley, CA). Differences
between the groups were evaluated by Fisher PLSD (Protected Least
Significant Difference) test after analysis of variance using repeated
measures or factorial analysis where appropriate.
 |
RESULTS |
TGF-
Action in MCF-7 Cells Transfected with hIGFBP-3
cDNA--
To determine whether IGFBP-3 has a physiological
relevance in cellular responses to TGF-
, we introduced the IGFBP-3
cDNA into MCF-7 cells, which have intact TGF-
signaling
machinery. Analysis of culture medium conditioned by
IGFBP-3-transfected MCF-7 (MCF-7/IGFBP-3) cells for 3 days revealed up
to 50 ng/ml IGFBP-3, which was determined by radioimmunoassay. In
contrast, IGFBP-3 was not detected in medium conditioned by control
vector-transfected cells (MCF-7/vector). 125I-IGF-I ligand
blot analysis (Fig. 1A) of
concentrated culture medium, conditioned by MCF-7/vector cells,
indicated the presence of three IGFBPs (IGFBP-2, IGFBP-4, and IGFBP-5)
as described previously (36). In addition to these IGFBPs, a 43-kDa
IGFBP was also present in MCF-7/IGFBP-3 conditioned medium, which was
detected by 125I-IGF-I ligand blot analysis after
immunoprecipitation with anti-human IGFBP-3 antibody (Fig.
1A), thus identifying it as IGFBP-3. Immunoblot analysis
indicated that the IGFBP-3 was intact with no indication of
proteolysis.

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
A, immunoblot analysis of media
conditioned by control vector-transfected MCF-7 cells and
IGFBP-3-transfected MCF-7 cells. For 72 h, conditioned media from
subconfluent cultures of vector-transfected cells (lanes 1,
3, and 5) or IGFBP-3-transfected MCF-7 cells
(lanes 2, 4, and 6) were either
concentrated 20-fold (lanes 1 and 2) or
immunoprecipitated with hIGFBP-3-specific antibody (lanes
3-6). Samples were electrophoresed and transferred to
nitrocellulose as described under "Experimental Procedures" and
then probed with either 125I-IGF-I, 1 × 106 cpm/50 ml (lanes 1-4) or antiserum R-30 to
hIGFBP-3 (1:7500 final dilution) (lanes 5 and
6). The mobilities of molecular mass markers
(kDa) are indicated on the left.
B, responsiveness of MCF-7/IGFBP-3 cells to TGF- 1 growth
inhibition. Vector-transfected MCF-7 cells and IGFBP-3-transfected
MCF-7 cells were seeded at 5 × 104 cells/well in
media containing 10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum. Cells were treated with
various concentrations of TGF- 1 for 4 days, the monolayers were
trypsinized, and total cell numbers were determined in a hemocytometer.
Values shown are the means ± S.E. of triplicate wells from three
independent experiments. *, p < 0.0001 for
MCF-7/IGFBP-3 versus MCF-7/vector cells.
|
|
In the absence of exogenous TGF-
1, IGFBP-3-expressing MCF-7 cells
demonstrated a basal proliferation rate, which was almost half that of
the control vector-transfected cells (p < 0.0001) (Fig. 1B). After treatment with TGF-
1 over the range of
0.5-5 ng/ml for 4 days, the proliferation rate of the
IGFBP-3-transfected cells was further reduced in a TGF-
1
dose-dependent manner (p < 0.0001) by
repeated measures of analysis of variance, whereas vector-transfected
cells were not significantly growth-inhibited (p = 0.5)
(Fig. 1B). The lack of growth inhibitory effect of TGF-
1 on vector-transfected MCF-7 cells was hypothesized to be due to the
presence of endogenous TGF-
1 produced by the cells, which might
render the cells less responsive to additional TGF-
1 treatment. Because most cell lines have been shown to secrete TGF-
1 in a latent
form requiring acidification to become active (37), we measured
TGF-
1 activity in neutral-treated and acid-treated media from MCF-7
cells. TGF-
1 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay of medium conditioned
by MCF-7/vector cells revealed the presence of 3.2 ng/ml total
TGF-
1, of which approximately 1.5 ng/ml was present in the active
form. The level of TGF-
1 expressed was similar in the presence of
endogenous IGFBP-3 in MCF-7/IGFBP-3 cells (Table
I).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Levels of TGF- 1 secreted by T47D and MCF-7 cells
Serum-free conditioned media collected from cells were acid-activated
as described under "Experimental Procedures." 100 µl of either
acid-activated or unprocessed conditioned media were assayed by
TGF- 1 enzyme-linked immunoabsorbent assay to measure total and
active TGF- 1, respectively. Values shown are the means ± S.E.
of triplicate wells from two independent experiments.
|
|
Expression of TGF-
RII by T47D Cells Transfected with TGF-
RII
cDNA--
Because the sensitivity of MCF-7 cells to TGF-
1
appeared to be enhanced when the cells were expressing IGFBP-3, we used
the TGF-
RII-negative T47D cell line to investigate possible
synergism between TGF-
and IGFBP-3 signaling. To demonstrate that
TGF-
1 responsiveness could be restored in T47D cells after
TGF-
RII expression, cells were stably transfected with either the
plasmid vector pcDNA3 or the recombinant plasmid
pcDNA3/TGF-
RII. Northern blot analysis of total RNA isolated
from the transfected cells revealed the presence of a 1.7-kilobase
band, corresponding to the TGF-
RII mRNA transcript in
T47D/TGF-
RII cells but not in control T47D/vector cells (Fig.
2A). In addition,
immunoprecipitated cell lysates of T47D/vector and T47D/TGF-
RII
cells were examined using SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and
Western immunoblotting with an anti-TGF-
RII antibody. Fig.
2B shows that TGF-
RII-transfected cells but not
vector-transfected T47D cells expressed the ~75-kDa TGF-
RII.

View larger version (57K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Expression of type II TGF-
receptor in transfected T47D cells. A, Northern
blot analysis of total cellular RNA isolated from T47D/vector and
T47D/TGF- RII cells. RNA samples were extracted, electrophoresed,
transferred to nitrocellulose, and probed with radiolabeled TGF- RII
cDNA as described under "Experimental Procedures." The relative
migration distances of the molecular size markers
(kb) are indicated on the left side of the
panel. B, immunoblot analysis of
immunoprecipitated cell lysates of T47D/vector cells and
T47D/TGF- RII cells. Samples were prepared and processed for
immunoblotting as described under "Experimental Procedures." The
C16 antibody used is specific for TGF- RII. The relative migration
distances of the molecular mass markers (kDa) are indicated
on the left side of the panel. kb,
kilobase
|
|
Effect of TGF-
RII Expression on T47D Cell
Proliferation--
As shown in Fig.
3A, the basal proliferation
rate of T47D/TGF-
RII cells, measured over 4 days serum-free after
the initial plating period, was significantly lower in the absence of
exogenous TGF-
1 than in vector-transfected cells (p < 0.0001). The addition of exogenous TGF-
1 (1-10 ng/ml) slightly
stimulated T47D/TGF-
RII cell growth (p = 0.005) but
had no effect on the proliferation of the control T47D/vector
cells.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
A, inhibition of the basal proliferation
rate of T47D cells by TGF- RII expression. T47D/vector (black
bars) or T47D/TGF- RII (open bars) cells
were seeded at 5 × 104 cells/well in media containing
10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum. Cells were treated with the various
indicated concentrations of TGF- 1 in serum-free media for 4 days.
The monolayers were trypsinized, and total cell numbers were determined
as described under "Experimental Procedures." Values shown are the
means ± S.E. of triplicate wells from four independent
experiments. *, p < 0.0001 for T47D/TGF- RII
versus T47D/vector cells. B, reversal of
TGF- RII-induced growth inhibition by immunoneutralizing
TGF- 1. T47D/vector cells or T47D/TGF- RII cells were seeded
at 5 × 104 cells/well in media containing 10% (v/v)
fetal bovine serum. Cells were treated with various concentrations of
TGF- 1-neutralizing antibody (MAB240) as indicated in serum-free
media for 4 days. The monolayers were then trypsinized, and total cell
numbers were determined as described under "Experimental
Procedures." Values shown are the means ± S.E. of triplicate
wells from three independent experiments. *, p < 0.0001; **, p = 0.002 for T47D/TGF- RII
versus T47D/vector cells.
|
|
The absence of a growth inhibitory effect of exogenous TGF-
1 on
T47D/TGF-
RII cells was hypothesized to be due to the presence of
active TGF-
1 produced by T47D cells. Analysis of serum-free conditioned media from these cells showed that T47D cells secrete 1.6 ng/ml total TGF-
1, of which ~0.6 ng/ml is endogenously active. These levels were not affected by transfection with either vector or
TGF-
RII cDNA (Table I). To examine whether the difference in the
basal proliferation rate between T47D/vector and T47D/TGF-
RII cells
was due to endogenous active TGF-
1, we tested the effect of an
anti-TGF-
1-neutralizing antibody on cell growth (Fig.
3B). The antibody (0-15 µg/well) had no effect on the
proliferation of the control vector-transfected cells but increased the
proliferation rate of the receptor-transfected cells in a
dose-dependent manner with 15 µg of the antibody
resulting in a 2-fold increase in the basal proliferation rate
(p < 0.0001). This is consistent with the presence of
endogenous active TGF-
1, which only inhibits proliferation in the
presence of functional TGF-
RII. Treatment of both cell lines with 15 µg of non-immune IgG had no effect on the proliferation of either
cell line (data not shown).
IGFBP-3 and TGF-
1 Act Synergistically to Inhibit Cell
Growth--
To investigate the functional interaction between TGF-
1
and IGFBP-3, T47D/TGF-
RII and T47D/vector cells were treated with various concentrations of exogenous TGF-
1 (0-10 ng) in the absence or presence of 500 ng of human plasma-derived IGFBP-3 for 4 days. The
vector-transfected T47D cells, which showed no response to treatment by
exogenous TGF-
1 alone, were slightly growth-stimulated in the
presence of 500 ng of IGFBP-3 at the higher concentrations of TGF-
1
(p = 0.001) (Fig.
4A). However, in
T47D/TGF-
RII cells, which were slightly growth-stimulated after
treatment with TGF-
1 alone (Figs. 3A and 4B),
the basal cell number was further reduced in the presence of TGF-
1
together with IGFBP-3 (p < 0.0001) in a TGF-
1
dose-dependent manner (Fig. 4B).

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Synergistic growth inhibition by
TGF- 1 and IGFBP-3. T47D/vector
(A and C) or T47D/TGF- RII (B and
D) cells were seeded at 5 × 104 cells/well
in media containing 10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum. Cells were treated
with increasing concentrations of TGF- 1 (A and
B) in the absence (open symbols) and presence
(closed symbols) of 500 ng/ml IGFBP-3 for 4 days.
C and D, cells were treated with increasing
concentrations of IGFBP-3 in the absence (open symbols) and
presence (closed symbols) of 2.5 ng/ml TGF- 1 for 4 days.
The monolayers were then trypsinized, and total cell numbers were
determined as described under "Experimental Procedures." Values
shown are the means ± S.E. of triplicate wells from four
independent experiments for A and B and from two
independent experiments for C and D. Only
error bars larger than the symbols used are
shown. *, p < 0.0001 (repeated measures of analysis of
variance) for TGF- 1 (0 ng) versus TGF- 1 (2.5 ng) in
T47D/TGF- RII cells treated with increasing concentrations of IGFBP-3
(D); and *, p < 0.0001 for IGFBP-3
(0 ng) versus IGFBP-3 (500 ng) in T47D/TGF- RII cells
treated with increasing concentrations of TGF- 1
(B).
|
|
Similar observations were made when cells were treated with fixed
concentration (2.5 ng/ml) of exogenous TGF-
1 together with increasing concentrations of IGFBP-3. IGFBP-3 alone did not affect control T47D/vector cell growth, although when TGF-
1 was added together with IGFBP-3, cells were slightly growth-stimulated
(p < 0.0001) (Fig. 4C). Similarly,
T47D/TGF-
RII cells did not respond to treatment with IGFBP-3
alone (Fig. 4D); however, when co-treated with IGFBP-3
and TGF-
1, they were growth-inhibited in a IGFBP-3 dose-dependent manner (p < 0.0001). These
data indicate a synergism between IGFBP-3 and TGF-
1, which requires
the presence of the TGF-
RII.
Intracellular Signaling Mechanism Involved in TGF-
1 and IGFBP-3
Regulation of Cell Growth--
To investigate whether the TGF-
signaling intermediates, Smads, were involved in the synergism between
TGF-
1 and IGFBP-3, Smad2 and Smad3 serine phosphorylation was
analyzed. Both T47D/vector and T47D/TGF-
RII cells were treated with
exogenous TGF-
1 at 2.5 ng/ml for 0-30 min before analyzing
anti-phosphoserine antibody immunoprecipitated cell lysates by
SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. There was an undetectable level
of phosphorylated Smad2 or Smad3 in T47D/vector cells. However, in
T47D/TGF-
RII cells, Smad2 and Smad3 showed maximal phosphorylation
when exposed to TGF-
1 at different time points after treatment with
the optimal time for Smad2 phosphorylation occurring at 5-10 min
followed by a decrease to the basal level by about 30 min. On the other
hand, Smad3 phosphorylation occurred slightly later with maximum
phosphorylation detected at 15 min post-TGF-
1 treatment, which then
decreased to the basal level by 30 min (Fig.
5A). IGFBP-3 also
induced Smad2 and Smad3 phosphorylation in T47D/TGF-
RII cells,
although with a different time course to TGF-
-induced
phosphorylation. IGFBP-3-induced phosphorylation of Smad2 occurred
later than that induced by TGF-
1, increasing at 15 min
post-treatment and peaking after 30 min followed by a decrease after
3 h of treatment (Fig. 5B). IGFBP-3 phosphorylation of
Smad3 peaked later than that of Smad2, with a maximal phosphorylation observed 90 min after treatment with exogenous IGFBP-3, declining by
3 h (Fig. 5B). Like TGF-
1, IGFBP-3 was unable to
induce Smad2 or Smad3 phosphorylation in control vector-transfected
T47D cells (data not shown), suggesting that both TGF-
1 and IGFBP-3
require functional TGF-
signaling machinery to induce
phosphorylation of Smad proteins.

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Stimulation of Smad2 and Smad3
phosphorylation by TGF- 1 and IGFBP-3.
A, T47D/vector cells and T47D/TGF- RII cells were treated
with 2.5 ng/ml TGF- 1 for the times indicated. Cell lysates were then
immunoprecipitated with 5 µg of anti-phosphoserine antibody and then
subjected to immunoblot analysis with either Smad2 or Smad3 antibody,
both used at 2 µg/ml. B, T47D/TGF- RII cells were
treated with 500 ng/ml IGFBP-3 for the times indicated. Samples were
processed as in A for Smad2 and Smad3 immunoblot analysis.
C, T47D/TGF- RII cells were treated with 500 ng/ml IGFBP-3
for the times indicated, which incorporated either a final 10-min
(Smad2) or 15-min (Smad3) co-treatment with 2.5 ng/ml TGF- 1. Samples
were processed as in A for Smad2 and Smad3 immunoblot
analysis.
|
|
Because the co-treatment of T47D/TGF-
RII cells with TGF-
1 and
IGFBP-3 revealed their synergistic effect on cell growth and based on
the individual ability of TGF-
1 and IGFBP-3 to induce Smad2 and
Smad3 phosphorylation (Fig. 5, A and B), we
examined the effect of their co-treatment on both Smad2 and Smad3
phosphorylations. This study was done by performing a single time point
of TGF-
1 treatment, which induced maximal Smad2 or Smad3
phosphorylation, while IGFBP-3 treatment was carried out for 15, 30, 90, 180, or 240 min. Based on the results from TGF-
1-induced
phosphorylation of Smad2 and Smad3 (Fig. 5A), each IGFBP-3
time point incorporated a final 10 min of TGF-
1 treatment for the
Smad2 experiment, whereas to test Smad3 phosphorylation, a final 15-min
TGF-
1 treatment was combined with each IGFBP-3 treatment. Fig.
5C shows that T47D/TGF-
RII cells treated with exogenous
IGFBP-3 for 15 min, in the last 10 min of which TGF-
1 was also
added, exhibited maximum Smad2 phosphorylation. Smad3 phosphorylation,
on the other hand, was more significant after a 30-min IGFBP-3
treatment, which included TGF-
1 treatment in the last 15 min (Fig.
5C). These levels of Smad2 and Smad3 phosphorylation were
greater than the levels induced by either TGF-
1 or IGFBP-3 alone,
suggesting a synergism between TGF-
1 and IGFBP-3 in Smad phosphorylation.
 |
DISCUSSION |
Intracellular signals from TGF-
are transduced by a mechanism
that involves the transmembrane serine-threonine kinase receptors, TGF-
RI and TGF-
RII (38). TGF-
binds primarily to the
TGF-
RII followed by the recruitment of TGF-
RI to form a ternary
complex that allows TGF-
RII to phosphorylate TGF-
RI. This
activation of the type I receptor kinase is the first necessary step in
transducing the TGF-
signal downstream.
There is now considerable evidence that the loss of TGF-
RII
expression occurs in a variety of human neoplasms, resulting in a lack
of response to TGF-
growth inhibition in these cells. Loss of
TGF-
RII expression is caused by various mechanisms including homozygous gene losses, gross gene rearrangements, and truncated transcripts of this receptor (13, 30, 39, 40). Inactivation of the
TGF-
pathway has also been shown to be caused by the mutation or
loss of TGF-
RI (41, 42). Furthermore, the deletion or mutation of
Smad2, Smad3, or Smad4 has also been demonstrated in several cancer
cell lines (43). Any of these mechanisms provides a selective advantage
by allowing the cells to escape from TGF-
-mediated growth control.
In this study, we have investigated possible interactions between
TGF-
and IGFBP-3 signaling pathways. We first showed that the
overexpression of IGFBP-3 in MCF-7 human breast cancer cells, which
normally express low levels of the protein (44), led to a decreased
proliferation rate. Exogenous IGFBP-3 is known to inhibit MCF-7 cell
proliferation (45), and the growth inhibitory effect of the
anti-estrogen ICI 182780 (46) and vitamin D (47) on these cells is
believed to be mediated in part by the induction of IGFBP-3 gene
expression. In contrast, transfection of MCF-7 cells with IGFBP-3
cDNA was reported by Chen et al. (48) to enhance
IGF-I-stimulated proliferation. Although the different responses to
IGFBP-3 in different studies are not easily explained, they may be
related to the presence of IGFBP-3 proteolytic activity secreted by
MCF-7 cells (49), which has recently been shown to be stimulated by
estrogen and inhibited by TGF-
(50).
We found that in IGFBP-3-transfected MCF-7 cells, sensitivity to growth
inhibition by TGF-
was unexpectedly increased, raising the
possibility of an interaction between TGF-
and IGFBP-3 inhibitory signaling. Late passage MCF-7 cells are reported to be less sensitive to TGF-
than early passage MCF-7 cells, a difference associated with
a 3-fold reduction in TGF-
RII expression (51). To investigate further how TGF-
signaling might be influenced by IGFBP-3, we turned
to the T47D breast cancer cell line, which is reported in some studies
to totally lack the TGF-
RII expression. In fact, there are
conflicting reports regarding the level of TGF-
RII in T47D cells and
the sensitivity of these cells to TGF-
treatment. TGF-
inhibition of T47D cell proliferation has been demonstrated by several
groups (52-54), whereas others (55, 56) have demonstrated a resistance
to TGF-
effects in these cells. Kalkhoven et al. (30)
have shown that resistance to TGF-
growth inhibition was due to the
lack of sufficient TGF-
RII expression. Pouliot and Labrie (43) have
also shown that T47D cells lack TGF-
RII but express mRNAs for
Smad2, Smad3, and Smad4. The differences in the TGF-
responsiveness
of T47D cell lines reported by various groups may reflect the variation
between clonal lines used in different studies.
In the present study, we used a T47D cell line with demonstrable
resistance to TGF-
1 due to lack of TGF-
RII. Transfection of these
cells with a TGF-
RII expression plasmid resulted in a significantly
lower basal proliferation rate compared with control vector-transfected
cells. This observation suggested that other components in the TGF-
signal transduction pathway are intact and that the loss of TGF-
RII
expression is the mechanism by which these T47D cells escape TGF-
growth inhibition. Treatment with exogenous TGF-
1 alone did not have
any further growth inhibitory effect on the T47D/TGF-
RII cells over
4 days, although it increased the basal phosphorylation levels of both
Smad2 and Smad3 rapidly (within 10-15 min) and transiently. The lack
of effect of exogenous TGF-
1 on 4-day growth inhibition may be due
to the presence of a sustained level of endogenous TGF-
1,
neutralization of which was able to stimulate cell growth almost to the
level of TGF-
RII-negative control cells.
IGFBP-3 has been shown to mediate the growth inhibitory effects of a
number of anti-proliferative agents on breast cancer cells. Growth
inhibition by TGF-
(57, 58), retinoic acid (59), anti-estrogens
(46), and the tumor suppressor p53 (60) has been shown to correlate
with the induction of IGFBP-3 at both the transcriptional and
translational levels. However, the mechanism by which IGFBP-3 can
mediate these growth inhibitory effects is not well understood. In a
previous study, we showed that T47D cells transfected with an IGFBP-3
expression plasmid were growth-inhibited at low passage numbers
post-transfection but became refractory to the IGFBP-3 growth
inhibitory effect at higher passage numbers (31). The mechanism by
which the early passage cells producing endogenous IGFBP-3 were
sensitive to the IGFBP-3 growth inhibitory effect is not clear. In the
light of the present study, this requires further investigation because
we have shown here that exogenous IGFBP-3 is not inhibitory to either
T47D/vector or T47D/TGF-
RII cells in the absence of exogenous
TGF-
. This finding suggests that IGFBP-3 expressed within the cell
may be able to bypass the step that requires TGF-
interaction with
TGF-
RII at the cell surface to sensitize the cells to exogenous
IGFBP-3.
In the presence of an active TGF-
signaling pathway, T47D/TGF-
RII
cells are responsive to exogenous IGFBP-3 and TGF-
1, whereas the
same combined treatment is inactive in T47D/vector cells. This
finding suggests that both active TGF-
signaling pathway and
exogenous IGFBP-3 are required to cause growth inhibition in
T47D/TGF-
RII cells and that there is synergism between IGFBP-3 and
TGF-
1 in their growth inhibitory actions.
In investigating the mechanism of this synergism, we have shown the
ability of exogenous IGFBP-3 as well as TGF-
1 to potentiate Smad2
and Smad3 phosphorylation. This is the first report of phosphorylation of intracellular signaling intermediates known to be involved in growth
inhibitory signals in response to IGFBP-3. The synergistic effect of
IGFBP-3 and TGF-
1 was also evident in their potentiation of Smad2
and Smad3 phosphorylation, which was greater in the presence of both
effectors than either agent alone. This provides evidence for
some commonality in the inhibitory signaling pathways used by TGF-
1
and IGFBP-3. We recently reported that the sensitivity to IGFBP-3 in
MCF-10A mammary epithelial cells was abrogated by the expression of
oncogenic ras and restored when mitogen-activated protein
kinase phosphorylation was blocked by the inhibitor PD98059 (61).
Whether the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway provides a link
between the inhibitory effects of TGF-
1 and IGFBP-3 in T47D cells
remains to be determined.
The identity of the proteins on the T47D cell surface or elsewhere that
interact with IGFBP-3 to facilitate the intracellular TGF-
signaling
cascade remains elusive. Several cell-associated proteins that bind
IGFBP-3 have been described (58, 62, 63), although the specificity of
the binding and whether these IGFBP-3-binding proteins play a
functional role in the growth inhibition by IGFBP-3 have yet to be
confirmed. The type V TGF-
receptor (TGF-
RV) has recently been
described as having a role in mediating the IGF-independent growth
inhibitory effect of IGFBP-3 in mink lung cells (64). Interestingly,
phosphorylation of Smad2 and Smad3 was not stimulated by IGFBP-3 in
this cell line, despite an effect of TGF-
on Smad phosphorylation
(65). Thus, the functional link of the reported signaling of IGFBP-3
through TGF-
RV and the synergy between IGFBP-3 and TGF-
, which is
dependent on the presence of TGF-
RII that we have described in T47D
cells, is not clear.
In conclusion, we have demonstrated that the well recognized TGF-
signaling pathway requiring the presence of TGF-
RII and involving
the phosphorylation of receptor-associated Smads can be activated by
IGFBP-3 in a way that apparently increases the sensitivity toward
TGF-
, thus leading to an enhancement of growth inhibition in the
presence of both agents. The level at which IGFBP-3 interacts and the
mechanism by which T47D cells transfected with IGFBP-3 cDNA may
bypass the early steps of the TGF-
signaling cascade remain
important areas for investigation.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT |
We thank Dr. Janet Martin for helpful discussions.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This study was supported by the University of Sydney Medical
Foundation.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.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 61-2-9926-8486;
Fax: 61-2-9926-8484; E-mail: robaxter@med.usyd.edu.au.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, September 18, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M006964200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
TGF-
, transforming growth factor-
;
TGF-
RI, type I TGF-
receptor;
TGF-
RII, type II TGF-
receptor;
TGF-
RV, type V TGF-
receptor;
IGF, insulin-like growth factor;
IGFBP, insulin-like growth
factor-binding protein;
hIGFBP, human IGFBP;
TBS, Tris-buffered saline.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Wakefield, L. M.,
Colletta, A. A.,
McCune, B. K.,
and Sporn, M. B.
(1992)
Cancer Treat. Res.
61,
97-136
|
| 2.
|
Roberts, A. B.,
Flanders, K. C.,
Kondaiah, P.,
Thompson, N. L.,
van Obberghen-Schilling, E. V.,
Wakefield, L.,
Rossi, P.,
de Crombrugghe, B.,
Heine, V.,
and Sporn, M. B.
(1988)
Recent Prog. Horm. Res.
44,
157-197
|
| 3.
|
Moses, H. L.,
Yang, E. Y.,
and Pieterol, J. A.
(1990)
Cell
63,
245-247
|
| 4.
|
Valverius, E. M.,
Walker-Jones, D.,
Bates, S. E.,
Stampfer, M. R.,
Clark, R.,
McCormick, F.,
Dickson, R. B.,
and Lippman, M. E.
(1989)
Cancer Res.
49,
6269-6274
|
| 5.
|
Fynan, T. M.,
and Reiss, M.
(1993)
Crit. Rev. Oncog.
4,
493-540
|
| 6.
|
Daly, R. J.,
King, R. J.,
and Darbre, P. D.
(1990)
J. Cell. Biochem.
43,
199-211
|
| 7.
|
Pircher, R.,
Lawrence, D. A.,
and Jullien, P.
(1984)
Cancer Res.
44,
5538-5543
|
| 8.
|
Pircher, R.,
Jullien, P.,
and Lawrence, D. A.
(1986)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
136,
30-37
|
| 9.
|
Tucker, R. F.,
Branum, E. L.,
Shipley, G. D.,
Ryan, R. J.,
and Moses, H. L.
(1984)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
81,
6757-6761
|
| 10.
|
Cheifetz, S.,
Ling, N.,
Guillemin, R.,
and Massague, J.
(1988)
J. Biol. Chem.
263,
17225-17228
|
| 11.
|
Cheifetz, S.,
Andres, J. L.,
and Massague, J.
(1988)
J. Biol. Chem.
263,
16984-16991
|
| 12.
|
Attisano, L.,
Wrana, J. L.,
Lopez-Caillas, F.,
and Massague, J.
(1990)
Annu. Rev. Cell Biol.
6,
597-641
|
| 13.
|
Sun, L.,
Wu, G.,
Willson, J. K. V.,
Zborowska, E.,
Yang, J.,
Rajkarunanayake,
Wang, J.,
Gentry, L. E.,
Wang, X.-F.,
and Brattain, M. G.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
26449-26455
|
| 14.
|
Wang, J.,
Han, W.,
Zborowska, E.,
Liang, J.,
Wang, X.-F.,
Willson, J. K. V.,
Sun, L.,
and Brattain, M. G.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
17366-17371
|
| 15.
|
Heldin, C.-H.,
Miyazono, K.,
and ten Dijke, P.
(1997)
Nature
390,
465-471
|
| 16.
|
Nakao, A.,
Imamura, T.,
Souchelnytskyi, S.,
Kawabata, M.,
Ishisaki, A.,
Oeda, E.,
Tamaki, K.,
Hanai, J.,
Heldin, C.-H.,
Miyazono, K.,
and ten Dijke, P.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
5353-5362
|
| 17.
|
Chen, Y.,
Lebrun, J. J.,
and Vale, W.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
12992-12997
|
| 18.
|
Kretzschmar, M.,
Liu, F.,
Hata, A.,
Doody, J.,
and Massague, J.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
984-995
|
| 19.
|
Souchelnytskyi, S.,
Tamaki, K.,
Engstrom, U.,
Wernstedt, C.,
ten Dijke, P.,
and Heldin, C.-H.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
28107-28115
|
| 20.
|
Hahn, S. A.,
Schutte, M.,
Shamsul Hoque, A. T. M.,
Moskaluk, C. A.,
da Costa, L. T.,
Rozenblum, E.,
Weinstein, C. L.,
Fischer, A.,
Yeo, C. J.,
Hruban, R. H.,
and Kern, S. E.
(1996)
Science
271,
350-353
|
| 21.
|
Lagna, G.,
Hata, A.,
Hemmati-Brivanlou, A.,
and Massague, J.
(1996)
Nature
383,
832-836
|
| 22.
|
Imamura, T.,
Takase, M.,
Nishihara, A.,
Oeda, E.,
Hanai, J. I.,
Kawabata, M.,
and Miyazono, K.
(1997)
Nature
389,
622-626
|
| 23.
|
Nakao, A.,
Afrakhte, M.,
Moren, A.,
Nakayama, T.,
Christian, J. L.,
Heuchel, R.,
Itoh, S.,
Kawabata, M.,
Heldin, N. E.,
Heldin, C.-H.,
and ten Dijke, P.
(1997)
Nature
389,
631-635
|
| 24.
|
Wu, R. Y.,
Zhang, Y.,
Feng, X. H.,
and Derynck, R.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
2521-2528
|
| 25.
|
Baxter, R. C.
(1994)
Horm. Res.
42,
140-144
|
| 26.
|
Baxter, R. C.,
and Martin, J. L.
(1989)
Prog. Growth Factor Res.
1,
49-68
|
| 27.
|
DeMellow, J. S. M.,
and Baxter, R. C.
(1988)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
156,
199-204
|
| 28.
|
Cohen, P.,
Lamson, G.,
Okajima, T.,
and Rosenfeld, R. G.
(1993)
Mol. Endocrinol.
7,
380-386
|
| 29.
|
Oh, Y.,
Muller, H. L.,
Lamson, G.,
and Rosenfeld, R. G.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
14964-14971
|
| 30.
|
Kalkhoven, E.,
Roelen, B. A.,
de Winter, J. P.,
Mummery, C. L.,
van den Eijnden-van Raaij, A. J. M.,
van der Saag, P. T.,
and van der Burg, B.
(1995)
Cell Growth Differ.
6,
1151-1161
|
| 31.
|
Firth, S. M.,
Fanayan, S.,
and Baxter, R. C.
(1998)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
246,
325-329
|
| 32.
|
Martin, J. L.,
and Baxter, R. C.
(1986)
J. Biol. Chem.
261,
8754-8760
|
| 33.
|
Wood, W. I.,
Cachianes, G.,
Henzel, W. J.,
Winslow, G. A.,
Spencer, S. A.,
Hellmiss, R.,
Martin, J. L.,
and Baxter, R. C.
(1988)
Mol. Endocrinol.
2,
1176-1185
|
| 34.
|
Chomczynski, P.,
and Sacchi, N.
(1987)
Anal. Biochem.
162,
156-159
|
| 35.
|
Martin, J. L.,
and Baxter, R. C.
(1990)
Endocrinology
127,
781-788
|
| 36.
|
Pratt, S. E.,
and Pollak, M. N.
(1993)
Cancer Res.
53,
5193-5198
|
| 37.
|
Wakefield, L. M.,
Smith, D. M.,
Masui, T.,
Harris, C. C.,
and Sporn, M. B.
(1987)
J. Cell Biol.
105,
965-975
|
| 38.
|
Massague, J.
(1996)
Cell
85,
947-950
|
| 39.
|
Park, K.,
Kim, S.-J.,
Bang, Y.-J.,
Park, J.-G.,
Kim, N. K.,
Roberts, A. B.,
and Sporn, M. B.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
8772-8776
|
| 40.
|
De Jonge, R. R.,
Garrigue-Antar, L.,
Vellucci, V. F.,
and Reiss, M.
(1997)
Oncol. Res.
9,
89-98
|
| 41.
|
Kim, I. Y.,
Ahn, H. J.,
Zelner, D. J.,
Shaw, J. W.,
Sensibar, J. A.,
Kim, J. H.,
Kato, M.,
and Lee, C.
(1996)
Cancer Res.
56,
44-48
|
| 42.
|
Baldwin, R. L.,
Friess, H.,
Yokoyama, M.,
Lopez, M. E.,
Kobrin, M. S.,
Buchler, M. W.,
and Korc, M.
(1996)
Int. J. Cancer
67,
283-288
|
| 43.
|
Pouliot, F.,
and Labrie, C.
(1999)
Int. J. Cancer
81,
98-103
|
| 44.
|
Martin, J. L.,
Coverley, J. A.,
Pattison, S. T.,
and Baxter, R. C.
(1995)
Endocrinology
136,
1219-1226
|
| 45.
|
Pratt, S. E.,
and Pollak, M. N.
(1994)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
198,
292-297
|
| 46.
|
Huynh, H.,
Yang, X. F.,
and Pollak, M.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
1016-1021
|
| 47.
|
Colston, K. W.,
Perks, C. M.,
Xie, S. P.,
and Holly, J. M. P.
(1998)
J. Mol. Endocrinol.
20,
157-162
|
| 48.
|
Chen, J.-C.,
Shao, Z.-M.,
Sheikh, M. S.,
Hussain, A.,
LeRoith, D.,
Roberts, C. T.,
and Fontana, J. A.
(1994)
J. Cell. Physiol.
158,
69-78
|
| 49.
|
Grimes, R. W.,
Manni, A.,
and Hammond, J. M.
(1996)
Breast Cancer Res. Treat.
39,
187-196
|
| 50.
|
Salahifar, H.,
Baxter, R. C.,
and Martin, J. L.
(2000)
Endocrinology
141,
3104-3110
|
| 51.
|
Ko, Y.,
Banerji, S. S.,
Liu, Y.,
Li, W.,
Liang, J.,
Soule, H. D.,
Pauley, R. J.,
Willson, J. K.,
Zborowska, E.,
and Brattain, M. G.
(1998)
J. Cell. Physiol.
176,
424-434
|
| 52.
|
Roberts, A. B.,
Anzano, M. A.,
Wakefield, L. M.,
Roche, N. S.,
Stern, D. F.,
and Sporn, M. B.
(1985)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
82,
119-123
|
| 53.
|
Knabbe, C.,
Lippman, M. E.,
Wakefield, L. M.,
Flanders, K. C.,
Kasid, A.,
Derynck, R.,
and Dickson, R. B.
(1987)
Cell
48,
417-428
|
| 54.
|
Jakowlew, S. B.,
Moody, T. W.,
and Mariano, J. M.
(1997)
Anticancer Res.
17,
1849-1860
|
| 55.
|
Arteaga, C. L.,
Tandon, A. K.,
von Hoff, D. D.,
and Osborne, C. K.
(1988)
Cancer Res.
48,
3898-3904
|
| 56.
|
Murphy, C. L.,
and Dotzlaw, H.
(1989)
Mol. Endocrinol.
3,
611-617
|
| 57.
|
Oh, Y.,
Muller, H. L.,
Ng, L.,
and Rosenfeld, R. G.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
13589-13592
|
| 58.
|
Rajah, R.,
Valentinis, B.,
and Cohen, P.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
12181-12188
|
| 59.
|
Gucev, Z. S.,
Oh, Y.,
Kelley, K. M.,
and Rosenfeld, R. G.
(1996)
Cancer Res.
56,
1545-1550
|
| 60.
|
Buckbinder, L.,
Talbott, R.,
Velasco-Miguel, S.,
Takenaka, I.,
Faha, B.,
Seizinger, B. R.,
and Kley, N.
(1995)
Nature
377,
646-649
|
| 61.
|
Martin, J. L.,
and Baxter, R. C.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
16407-16411
|
| 62.
|
Oh, Y.,
Muller, H. L.,
Pham, H. M.,
and Rosenfeld, R. G.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
26045-26048
|
| 63.
|
Hodgkinson, S.,
Fowke, P.,
Al Somai, N.,
and McQuoid, M.
(1995)
J. Endocrinol.
145,
R1-R6
|
| 64.
|
Leal, S. M.,
Liu, Q. L.,
Huang, S. S.,
and Huang, J. S.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
20572-20576
|
| 65.
|
Leal, S. M.,
Huang, S. S.,
and Huang, J. S.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
6711-6717
|
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:

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. Zappala, C. Elbi, J. Edwards, J. Gorenstein, M. M. Rechler, and N. Bhattacharyya
Induction of Apoptosis in Human Prostate Cancer Cells by Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 Does Not Require Binding to Retinoid X Receptor-{alpha}
Endocrinology,
April 1, 2008;
149(4):
1802 - 1812.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. J. Schedlich, A. Muthukaruppan, M. K. O'Han, and R. C. Baxter
Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein-5 Interacts with the Vitamin D Receptor and Modulates the Vitamin D Response in Osteoblasts
Mol. Endocrinol.,
October 1, 2007;
21(10):
2378 - 2390.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|