| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Advances in Brief |
Departments of Diagnostic Sciences and Pathology [N. G. N., J. J. S.] and of Pathology [A. W. H.], and Greenebaum Cancer Center [A. W. H., J. J. S.], University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland 21201-1586
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
did not attenuate the ability of sulindac to down-regulate Stat3. Our results suggest that down-modulation of Stat3 can be induced by sulindac treatment, thus possibly contributing to the antineoplastic effect of this drug. | Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
/epidermal growth factor receptor signaling leads to constitutive activation of Stat3, which is accompanied by increases in Stat3 protein expression and Stat3 tyrosine phosphorylation (11
, 12)
. A critical role of Stat3 activation for head and neck SCCa carcinogenesis has been documented, because the targeting of Stat3 results in significant growth inhibition and induction of apoptosis both in vitro and in vivo (11
, 12)
. In this study, we explored the possibility that sulindacs antineoplastic effect on oral cancer cells is mediated through Stat3 down-modulation. We observed that sulindac treatment leads first to a significant decrease in Stat3 phosphorylation and eventual elimination of Stat3 expression. This is the first time that the antineoplastic effect of NSAIDs is linked to the abrogation of Stat3 signaling pathway.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Sulindac Treatment, Protein Lysate Preparation, and Western Blotting.
Cells were plated in 6-well plates at a density of 5 x 104 cells/well and were allowed to grow to 80% confluency. Sulindac sulfide or sulindac sulfone (Biomol Research Laboratories, Inc., Plymouth Meeting, PA), dissolved in 100% DMSO, were added to the medium at a concentration of 150 µM. The final concentration of DMSO did not exceed 0.1%. After incubation for various time periods, the cells were washed twice with cold PBS, lysed in radioimmunoprecipitation assay buffer [50 mM Tris (pH 7.4), 150 mM NaCl, 1% Triton X-100, 1% deoxycholic acid, sodium salt, 0.1% SDS, 100 µg/ml phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 1 µg/ml aprotinin, 1 mM DTT, and 1 mM sodium orthovanadate] for 10 min, and scraped. The extracts were centrifuged at 40,000 x g for 15 min at 4°C. Protein concentrations were measured and equalized using Bio-Rad protein assay (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Richmond, CA) according to the manufacturers instructions.
Western blot analysis was performed using phospho-Stat3 (Tyr 705) antibody (1:500 dilution; Cell Signaling Technology, Beverly, MA) according to the manufacturers instructions. Blots were stripped [20 mM DTT, 2% SDS, and 67.5 mM Tris-HCl (pH 6.7)]) and then reprobed sequentially with Stat3 (Tyr 705) antibody (1:1000 dilution; Cell Signaling Technology) and with actin antibody (1:500 dilution; Sigma Chemical Co). Densitometric analyses were performed using the Image Quant program of a Molecular Dynamics laser densitometer.
Design, Synthesis, and Transfection of Antisense/Sense Oligonucleotides.
Antisense and sense phosphorothioate oligonucleotides were designed using the PPAR
cDNA nucleotide sequence. The oligonucleotides were synthesized by Oligos etc. (Wilsonville, OR), as follows: PPAR
antisense (5'-CTCTGTGTCAACCATGGTCAT-3'); PPAR
sense (5'-ATGACCATGGTTGACACAGAG-3'). The transfection reagent Lipofectin (Life Technologies, Inc., Paisley, Scotland) was used to introduce oligonucleotides into the carcinoma cell lines. For these studies, 5 x 104 cells/well were seeded in six-well plates and incubated under normal conditions to 60% confluency. Cells were transfected using 0.2 µM oligonucleotides and 5 µg of Lipofectin according to the manufacturers instructions.
To confirm the efficacy of PPAR
antisense treatment, the effect of the treatment on mRNA and protein levels of PPAR
was assessed. After 24 h of treatment with PPAR
antisense or sense oligonucleotides, the medium was removed and replenished with normal growth medium for 24 h. Total RNA was then isolated using the TRIZOL Reagent (Life Technologies, Inc.) and quantitative real-time reverse transcription-PCR was performed using PE Biosystems protocols to estimate the mRNA levels of PPAR
. The forward and reverse primers, selected using Primer Express software (PE Biosysystems, Foster City, California), were 5'-TATCGACCAGCTGAATCCAGAG-3' and 5'-TCGCCTTTGCTTTGGTCA-3', respectively. To assess the protein levels of PPAR
, protein was extracted and Western Blotting was performed using a PPAR
antibody (sc-1984, 1:200 dilution; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc.), as described above.
Subsequent to 24 h of treatment with PPAR
antisense or sense oligonucleotides, cells were treated for 48 h with 150 µM sulindac sulfide or sulindac sulfone dissolved in 100% DMSO and added to the medium. Protein lysate preparation and Western blot analysis for assessment of the protein levels of phosphorylated Stat3 and Stat3 followed as described above. Appropriate normal growth medium and Lipofectin controls were included.
Cell Growth Inhibition.
Cells were plated in 24-well plates at a density of 5 x 104 cells/well in normal growth medium. After 24 h, DMSO at a concentration of 0.1% or 150 µM of sulindac sulfide or sulindac sulfone dissolved in 100% DMSO (Biomol Research Laboratories, Inc., Plymouth Meeting, PA), were added to the growth medium. The final concentration of DMSO did not exceed 0.1%. After incubation for 24, 48, or 72 h, either treated or untreated cells were removed enzymatically and counted using a Coulter counter (Coulter Model ZI; Coulter Corporation, Miami, FL). The percentage of growth was determined, setting as 100%, the growth of cells treated only with the vehicle (0.1% DMSO). All of the analyses were performed in triplicate.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Sulfide treatment of SCC9 cells for 45 min also caused a small decrease in Stat3 protein expression levels. However, this could not account for the decrease in phosphorylated Stat3, as determined by densitometric analysis. Longer treatment for 24 h and 48 h further reduced Stat3 protein levels, whereas 72 h of treatment eliminated Stat3 expression (Fig. 1A)
. In contrast, the levels of actin protein remained stable throughout the treatment, indicating that the effect on Stat3 was not caused by a nonspecific reduction of protein expression (Fig. 1A)
.
The aforementioned results were very similar to those obtained using SCC25 cells (data not shown). Likewise, Stat3 phosphorylation and expression were eliminated by 72 h of sulindac treatment with 150 µM in all four of the SCCa cell lines tested (Fig. 1B)
.
On the other hand, treatment of cells for 72 h with 150 µM of sulindac sulfone, which is devoid of COX inhibitory activity, did not significantly change the protein levels of either Stat3 or phosphorylated Stat3 (Fig. 2)
.
|
Antisense Treatment on Stat3 Down-Modulation Induced by Sulindac.
in oral SCCa cells treated with PPAR
antisense oligonucleotides by quantitative real-time reverse transcription-PCR and Western blot. The relative PPAR
mRNA expression levels after treatment with normal growth medium, Lipofectin, sense, and antisense oligonucleotides were 1, 1.07, 0.84, and 0.16, respectively. Protein expression of PPAR
was abolished after PPAR
antisense oligonucleotide treatment, but was not changed after treatment with PPAR
sense oligonucleotides or Lipofectin alone, confirming the effectiveness of the PPAR
antisense treatment (Fig. 3A)
|
is an important mediator of the antineoplastic effect of sulindac on oral SCCa cells (2)
, we next tested whether PPAR
might also mediate the decrease in Stat3 phosphorylation and expression induced by sulindac. Oral SCC9 cells pretreated for 24 h with PPAR
antisense oligonucleotides responded to 48 h of sulindac sulfide treatment with significant reduction of Stat3 and phosphorylated Stat3 protein levels. This reduction was very similar to that exhibited in response to sulfide treatment by control cells pretreated with PPAR
sense oligonucleotides, Lipofectin, or normal medium (Fig. 3B)
antisense treatment does not attenuate sulfides ability to down-modulate expression of both Stat3 and phosphorylated Stat3.
Effect of Sulindac on Cell Growth.
Sulindac sulfide treatment (150 µM) resulted in a statistically significant (P
0.05) time-dependent reduction in cell growth (Fig. 4)
. Treatment of cells with 150 µM sulindac sulfone also resulted in a significant (P
0.05) cell growth reduction, which, however, was smaller than that induced by sulfide (data not shown).
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
antisense treatment abolished the cell growth inhibition induced by sulindac, which suggests that induction of PPAR
expression and activation may play a prominent role in sulindacs antineoplastic effect on oral cancer. Given the importance of Stat3 in SCCa of the head and neck (11
, 12)
, we investigated whether sulindac treatment affects Stat3 protein expression and Stat3 tyrosine phosphorylation of oral SCCa cell lines. Sulindac sulfide treatment down-modulated both Stat3 expression and Stat3 phosphorylation, which were initially reduced (even after 45 min of treatment) and eventually eliminated (after 72 h of treatment). These results could not be attributed to a nonspecific effect on protein expression, because the protein levels of actin were unchanged despite the treatment. Experimental evidence suggests that targeting of Stat3 may serve as a novel strategy for cancer therapy (6 , 9) . In SCCa of the head and neck, both in vitro and in vivo experiments have established the antitumor efficacy of Stat3 targeting, which has been shown to attenuate Bcl-XL protein expression leading to enhancement of apoptosis (11 , 12) . Accordingly, down-modulation of Stat3 protein expression and phosphorylation may represent a thus-far uninvestigated mechanism through which NSAID sulindac may exert its antineoplastic effect. Interestingly, treatment of oral SCCa cells, under the same conditions shown to induce Stat3 down-modulation (i.e., 150 µM of sulindac sulfide for 24 to 72 h), also caused significant cell growth inhibition, suggesting that the targeting of Stat3 by sulindac has functional consequences by decreasing cell number. These observations lend support to the hypothesis that sulindacs cell growth-inhibitory effect may be mediated through Stat3 down-modulation. The molecular pathways that underlie these phenomena and the role that specific apoptotic molecules, such as members of the Bcl-2 family, play warrant further exploration.
Because we have previously shown that the growth inhibitory effect of sulindac on human oral SCCa cell lines is, at least partially, mediated through PPAR
(2)
, we investigated next whether PPAR
is also involved in sulindac-induced Stat3 down-modulation. Although a direct association between these two molecules has not been reported, cross-talk between PPAR and STAT pathways has been suggested. Ricote et al. (13)
have shown that PPAR
inhibits gene expression in activated macrophages by antagonizing the nuclear factor -
B, AP-1, and STAT signaling pathways. However, only Stat1 and not Stat3 was tested. Moreover, Zhou and Waxman (14
, 15)
established the ability of Stat5b to inhibit the transcriptional activity of PPAR
, PPAR
, and PPAR
and suggested the possibility for a more general inhibitory cross-talk between STAT proteins and nuclear receptors. Direct protein-protein interactions or indirect mechanisms, such as competition for common coactivators or modulation of inhibitors of transcriptional activity, may be responsible for STAT-PPAR cross-talk (14
, 15) . However, PPAR
antisense treatment did not reduce sulfides ability to cause Stat3 down-modulation. Moreover, the sulfone metabolite of sulindac, which despite lacking COX-2 inhibitory effect induces a PPAR
-mediated cell growth inhibition and apoptosis induction on oral SCCa cells, did not alter expression and phosphorylation of Stat3. Taken together, these results suggest that sulindac-induced Stat3 down-modulation is independent of the drugs ability to function as PPAR
ligand, most probably being related to the COX-2 inhibitory effect of sulindac.
Another possible mechanism through which sulindac may down-modulate Stat3 could involve the inhibition of the production of molecules that may trigger pathways that lead to the activation of Stat3. The cytokine IL-6 could serve as such a molecule through its ability to induce activation of Stat3 (16) , which has been linked to up-regulation of the antiapoptotic protein Bcl-XL in multiple myeloma cells (9) . This pathway may be of particular importance for oral cancer, because Hong et al. have demonstrated that IL-6 stimulation in oral cancer cells led to increases in both Stat3 phosphorylation and cell growth (17) . They also showed that treatment with the pan-COX inhibitor ketorolac decreased IL-6 levels and reduced tumor cell growth. In accordance with these observations, sulindacs ability to down-modulate Stat3 may be the result of the inhibitory effect that sulindac exerts on IL-6 (18) . However, the mechanism by which sulindac causes IL-6 down-modulation necessitates further investigation. The aforementioned model of Stat3 down-modulation through sulindac-induced inhibition of IL-6 (and possibly other Stat3 activating molecules) can explain not only the observed reduction in Stat3 phosphorylation but also the decrease in Stat3 expression. The latter is justified by the existence of an autoregulatory loop for Stat3, according to which IL-6-induced Stat3 activation results in increased Stat3 gene expression (19) .
Whether the elimination of Stat3 protein expression by sulindac treatment is secondary to the inactivation of Stat3 or is the result of a more direct effect of sulindac on Stat3 expression remains to be elucidated. Independent of the exact molecular mechanism, the down-modulation of Stat3 expression and phosphorylation by sulindac is of particular importance, because it offers an alternative strategy for disrupting Stat3, an oncogene that constitutes a valid molecular target for cancer therapy.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
1 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at University of Maryland, Department of Diagnostic Sciences and Pathology, Room 4-C-02, 666 West Baltimore Street, Baltimore, MD 21201-1586. ![]()
2 The abbreviations used are: NSAID, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug; Stat, signal transducer and activator of transcription; PPAR, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor; COX, cyclooxygenase; SCCa, squamous cell carcinoma. ![]()
Received 8/13/01. Accepted 1/ 2/02.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-mediated antineoplastic effect of NSAID sulindac on human oral squamous carcinoma cells. Int. J. Cancer, in press, 2002.
is a negative regulator of macrophage activation. Nature (Lond.), 391: 79-82, 1998.[Medline]
(PPAR
) signaling pathways. Growth hormone inhibition of PPAR
transcriptional activity mediated by stat5b. J. Biol. Chem., 274: 2672-2681, 1999.
transcription by inhibition of ligand-independent activation function region-1 trans-activation domain. J. Biol. Chem., 274: 29874-29882, 1999.This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
Y. Zhang, X.-W. Wang, D. Jelovac, T. Nakanishi, M.-h. Yu, D. Akinmade, O. Goloubeva, D. D. Ross, A. Brodie, and A. W. Hamburger The ErbB3-binding protein Ebp1 suppresses androgen receptor-mediated gene transcription and tumorigenesis of prostate cancer cells PNAS, July 12, 2005; 102(28): 9890 - 9895. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Siavash, N.G. Nikitakis, and J.J. Sauk SIGNAL TRANSDUCERS AND ACTIVATORS OF TRANSCRIPTION: INSIGHTS INTO THE MOLECULAR BASIS OF ORAL CANCER Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine, September 1, 2004; 15(5): 298 - 307. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Klampfer, J. Huang, L.-A. Swaby, and L. Augenlicht Requirement of Histone Deacetylase Activity for Signaling by STAT1 J. Biol. Chem., July 16, 2004; 279(29): 30358 - 30368. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Klampfer, J. Huang, T. Sasazuki, S. Shirasawa, and L. Augenlicht Inhibition of Interferon {gamma} Signaling by the Short Chain Fatty Acid Butyrate Mol. Cancer Res., September 1, 2003; 1(11): 855 - 862. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Wick, G. Hurteau, C. Dessev, D. Chan, M. W. Geraci, R. A. Winn, L. E. Heasley, and R. A. Nemenoff Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor-gamma Is a Target of Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Mediating Cyclooxygenase-Independent Inhibition of Lung Cancer Cell Growth Mol. Pharmacol., November 1, 2002; 62(5): 1207 - 1214. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cancer Prevention Research |
| Cancer Prevention Journals Portal | Cancer Reviews Online |
| Annual Meeting Education Book | Meeting Abstracts Online |