|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | |||||
First published online April 3, 2008
doi: 10.1242/10.1242/jcs.016634
Commentary |
1 Division of Human Biology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave N., C3-168, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
2 Molecular and Cellular Biology Program, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
3 Department of Pathology and Institute for Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
* Author for correspondence (e-mail: vvasiouk{at}fhcrc.org)
Accepted 19 February 2008
 |
Summary |
|---|
 Top Summary IntroductionCore mechanisms of cellular...AJCs as a crucial...Core cell-polarity mechanisms...Cell-polarity mechanisms in self...Cell-polarity-mediated 3D tissue...Conclusion and future outlookReferences |
|---|
Key words: Cancer, Cell polarity, Stem cells
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionCore mechanisms of cellular...AJCs as a crucial...Core cell-polarity mechanisms...Cell-polarity mechanisms in self...Cell-polarity-mediated 3D tissue...Conclusion and future outlookReferences |
|---|
|
|
Core mechanisms of cellular polarity and their connection to the apical junctional complex |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionCore mechanisms of cellular...AJCs as a crucial...Core cell-polarity mechanisms...Cell-polarity mechanisms in self...Cell-polarity-mediated 3D tissue...Conclusion and future outlookReferences |
|---|
; Wodarz, 2005). Whereas mechanisms of cell polarity are quite complex, three groups of proteins play a central role in the establishment and maintenance of apical-basal cell polarity. The Crumbs-Pals1(Stardust)-Patj and the Par3(Bazooka)-Par6-aPKC protein complexes localize to the apical membrane domain and promote apical-membrane-domain identity (Margolis and Borg, 2005; Suzuki and Ohno, 2006). Their function is antagonized by the basolaterally localized Lethal giant larvae (Lgl), Scribble (Scrib) and Discs large (Dlg) proteins, which together promote basolateral membrane identity (Bilder, 2004) (Fig. 2). Epistatic genetic experiments in Drosophila revealed that the apical aPKC-Par3-Par6 protein complex and the basolateral Lgl, Scrib and Dlg proteins are involved in a tug-of-war-type interaction in which a fine balance between their activities defines the boundary position and the sizes of the apical and basolateral membrane domains (Suzuki and Ohno, 2006). Although the molecular mechanisms of mutual inhibition between the apical Par3-Par6-aPKC complex and the basolateral Lgl, Scrib and Dlg proteins are only beginning to be understood, an important discovery revealed that aPKC phosphorylates and `inactivates' Lgl at the apical membrane domain (Betschinger et al., 2003; Plant et al., 2003). The molecular basis for the reverse inhibitory interaction by Lgl, Scrib and Dlg is unknown, although the basolateral cell-polarity-protein Par1 phosphorylates and inhibits Par3 by promoting its dissociation from the Par6-aPKC complex (Benton and St Johnston, 2003).
|
In epithelial tissues, the apical and basolateral membrane domains are separated by a physical barrier called the apical junctional complex (AJC) (Fig. 2), which is also the most significant epithelial cell-cell adhesion structure and comprises tight junctions (TJs) and adherens junctions (AJs) (Hartsock and Nelson, 2007). Whereas TJs are crucial for epithelial barrier function by providing a tight seal between the membranes of the neighboring cells, AJs use the forces that are generated by the actin cytoskeleton to keep the cellular membranes of neighboring cells together (Hartsock and Nelson, 2007; Perez-Moreno and Fuchs, 2006; Vasioukhin et al., 2000). Cell polarity mechanisms have an intimate relationship with the AJCs and the activities of the apical and basolateral polarity complexes are required for maintenance of AJCs (Bilder and Perrimon, 2000; Chen and Macara, 2005; Firestein and Rongo, 2001; Harris and Peifer, 2007; Hutterer et al., 2004; Imai et al., 2006; Rolls et al., 2003; Woods et al., 1997).
|
AJCs as a crucial physical link between internal cell polarity and 3D tissue organization |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionCore mechanisms of cellular...AJCs as a crucial...Core cell-polarity mechanisms...Cell-polarity mechanisms in self...Cell-polarity-mediated 3D tissue...Conclusion and future outlookReferences |
|---|
). We will now discuss what happens to cell polarity and AJCs in cancer.
|
Core cell-polarity mechanisms and mammalian cancer |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionCore mechanisms of cellular...AJCs as a crucial...Core cell-polarity mechanisms...Cell-polarity mechanisms in self...Cell-polarity-mediated 3D tissue...Conclusion and future outlookReferences |
|---|
). Concordantly, a number of studies found decreased expression or a complete loss of Lgl, Dlg and Scrib polarity proteins in primary tumors from human patients (Cavatorta et al., 2004; Gardiol et al., 2006; Kuphal et al., 2006; Nakagawa et al., 2004; Navarro et al., 2005; Schimanski et al., 2005). Interestingly, re-expression of Dlg and Lgl proteins in tumor-cell lines resulted in the attenuation of neoplastic phenotypes, suggesting that these also have a tumor-suppressor function in human cells (Kuphal et al., 2006; Massimi et al., 2004).
Epistasis experiments in Drosophila revealed that activation of aPKC, an Lgl antagonist, promotes tumorigenesis in lgl mutants (Lee et al., 2006b). Activation of aPKC has also been implicated in human cancer. Human aPKC
is amplified and overexpressed in ovarian and non-small-cell lung cancers (Eder et al., 2005; Regala et al., 2005; Zhang et al., 2006a), and loss-of-function experiments demonstrated that aPKC plays a causal role in the regulation of cell proliferation, anchorage-independent growth and xenograft tumor development in cell lines derived from these tumors (Regala et al., 2005; Stallings-Mann et al., 2006; Zhang et al., 2006a). Furthermore, experiments in mice revealed that aPKC has an important role in Ras-induced colon carcinogenesis, in which aPKC is necessary for Ras-mediated activation of Rac1 (Murray et al., 2004). In addition to aPKC, aPKC
has also been implicated in human cancer. aPKC is hyperactivated in the squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck, where it is required for EGF-induced proliferation by mediating the activation of MAPK (Cohen et al., 2006). aPKC is also crucial for the proliferation of human glioblastoma cell lines (Donson et al., 2000) and the regulation of cancer-cell chemotaxis and motility, which may be important for tumor-cell invasion and metastasis (Kuribayashi et al., 2007; Sun et al., 2005). These experiments demonstrated that the crucial apical cell-polarity-protein aPKC is also a potent proto-oncogene in mammalian cells. Taken together, these studies directly implicate cell-polarity pathways in the development of human cancer.
|
; Handa et al., 2007; Massimi et al., 2004; Massimi et al., 2007; Nakagawa and Huibregtse, 2000; Pim et al., 2000; Thomas et al., 2001; Zhang et al., 2007). The ability to degrade these cell-polarity proteins correlates with the malignant potential of E6 oncogenes. The interaction between an oncoprotein and Dlg is not unique to E6. Dlg also binds to the Tax1 oncoprotein from human T-lymphotropic virus type 1 (HTLV-1) and the adenovirus oncoprotein 9ORF1 (Hirata et al., 2004; Kanamori et al., 2003; Lee et al., 1997). As viral proteins are under selective evolutionary pressure to keep only the most essential functions, these findings suggest that degradation of Dlg and Scrib is necessary for malignant transformation.
In addition to viral oncogenes, malignant transformation can be induced by the abnormal activation of various growth-factor signaling pathways, which not only stimulates cell proliferation, but also results in disruption of apical-basal polarity, cell-cell adhesion and sometimes a complete epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Transforming growth factor β (TGFβ) signaling, for example, promotes EMT during normal development and tumor progression (Huber et al., 2005; Massague and Gomis, 2006; Thiery, 2003). An interesting insight into the mechanisms responsible for this phenotype was recently provided by the laboratory of Jeffrey Wrana, who found that AJC-localized Par6 directly interacts with TGFβ receptors and is a substrate for TGFβRII-mediated phosphorylation (Ozdamar et al., 2005). Activation of TGFβ signaling results in phosphorylation of Par6, which promotes its interaction with the E3 ubiquitin ligase Smurf1. Localized to the AJCs, Smurf1, in turn, targets junctional RhoA for degradation. As RhoA is crucial for the maintenance of the actin cytoskeleton and stabilization of AJCs, activation of TGFβ signaling ultimately results in the destabilization and loss of AJCs and the initiation of EMT (Fig. 3B).
Abnormal activation of the receptor tyrosine kinase ErbB2 (also known as HER2) is implicated in human breast cancer, and ovarian, gastric, esophageal and endometrial cancers (Hynes and Lane, 2005; Linggi and Carpenter, 2006; Moasser, 2007). Whereas ErbB2 stimulates cell proliferation by activating the Ras-PI3K-PLC pathway, it can also directly disrupt cell polarity and provide protection from apoptosis through its interaction with the Par6-aPKC protein complex (Aranda et al., 2006). Activation of ErbB2 results in the dissociation of Par3 from the Par6-aPKC complex (Fig. 3C). Inhibition of this dissociation restores correct cell polarity and abrogates the anti-apoptotic effects of ErbB2, but does not affect its role in the stimulation of cell proliferation. These findings indicate that growth-factor receptors can use independent mechanisms to regulate proliferation and polarity, and that it is possible to activate cell proliferation without inducing cell-polarity defects.
TGFβRII and ErbB2 are probably not the only growth-factor receptors that can directly target cell-polarity mechanisms. In addition to TGFβ and ErbB2 signaling, loss of polarized cell architecture and EMT can be induced by a variety of signal-transduction pathways, including receptor tyrosine kinases, Ras, Wnt, Notch, Hedgehog and nuclear factor 
B (NFB) (Huber et al., 2005). Future research will help to reveal the molecular mechanisms that connect these relevant cancer signaling pathways to the disruption of cell polarity and EMT.
Connections between tumor suppressors and cell-polarity pathways
In addition to oncogenes and proto-oncogenes, tumor suppressors are also involved in the regulation of apical-basal cell polarity. Mutations in the von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) tumor suppressor are responsible for von Hippel-Lindau disease, which is characterized by the development of hemangioblastoma, clear-cell renal carcinoma and pheochromocytomas (Kaelin, Jr, 2005; Kaelin, Jr, 2007). VHL polyubiquitinates and targets the transcription factor hypoxia-inducible factor 1 for degradation. VHL can also directly impact cell-polarity pathways by ubiquitin-mediated degradation of activated aPKC (Fig. 3D) (Okuda et al., 2001). Furthermore, interaction between VHL and the Par3-Par6-aPKC complex is involved in VHL-mediated regulation of polarized microtubule growth and formation of primary cilia (Schermer et al., 2006). This function makes VHL an important regulator of cell polarity because polarized growth of microtubules is crucial for cell polarization. Moreover, because primary cilia play an important role in cancer-relevant Hedgehog signaling and plateled-derived growth factor (PDGF) signaling pathways, the cell-polarity function of VHL might be directly involved in its function as a regulator of cell proliferation and tumor suppressor.
Phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) is another tumor suppressor protein that is implicated in the regulation of cell polarity. PTEN negatively regulates the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway by dephosphorylating the PI3K product, phosphatidylinositol (3,4,5)-trisphosphate [PtdIns(3,4,5)P3], and producing phosphatidylinositol (4,5)-bisphosphate [PtdIns(4,5)P2] (Rossi and Weissman, 2006). Spatial membrane segregation of PtdIns(4,5)P2 and PtdIns(3,4,5)P3 is crucial for apical-basal cell polarity (Fig. 3E) (Martin-Belmonte et al., 2007). PtdIns(4,5)P2 is localized to the apical membrane domain and it maintains its identity by promoting apical localization of annexin2, Cdc42 and aPKC proteins. Apical accumulation of PtdIns(4,5)P2 depends on apical membrane targeting of PTEN. Thus, PTEN is pivotal for the establishment and maintenance of apical-basal cell polarity.
In addition to PTEN, serine/threonine kinase 11 (STK11, herafter referred to as LKB1) is another dual-function protein that is directly involved in both cell polarity and tumor suppression. Mutations in LKB1 are responsible for Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, which is characterized by the development of benign hamartomatous polyps throughout the gastrointestinal tract and a 18-fold increased risk of cancer (Giardiello et al., 1987; Katajisto et al., 2007). LKB1 is a homologue of the Drosophila and Caenorhabditis elegans cell-polarity protein Par4, and its function is also crucial for the polarization of mammalian cells (Baas et al., 2004). LKB1 phosphorylates and activates several other serine/threonine kinases including AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) and Par1 (Fig. 3F) (Lizcano et al., 2004). Although it was thought that LKB1 signaling regulates cell polarity via Par1 and proliferation via AMPK, recent evidence revealed that Drosophila and mammalian AMPK are also crucial for LKB1-mediated regulation of cell polarity (Lee et al., 2007; Mirouse et al., 2007; Zhang et al., 2006b). AMPK controls cell polarity by regulating the acto-myosin cytoskeleton via direct phosphorylation of the non-muscle myosin regulatory light chain (MRLC) protein (Lee et al., 2007). The discovery of AMPK as a crucial regulator of cell polarity indicates that LKB1-mediated control of cell growth and polarity are, ultimately, connected to each other.
Together, these studies demonstrate an intimate connection between cell-polarity pathways and tumor suppression. This relationship is either direct, because many known tumor suppressor proteins and proto-oncogenes are also crucial cell-polarity proteins, or indirect and mediated by specific signaling pathways that connect cancer-relevant proteins with core polarity mechanisms. Knowledge of the mechanisms that are used by pro-tumorigenic pathways to disrupt cell polarity opens the possibility of targeted inactivation of these mechanisms to reveal their specific contribution to cancer initiation and progression. This approach will help to determine the role of disruption of cell polarity in mammalian cancer. We will now discuss emerging data that directly implicate cell-polarity mechanisms in cancer through their role in the self-renewal and differentiation of stem cells.
|
Cell-polarity mechanisms in self-renewal and differentiation of stem cells and the emergence of cancer stem cells |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionCore mechanisms of cellular...AJCs as a crucial...Core cell-polarity mechanisms...Cell-polarity mechanisms in self...Cell-polarity-mediated 3D tissue...Conclusion and future outlookReferences |
|---|
|
; Wodarz and Nathke, 2007). Asymmetric cell division is regulated by the polarized localization of cell fate determinants (Numb, Pros, Brat, Pon and Mira) and the correct orientation of the mitotic spindle, and both are necessary to ensure that cell fate determinants are inherited by only one daughter cell (Fig. 4B). Asymmetric localization of cell fate determinants is controlled by the function of the apical Par3-Par6-aPKC polarity-protein complex and basolateral Lgl, Dlg and Scrib polarity proteins. Remarkably, lgl, dlg or scrib mutant neuroblasts fail to correctly localize cell fate determinants and generate daughter cells that maintain characteristics of dividing neuroblasts. Dividing cells accumulate quickly, leading to the development of a tumor (Albertson and Doe, 2003). Animals that have mutations in cell-fate determinants themselves (such as mira, pros, numb and brat) also develop tumors (Betschinger et al., 2006; Caussinus and Gonzalez, 2005; Lee et al., 2006c). Thus, abnormal asymmetric cell division is the primary defect responsible for tumor formation in lgl, dlg and scrib mutants.
In addition to correct segregation of cell fate determinants, correct spindle orientation is also required for the successful execution of asymmetric cell division of Drosophila neuroblasts. The mitotic spindle is positioned by dynamic interactions between astral microtubules and the cell cortex. Partner of Inscuteable (Pins), G
i and Mushroom body defect (Mud) proteins link astral microtubules to the apical Par3-Par6-aPKC polarity complex to regulate correct spindle orientation. Neuroblasts with mud mutations show correct localization of the apical polarity proteins and basal-cell fate determinants before cell division; the mitotic spindle, however, is not aligned correctly in these mutants, and this eventually leads to missegregation of cell-fate determinants between the daughter cells and the accumulation of excessive neuroblasts (Bowman et al., 2006; Izumi et al., 2006; Lee et al., 2006a; Siller et al., 2006). Finally, the mitotic kinases Aurora-A and Polo are necessary for both asymmetric segregation of cell fate determinants and correct orientation of the mitotic spindle, and Drosophila aurA and polo mutants also show accumulation of neuroblasts and tumor development (Lee et al., 2006a; Wang et al., 2007; Wang et al., 2006).
Abnormal asymmetric cell division as a potential cause of mammalian cancer stem cells
Overall, studies in Drosophila demonstrated that cell-polarity mechanisms regulate asymmetric cell division of stem cells, and perturbation of correct asymmetric cell division results in the abnormal accumulation of dividing cells and cancer. These findings became especially intriguing recently, after it was discovered that human cancers are driven by a small population of cancer stem cells (CSCs) (Al-Hajj et al., 2003; Huntly and Gilliland, 2005; Lapidot et al., 1994; O'Brien et al., 2007; Singh et al., 2004). Isolated from tumors, CSCs are similar to undifferentiated progenitors, which are committed to a specific cell lineage. Unlike normal progenitors, for which the proliferative life span is limited, CSCs are immortal and unable to withdraw from the cell cycle. Instead, they self-renew and produce cells of various degrees of differentiation that proliferate but have only a limited life span and form the bulk of the tumor (Fig. 5). CSCs in human tumors have distinct similarities to mutant Drosophila neuroblasts, which are unable to divide asymmetrically and instead keep dividing and form a tumor. One of the most exciting questions in modern cancer biology is whether the core cell-polarity mechanisms that govern the asymmetric cell division of stem cells are disrupted in human cancer, and whether these abnormalities are causally involved in the emergence of CSCs. Indeed, many apical-basal cell-polarity mechanisms that have been discovered in Drosophila are also conserved in mammalian cells.
|
; Klezovitch et al., 2004; Mahoney et al., 2006; McGee et al., 2001; Migaud et al., 1998; Murdoch et al., 2003). One of the reasons for the differences between Drosophila and mammalian systems might be the significant redundancy of core cell-polarity components in mammalian cells. Indeed, whereas the Drosophila genome has only one of each of the Dlg, Lgl, Par6, Par3 and aPKC genes, mammalian genomes have four Dlgs (Dlg1-4), two Lgls (Llgl1 and 2), three Par6 (PARD6A, PARD6B, PARD6G), two Par3 (PARD3 and PARD3B) and two aPKC (PRKCI and PRKCZ) genes. Owing to this redundancy, loss of any one of the mammalian genes might not be sufficient for the manifestation of abnormal asymmetric cell division and cancer. Future double- or triple-knockout experiments in mice will help to determine whether this is indeed the case.
In contrast to core cell-polarity genes, a number of genes that play an important role in the correct positioning of the mitotic spindle during asymmetric cell division in Drosophila have been shown to be involved in mammalian cancer. For example, Aurora-A and Polo kinases are implicated in human cancer (Malumbres and Barbacid, 2007). It is believed that genomic instability resulting from abnormal mitotic checkpoints and missegregation of chromosomes is responsible for the cancer-related roles of mammalian Aurora-A and Polo. However, it is conceivable that abnormal asymmetric cell division is also involved in Aurora-A and Polo-mediated tumors, and future studies will probably examine this possibility. In addition to the regulation of asymmetric cell division, internal cell-polarity mechanisms are important for the assembly of individual cells into complex 3D structures of tissues and organs. In the following section we discuss the available information concerning a potent regulatory function of 3D tissue organization and introduce a hypothetical model of tissue polarity as a non-canonical tumor-suppressor.
|
Cell-polarity-mediated 3D tissue organization as a potential non-canonical non-cell-autonomous tumor suppressor |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionCore mechanisms of cellular...AJCs as a crucial...Core cell-polarity mechanisms...Cell-polarity mechanisms in self...Cell-polarity-mediated 3D tissue...Conclusion and future outlookReferences |
|---|
; Kenny and Bissell, 2003; Nelson and Bissell, 2006; Potter, 2007; Zahir and Weaver, 2004). The significance of tissue organization was underestimated for decades because the field of cancer biology concentrated on using tumor-derived cell lines, either growing them in vitro or as a disorganized cellular mass in mouse xenograft tumors. The, perhaps first, evidence that the tissue microenvironment may be of importance in tumor development can be traced to early experiments with teratoma tumor cells injected into normal mouse blastocysts. Despite high malignancy and euploidy, tumor cells integrated into the wild-type host tissue and displayed normal behavior (Astigiano et al., 2005; Brinster, 1974; Illmensee and Mintz, 1976; Mintz and Illmensee, 1975).
The most obvious example of the non-cell-autonomous tumor suppressor effect of normal tissue organization comes from studies using genetically modified mice. It is well known that significant differences are often seen between the outcomes of experiments performed in vivo using an animal model, and in vitro using unorganized populations of cells in culture. In general, cancer-relevant phenotypes are much more readily apparent in vitro than in vivo. For example, expression of activated Ras results in a potent transformation in cultured cells; yet, expression of the same gene in vivo results in normal tissue that shows some clonal tumor development in cells that had presumably acquired additional oncogenic modifications (Frame and Balmain, 2000). Similar results were obtained after infection of organisms with oncogenic viruses. For example, cells in chicken embryos infected with v-Src-containing virus do not show a malignant phenotype, but when the same cells are dissociated and placed in culture, they show massive transformation (Dolberg and Bissell, 1984).
In fact, it is extremely rare that one or even several genetic modifications can turn an entire tissue into a tumor, suggesting that it is much more difficult to transform cells that grow as part of a tissue than single cells that grow in a culture dish. Furthermore, in addition to mutant cells, wild-type cells also show differences in cancer-relevant cell behavior depending on whether they grow as a part of the tissue or an unorganized cell population in culture. For example, it was thought that normal cells have only a limited life span in culture. However, recent studies demonstrated that this might be due to inferior culture conditions (Papini et al., 2003; Ramirez et al., 2001). When primary mouse and human keratinocytes grow as an unorganized cell population in the presence of fibroblasts, the keratinocytes display almost limitless proliferative capacity, although this is not due to transformation because the same cells behave normally after being grafted back onto human or mouse skin (Rheinwald and Green, 1977; Ronfard et al., 2000). These results indicate that completely normal cells can exhibit tumor-like behavior when they are grown outside of their normal tissue microenvironment.
3D cultures of epithelial cells, pioneered in Mina Bissell's laboratory, have provided substantial information concerning the role of tissue organization in the regulation of cell proliferation and cancer. Epithelial cells within polarized 3D structures are vastly different from the same cells that grow two-dimensionally (Wang et al., 1998). Polarization has a profound effect on the outcome of oncogenic signaling. For example, activation of Myc results in increased cell proliferation in cells that grow as an unorganized cell population, but has no effect in the same cells when they can form polarized 3D structures (Partanen et al., 2007).
Both intercellular communication and signals from the basement membrane are crucial for the manifestation of the transformed phenotype of epithelial cells. Disruption of the interaction between β1-integrin and the basement membrane suppresses the malignant phenotype of breast carcinoma cell lines (Liu et al., 2004; Wang et al., 1998; Weaver et al., 1997). Basement-membrane interaction of polarized epithelial cells not only provides them with integrin-mediated proliferation signals, but can also protect epithelial cells from apoptotic cell death (Weaver et al., 2002). Accordingly, elimination of signaling from the crucial basement-membrane-receptor β4-integrin in epithelial cells in vivo results in the attenuation of ErbB2-mediated mammary tumorigenesis (Guo et al., 2006).
|
). We propose that the internal cell-polarity mechanisms of the normal cells function as a non-cell-autonomous tumor suppressor by using 3D tissue organization to reinforce cell polarity, and attenuate proliferation and invasion of the mutant cells (Fig. 6). In this model, normal cells use their internal cell-polarity mechanisms to establish a polarized 3D tissue organization (Fig. 6A), which, in turn, uses the AJCs and cell-substratum adhesions to reinforce and maintain polarity of the mutant cells with disrupted internal cell-polarity pathways (Fig. 6B). If tumor cells are unable to form AJCs with their wild-type neighbors, AJ biosensors on wild-type cells will not recognize the mutant as a neighboring cell and will treat it as a gap in the epithelial layer that needs to be repaired. Subsequent activation of the actin-myosin-based `purse-string' epithelial wound-repair mechanism may result in expulsion and loss of the mutant cell (Brock et al., 1996; Danjo and Gipson, 1998) (Fig. 6C). Overall, in cases of both the `imposed' cell polarity and physical removal of the mutant cells, 3D tissue polarity may function to inhibit primary tumor development. This is a non-canonical mechanism of tumor suppression because, unlike the canonical tumor suppressors that function within the cells, 3D tissue polarity functions non-cell-autonomously and probably depends on the activities of multiple cell-polarity and cell-adhesion genes. Although such a mechanism of tumor suppression currently represents only a hypothetical model, specific experiments can be designed to test its validity in the future.
|
Conclusion and future outlook |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionCore mechanisms of cellular...AJCs as a crucial...Core cell-polarity mechanisms...Cell-polarity mechanisms in self...Cell-polarity-mediated 3D tissue...Conclusion and future outlookReferences |
|---|
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
|
References |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionCore mechanisms of cellular...AJCs as a crucial...Core cell-polarity mechanisms...Cell-polarity mechanisms in self...Cell-polarity-mediated 3D tissue...Conclusion and future outlookReferences |
|---|
Albertson, R. and Doe, C. Q. (2003). Dlg, Scrib and Lgl regulate neuroblast cell size and mitotic spindle asymmetry. Nat. Cell Biol. 5, 166-170.[CrossRef][Medline]
Al-Hajj, M., Wicha, M. S., Benito-Hernandez, A., Morrison, S. J. and Clarke, M. F. (2003). Prospective identification of tumorigenic breast cancer cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 3983-3988.
Aranda, V., Haire, T., Nolan, M. E., Calarco, J. P., Rosenberg, A. Z., Fawcett, J. P., Pawson, T. and Muthuswamy, S. K. (2006). Par6-aPKC uncouples ErbB2 induced disruption of polarized epithelial organization from proliferation control. Nat. Cell Biol. 8, 1235-1245.[CrossRef][Medline]
Astigiano, S., Damonte, P., Fossati, S., Boni, L. and Barbieri, O. (2005). Fate of embryonal carcinoma cells injected into postimplantation mouse embryos. Differentiation 73, 484-490.[CrossRef][Medline]
Baas, A. F., Kuipers, J., van der Wel, N. N., Batlle, E., Koerten, H. K., Peters, P. J. and Clevers, H. C. (2004). Complete polarization of single intestinal epithelial cells upon activation of LKB1 by STRAD. Cell 116, 457-466.[CrossRef][Medline]
Benton, R. and St Johnston, D. (2003). Drosophila PAR-1 and 14-3-3 inhibit Bazooka/PAR-3 to establish complementary cortical domains in polarized cells. Cell 115, 691-704.[CrossRef][Medline]
Betschinger, J., Mechtler, K. and Knoblich, J. A. (2003). The Par complex directs asymmetric cell division by phosphorylating the cytoskeletal protein Lgl. Nature 422, 326-330.[CrossRef][Medline]
Betschinger, J., Mechtler, K. and Knoblich, J. A. (2006). Asymmetric segregation of the tumor suppressor brat regulates self-renewal in Drosophila neural stem cells. Cell 124, 1241-1253.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bilder, D. (2004). Epithelial polarity and proliferation control: links from the Drosophila neoplastic tumor suppressors. Genes Dev. 18, 1909-1925.
Bilder, D. and Perrimon, N. (2000). Localization of apical epithelial determinants by the basolateral PDZ protein Scribble. Nature 403, 676-680.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bissell, M. J., Rizki, A. and Mian, I. S. (2003). Tissue architecture: the ultimate regulator of breast epithelial function. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 15, 753-762.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bowman, S. K., Neumuller, R. A., Novatchkova, M., Du, Q. and Knoblich, J. A. (2006). The Drosophila NuMA Homolog Mud regulates spindle orientation in asymmetric cell division. Dev. Cell 10, 731-742.[CrossRef][Medline]
Brinster, R. L. (1974). The effect of cells transferred into the mouse blastocyst on subsequent development. J. Exp. Med. 140, 1049-1056.[Abstract]
Brock, J., Midwinter, K., Lewis, J. and Martin, P. (1996). Healing of incisional wounds in the embryonic chick wing bud: characterization of the actin purse-string and demonstration of a requirement for Rho activation. J. Cell Biol. 135, 1097-1107.
Caussinus, E. and Gonzalez, C. (2005). Induction of tumor growth by altered stem-cell asymmetric division in Drosophila melanogaster. Nat. Genet. 37, 1125-1129.[CrossRef][Medline]
Cavatorta, A. L., Fumero, G., Chouhy, D., Aguirre, R., Nocito, A. L., Giri, A. A., Banks, L. and Gardiol, D. (2004). Differential expression of the human homologue of drosophila discs large oncosuppressor in histologic samples from human papillomavirus-associated lesions as a marker for progression to malignancy. Int. J. Cancer 111, 373-380.[CrossRef][Medline]
Chen, X. and Macara, I. G. (2005). Par-3 controls tight junction assembly through the Rac exchange factor Tiam1. Nat. Cell Biol. 7, 262-269.[CrossRef][Medline]
Cohen, E. E., Lingen, M. W., Zhu, B., Zhu, H., Straza, M. W., Pierce, C., Martin, L. E. and Rosner, M. R. (2006). Protein kinase C zeta mediates epidermal growth factor-induced growth of head and neck tumor cells by regulating mitogen-activated protein kinase. Cancer Res. 66, 6296-6303.
Cuthbert, P. C., Stanford, L. E., Coba, M. P., Ainge, J. A., Fink, A. E., Opazo, P., Delgado, J. Y., Komiyama, N. H., O'Dell, T. J. and Grant, S. G. (2007). Synapse-associated protein 102/dlgh3 couples the NMDA receptor to specific plasticity pathways and learning strategies. J. Neurosci. 27, 2673-2682.
Danjo, Y. and Gipson, I. K. (1998). Actin `purse string' filaments are anchored by E-cadherin-mediated adherens junctions at the leading edge of the epithelial wound, providing coordinated cell movement. J. Cell Sci. 111, 3323-3332.[Abstract]
Dolberg, D. S. and Bissell, M. J. (1984). Inability of Rous sarcoma virus to cause sarcomas in the avian embryo. Nature 309, 552-556.[CrossRef][Medline]
Donson, A. M., Banerjee, A., Gamboni-Robertson, F., Fleitz, J. M. and Foreman, N. K. (2000). Protein kinase C zeta isoform is critical for proliferation in human glioblastoma cell lines. J. Neurooncol. 47, 109-115.[Medline]
Eder, A. M., Sui, X., Rosen, D. G., Nolden, L. K., Cheng, K. W., Lahad, J. P., Kango-Singh, M., Lu, K. H., Warneke, C. L., Atkinson, E. N. et al. (2005). Atypical PKCiota contributes to poor prognosis through loss of apical-basal polarity and cyclin E overexpression in ovarian cancer. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102, 12519-12524.
Firestein, B. L. and Rongo, C. (2001). DLG-1 is a MAGUK similar to SAP97 and is required for adherens junction formation. Mol. Biol. Cell 12, 3465-3475.
Frame, S. and Balmain, A. (2000). Integration of positive and negative growth signals during ras pathway activation in vivo. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 10, 106-113.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gardiol, D., Kuhne, C., Glaunsinger, B., Lee, S. S., Javier, R. and Banks, L. (1999). Oncogenic human papillomavirus E6 proteins target the discs large tumour suppressor for proteasome-mediated degradation. Oncogene 18, 5487-5496.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gardiol, D., Zacchi, A., Petrera, F., Stanta, G. and Banks, L. (2006). Human discs large and scrib are localized at the same regions in colon mucosa and changes in their expression patterns are correlated with loss of tissue architecture during malignant progression. Int. J. Cancer 119, 1285-1290.[CrossRef][Medline]
Giardiello, F. M., Welsh, S. B., Hamilton, S. R., Offerhaus, G. J., Gittelsohn, A. M., Booker, S. V., Krush, A. J., Yardley, J. H. and Luk, G. D. (1987). Increased risk of cancer in the Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. N. Engl. J. Med. 316, 1511-1514.[Abstract]
Guo, W., Pylayeva, Y., Pepe, A., Yoshioka, T., Muller, W. J., Inghirami, G. and Giancotti, F. G. (2006). Beta 4 integrin amplifies ErbB2 signaling to promote mammary tumorigenesis. Cell 126, 489-502.[CrossRef][Medline]
Handa, K., Yugawa, T., Narisawa-Saito, M., Ohno, S., Fujita, M. and Kiyono, T. (2007). E6AP-dependent degradation of DLG4/PSD95 by high-risk human papillomavirus type 18 E6 protein. J. Virol. 81, 1379-1389.
Harris, T. J. and Peifer, M. (2007). aPKC controls microtubule organization to balance adherens junction symmetry and planar polarity during development. Dev. Cell 12, 727-738.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hartsock, A. and Nelson, W. J. (2007). Adherens and tight junctions: structure, function and connections to the actin cytoskeleton. Biochim. Biophys. Acta doi:10.1016/j.bbamem.2007.07.012.
Hirata, A., Higuchi, M., Niinuma, A., Ohashi, M., Fukushi, M., Oie, M., Akiyama, T., Tanaka, Y., Gejyo, F. and Fujii, M. (2004). PDZ domain-binding motif of human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 Tax oncoprotein augments the transforming activity in a rat fibroblast cell line. Virology 318, 327-336.[CrossRef][Medline]
Huber, M. A., Kraut, N. and Beug, H. (2005). Molecular requirements for epithelial-mesenchymal transition during tumor progression. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 17, 548-558.[CrossRef][Medline]
Huntly, B. J. and Gilliland, D. G. (2005). Cancer biology: summing up cancer stem cells. Nature 435, 1169-1170.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hutterer, A., Betschinger, J., Petronczki, M. and Knoblich, J. A. (2004). Sequential roles of Cdc42, Par-6, aPKC, and Lgl in the establishment of epithelial polarity during Drosophila embryogenesis. Dev. Cell 6, 845-854.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hynes, N. E. and Lane, H. A. (2005). ERBB receptors and cancer: the complexity of targeted inhibitors. Nat. Rev. Cancer 5, 341-354.[CrossRef][Medline]
Illmensee, K. and Mintz, B. (1976). Totipotency and normal differentiation of single teratocarcinoma cells cloned by injection into blastocysts. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 73, 549-553.
Imai, F., Hirai, S., Akimoto, K., Koyama, H., Miyata, T., Ogawa, M., Noguchi, S., Sasaoka, T., Noda, T. and Ohno, S. (2006). Inactivation of aPKC{lambda} results in the loss of adherens junctions in neuroepithelial cells without affecting neurogenesis in mouse neocortex. Development 133, 1735-1744.
Izumi, Y., Ohta, N., Hisata, K., Raabe, T. and Matsuzaki, F. (2006). Drosophila Pins-binding protein Mud regulates spindle-polarity coupling and centrosome organization. Nat. Cell Biol. 8, 586-593.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kaelin, W. G., Jr (2005). The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein: roles in cancer and oxygen sensing. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 70, 159-166.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kaelin, W. G., Jr (2007). The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein and clear cell renal carcinoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 13, 680s-684s.
Kanamori, M., Sandy, P., Marzinotto, S., Benetti, R., Kai, C., Hayashizaki, Y., Schneider, C. and Suzuki, H. (2003). The PDZ protein tax-interacting protein-1 inhibits beta-catenin transcriptional activity and growth of colorectal cancer cells. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 38758-38764.
Katajisto, P., Vallenius, T., Vaahtomeri, K., Ekman, N., Udd, L., Tiainen, M. and Makela, T. P. (2007). The LKB1 tumor suppressor kinase in human disease. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1775, 63-75.[Medline]
Kenny, P. A. and Bissell, M. J. (2003). Tumor reversion: correction of malignant behavior by microenvironmental cues. Int. J. Cancer 107, 688-695.[CrossRef][Medline]
Klezovitch, O., Fernandez, T. E., Tapscott, S. J. and Vasioukhin, V. (2004). Loss of cell polarity causes severe brain dysplasia in Lgl1 knockout mice. Genes Dev. 18, 559-571.
Kuphal, S., Wallner, S., Schimanski, C. C., Bataille, F., Hofer, P., Strand, S., Strand, D. and Bosserhoff, A. K. (2006). Expression of Hugl-1 is strongly reduced in malignant melanoma. Oncogene 25, 103-110.[Medline]
Kuribayashi, K., Nakamura, K., Tanaka, M., Sato, T., Kato, J., Sasaki, K., Takimoto, R., Kogawa, K., Terui, T., Takayama, T. et al. (2007). Essential role of protein kinase C zeta in transducing a motility signal induced by superoxide and a chemotactic peptide, fMLP. J. Cell Biol. 176, 1049-1060.
Lapidot, T., Sirard, C., Vormoor, J., Murdoch, B., Hoang, T., Caceres-Cortes, J., Minden, M., Paterson, B., Caligiuri, M. A. and Dick, J. E. (1994). A cell initiating human acute myeloid leukaemia after transplantation into SCID mice. Nature 367, 645-648.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lee, C. Y., Andersen, R. O., Cabernard, C., Manning, L., Tran, K. D., Lanskey, M. J., Bashirullah, A. and Doe, C. Q. (2006a). Drosophila Aurora-A kinase inhibits neuroblast self-renewal by regulating aPKC/Numb cortical polarity and spindle orientation. Genes Dev. 20, 3464-3474.
Lee, C. Y., Robinson, K. J. and Doe, C. Q. (2006b). Lgl, Pins and aPKC regulate neuroblast self-renewal versus differentiation. Nature 439, 594-598.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lee, C. Y., Wilkinson, B. D., Siegrist, S. E., Wharton, R. P. and Doe, C. Q. (2006c). Brat is a Miranda cargo protein that promotes neuronal differentiation and inhibits neuroblast self-renewal. Dev. Cell 10, 441-449.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lee, J. H., Koh, H., Kim, M., Kim, Y., Lee, S. Y., Karess, R. E., Lee, S. H., Shong, M., Kim, J. M., Kim, J. et al. (2007). Energy-dependent regulation of cell structure by AMP-activated protein kinase. Nature 447, 1017-1020.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lee, S. S., Weiss, R. S. and Javier, R. T. (1997). Binding of human virus oncoproteins to hDlg/SAP97, a mammalian homolog of the Drosophila discs large tumor suppressor protein. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94, 6670-6675.
Lien, W. H., Klezovitch, O. and Vasioukhin, V. (2006). Cadherin-catenin proteins in vertebrate development. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 18, 499-506.[CrossRef][Medline]
Linggi, B. and Carpenter, G. (2006). ErbB receptors: new insights on mechanisms and biology. Trends Cell Biol. 16, 649-656.[CrossRef][Medline]
Liu, H., Radisky, D. C., Wang, F. and Bissell, M. J. (2004). Polarity and proliferation are controlled by distinct signaling pathways downstream of PI3-kinase in breast epithelial tumor cells. J. Cell Biol. 164, 603-612.
Lizcano, J. M., Goransson, O., Toth, R., Deak, M., Morrice, N. A., Boudeau, J., Hawley, S. A., Udd, L., Makela, T. P., Hardie, D. G. et al. (2004). LKB1 is a master kinase that activates 13 kinases of the AMPK subfamily, including MARK/PAR-1. EMBO J. 23, 833-843.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mahoney, Z. X., Sammut, B., Xavier, R. J., Cunningham, J., Go, G., Brim, K. L., Stappenbeck, T. S., Miner, J. H. and Swat, W. (2006). Discs-large homolog 1 regulates smooth muscle orientation in the mouse ureter. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103, 19872-19877.
Malumbres, M. and Barbacid, M. (2007). Cell cycle kinases in cancer. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 17, 60-65.[CrossRef][Medline]
Margolis, B. and Borg, J. P. (2005). Apicobasal polarity complexes. J. Cell Sci. 118, 5157-5159.
Martin-Belmonte, F., Gassama, A., Datta, A., Yu, W., Rescher, U., Gerke, V. and Mostov, K. (2007). PTEN-mediated apical segregation of phosphoinositides controls epithelial morphogenesis through Cdc42. Cell 128, 383-397.[CrossRef][Medline]
Massague, J. and Gomis, R. R. (2006). The logic of TGFbeta signaling. FEBS Lett. 580, 2811-2820.[CrossRef][Medline]
Massimi, P., Gammoh, N., Thomas, M. and Banks, L. (2004). HPV E6 specifically targets different cellular pools of its PDZ domain-containing tumour suppressor substrates for proteasome-mediated degradation. Oncogene 23, 8033-8039.[CrossRef][Medline]
Massimi, P., Shai, A., Lambert, P. and Banks, L. (2007). HPV E6 degradation of p53 and PDZ containing substrates in an E6AP null background. Oncogene doi:10.1038/sj.onc.1210810.
McGee, A. W., Topinka, J. R., Hashimoto, K., Petralia, R. S., Kakizawa, S., Kauer, F. W., Aguilera-Moreno, A., Wenthold, R. J., Kano, M. and Bredt, D. S. (2001). PSD-93 knock-out mice reveal that neuronal MAGUKs are not required for development or function of parallel fiber synapses in cerebellum. J. Neurosci. 21, 3085-3091.
Migaud, M., Charlesworth, P., Dempster, M., Webster, L. C., Watabe, A. M., Makhinson, M., He, Y., Ramsay, M. F., Morris, R. G., Morrison, J. H. et al. (1998). Enhanced long-term potentiation and impaired learning in mice with mutant postsynaptic density-95 protein. Nature 396, 433-439.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mintz, B. and Illmensee, K. (1975). Normal genetically mosaic mice produced from malignant teratocarcinoma cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 72, 3585-3589.
Mirouse, V., Swick, L. L., Kazgan, N., St Johnston, D. and Brenman, J. E. (2007). LKB1 and AMPK maintain epithelial cell polarity under energetic stress. J. Cell Biol. 177, 387-392.
Moasser, M. M. (2007). The oncogene HER2: its signaling and transforming functions and its role in human cancer pathogenesis. Oncogene 26, 6469-6487.[CrossRef][Medline]
Murdoch, J. N., Henderson, D. J., Doudney, K., Gaston-Massuet, C., Phillips, H. M., Paternotte, C., Arkell, R., Stanier, P. and Copp, A. J. (2003). Disruption of scribble (Scrb1) causes severe neural tube defects in the circletail mouse. Hum. Mol. Genet. 12, 87-98.
Murray, N. R., Jamieson, L., Yu, W., Zhang, J., Gokmen-Polar, Y., Sier, D., Anastasiadis, P., Gatalica, Z., Thompson, E. A. and Fields, A. P. (2004). Protein kinase Ciota is required for Ras transformation and colon carcinogenesis in vivo. J. Cell Biol. 164, 797-802.
Nakagawa, S. and Huibregtse, J. M. (2000). Human scribble (Vartul) is targeted for ubiquitin-mediated degradation by the high-risk papillomavirus E6 proteins and the E6AP ubiquitin-protein ligase. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20, 8244-8253.
Nakagawa, S., Yano, T., Nakagawa, K., Takizawa, S., Suzuki, Y., Yasugi, T., Huibregtse, J. M. and Taketani, Y. (2004). Analysis of the expression and localisation of a LAP protein, human scribble, in the normal and neoplastic epithelium of uterine cervix. Br. J. Cancer 90, 194-199.[CrossRef][Medline]
Navarro, C., Nola, S., Audebert, S., Santoni, M. J., Arsanto, J. P., Ginestier, C., Marchetto, S., Jacquemier, J., Isnardon, D., Le Bivic, A. et al. (2005). Junctional recruitment of mammalian Scribble relies on E-cadherin engagement. Oncogene 24, 4330-4339.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nelson, C. M. and Bissell, M. J. (2006). Of extracellular matrix, scaffolds, and signaling: tissue architecture regulates development, homeostasis, and cancer. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 22, 287-309.[CrossRef][Medline]
O'Brien, C. A., Pollett, A., Gallinger, S. and Dick, J. E. (2007). A human colon cancer cell capable of initiating tumour growth in immunodeficient mice. Nature 445, 106-110.[CrossRef][Medline]
Okuda, H., Saitoh, K., Hirai, S., Iwai, K., Takaki, Y., Baba, M., Minato, N., Ohno, S. and Shuin, T. (2001). The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein mediates ubiquitination of activated atypical protein kinase C. J. Biol. Chem. 276, 43611-43617.
Ozdamar, B., Bose, R., Barrios-Rodiles, M., Wang, H. R., Zhang, Y. and Wrana, J. L. (2005). Regulation of the polarity protein Par6 by TGFbeta receptors controls epithelial cell plasticity. Science 307, 1603-1609.
Papini, S., Cecchetti, D., Campani, D., Fitzgerald, W., Grivel, J. C., Chen, S., Margolis, L. and Revoltella, R. P. (2003). Isolation and clonal analysis of human epidermal keratinocyte stem cells in long-term culture. Stem Cells 21, 481-494.[CrossRef][Medline]
Partanen, J. I., Nieminen, A. I., Makela, T. P. and Klefstrom, J. (2007). Suppression of oncogenic properties of c-Myc by LKB1-controlled epithelial organization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 14694-14699.
Perez-Moreno, M. and Fuchs, E. (2006). Catenins: keeping cells from getting their signals crossed. Dev. Cell 11, 601-612.[CrossRef][Medline]
Pim, D., Thomas, M., Javier, R., Gardiol, D. and Banks, L. (2000). HPV E6 targeted degradation of the discs large protein: evidence for the involvement of a novel ubiquitin ligase. Oncogene 19, 719-725.[CrossRef][Medline]
Plant, P. J., Fawcett, J. P., Lin, D. C., Holdorf, A. D., Binns, K., Kulkarni, S. and Pawson, T. (2003). A polarity complex of mPar-6 and atypical PKC binds, phosphorylates and regulates mammalian Lgl. Nat. Cell Biol. 5, 301-308.[CrossRef][Medline]
Potter, J. D. (2007). Morphogens, morphostats, microarchitecture and malignancy. Nat. Rev. Cancer 7, 464-474.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ramirez, R. D., Morales, C. P., Herbert, B. S., Rohde, J. M., Passons, C., Shay, J. W. and Wright, W. E. (2001). Putative telomere-independent mechanisms of replicative aging reflect inadequate growth conditions. Genes Dev. 15, 398-403.
Regala, R. P., Weems, C., Jamieson, L., Khoor, A., Edell, E. S., Lohse, C. M. and Fields, A. P. (2005). Atypical protein kinase C iota is an oncogene in human non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer Res. 65, 8905-8911.
Rheinwald, J. G. and Green, H. (1977). Epidermal growth factor and the multiplication of cultured human epidermal keratinocytes. Nature 265, 421-424.[CrossRef][Medline]
Rolls, M. M., Albertson, R., Shih, H. P., Lee, C. Y. and Doe, C. Q. (2003). Drosophila aPKC regulates cell polarity and cell proliferation in neuroblasts and epithelia. J. Cell Biol. 163, 1089-1098.
Ronfard, V., Rives, J. M., Neveux, Y., Carsin, H. and Barrandon, Y. (2000). Long-term regeneration of human epidermis on third degree burns transplanted with autologous cultured epithelium grown on a fibrin matrix. Transplantation 70, 1588-1598.[CrossRef][Medline]
Rossi, D. J. and Weissman, I. L. (2006). Pten, tumorigenesis, and stem cell self-renewal. Cell 125, 229-231.[CrossRef][Medline]
Schermer, B., Ghenoiu, C., Bartram, M., Muller, R. U., Kotsis, F., Hohne, M., Kuhn, W., Rapka, M., Nitschke, R., Zentgraf, H. et al. (2006). The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein controls ciliogenesis by orienting microtubule growth. J. Cell Biol. 175, 547-554.
Schimanski, C. C., Schmitz, G., Kashyap, A., Bosserhoff, A. K., Bataille, F., Schafer, S. C., Lehr, H. A., Berger, M. R., Galle, P. R., Strand, S. et al. (2005). Reduced expression of Hugl-1, the human homologue of Drosophila tumour suppressor gene lgl, contributes to progression of colorectal cancer. Oncogene 24, 3100-3109.[CrossRef][Medline]
Siller, K. H., Cabernard, C. and Doe, C. Q. (2006). The NuMA-related Mud protein binds Pins and regulates spindle orientation in Drosophila neuroblasts. Nat. Cell Biol. 8, 594-600.[CrossRef][Medline]
Singh, S. K., Hawkins, C., Clarke, I. D., Squire, J. A., Bayani, J., Hide, T., Henkelman, R. M., Cusimano, M. D. and Dirks, P. B. (2004). Identification of human brain tumour initiating cells. Nature 432, 396-401.[CrossRef][Medline]
Stallings-Mann, M., Jamieson, L., Regala, R. P., Weems, C., Murray, N. R. and Fields, A. P. (2006). A novel small-molecule inhibitor of protein kinase Ciota blocks transformed growth of non-small-cell lung cancer cells. Cancer Res. 66, 1767-1774.
Sun, R., Gao, P., Chen, L., Ma, D., Wang, J., Oppenheim, J. J. and Zhang, N. (2005). Protein kinase C zeta is required for epidermal growth factor-induced chemotaxis of human breast cancer cells. Cancer Res. 65, 1433-1441.
Suzuki, A. and Ohno, S. (2006). The PAR-aPKC system: lessons in polarity. J. Cell Sci. 119, 979-987.
Thiery, J. P. (2003). Epithelial-mesenchymal transitions in development and pathologies. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 15, 740-746.[CrossRef][Medline]
Thomas, M., Glaunsinger, B., Pim, D., Javier, R. and Banks, L. (2001). HPV E6 and MAGUK protein interactions: determination of the molecular basis for specific protein recognition and degradation. Oncogene 20, 5431-5439.[CrossRef][Medline]
Vasioukhin, V., Bauer, C., Yin, M. and Fuchs, E. (2000). Directed actin polymerization is the driving force for epithelial cell-cell adhesion. Cell 100, 209-219.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wang, F., Weaver, V. M., Petersen, O. W., Larabell, C. A., Dedhar, S., Briand, P., Lupu, R. and Bissell, M. J. (1998). Reciprocal interactions between beta1-integrin and epidermal growth factor receptor in three-dimensional basement membrane breast cultures: a different perspective in epithelial biology. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95, 14821-14826.
Wang, H., Somers, G. W., Bashirullah, A., Heberlein, U., Yu, F. and Chia, W. (2006). Aurora-A acts as a tumor suppressor and regulates self-renewal of Drosophila neuroblasts. Genes Dev. 20, 3453-3463.
Wang, H., Ouyang, Y., Somers, W. G., Chia, W. and Lu, B. (2007). Polo inhibits progenitor self-renewal and regulates Numb asymmetry by phosphorylating Pon. Nature 449, 96-100.[CrossRef][Medline]
Weaver, V. M., Petersen, O. W., Wang, F., Larabell, C. A., Briand, P., Damsky, C. and Bissell, M. J. (1997). Reversion of the malignant phenotype of human breast cells in three-dimensional culture and in vivo by integrin blocking antibodies. J. Cell Biol. 137, 231-245.
Weaver, V. M., Lelievre, S., Lakins, J. N., Chrenek, M. A., Jones, J. C., Giancotti, F., Werb, Z. and Bissell, M. J. (2002). beta4 integrin-dependent formation of polarized three-dimensional architecture confers resistance to apoptosis in normal and malignant mammary epithelium. Cancer Cell 2, 205-216.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wodarz, A. (2005). Molecular control of cell polarity and asymmetric cell division in Drosophila neuroblasts. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 17, 475-481.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wodarz, A. and Nathke, I. (2007). Cell polarity in development and cancer. Nat. Cell Biol. 9, 1016-1024.[CrossRef][Medline]
Woods, D. F., Wu, J. W. and Bryant, P. J. (1997). Localization of proteins to the apicolateral junctions of Drosophila epithelia. Dev. Genet. 20, 111-118.[CrossRef][Medline]
Zahir, N. and Weaver, V. M. (2004). Death in the third dimension: apoptosis regulation and tissue architecture. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 14, 71-80.[CrossRef][Medline]
Zhang, L., Huang, J., Yang, N., Liang, S., Barchetti, A., Giannakakis, A., Cadungog, M. G., O'Brien-Jenkins, A., Massobrio, M., Roby, K. F. et al. (2006a). Integrative genomic analysis of protein kinase C (PKC) family identifies PKCiota as a biomarker and potential oncogene in ovarian carcinoma. Cancer Res. 66, 4627-4635.
Zhang, L., Li, J., Young, L. H. and Caplan, M. J. (2006b). AMP-activated protein kinase regulates the assembly of epithelial tight junctions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103, 17272-17277.
Zhang, Y., Dasgupta, J., Ma, R. Z., Banks, L., Thomas, M. and Chen, X. S. (2007). Structures of a human papillomavirus (HPV) E6 polypeptide bound to MAGUK proteins: mechanisms of targeting tumor suppressors by a high-risk HPV oncoprotein. J. Virol. 81, 3618-3626.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  C. Maenhaut, J.E. Dumont, P.P. Roger, and W.C.G. van Staveren Cancer stem cells: a reality, a myth, a fuzzy concept or a misnomer? An analysis Carcinogenesis, February 1, 2010; 31(2): 149 - 158. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. V Shah, S. Thomas, A. Muralidharan, Y. Liu, P. L Hermonat, J. Williams, and J. Chaudhary Calcitonin promotes in vivo metastasis of prostate cancer cells by altering cell signaling, adhesion, and inflammatory pathways Endocr. Relat. Cancer, December 1, 2008; 15(4): 953 - 964. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. L. Fish, C. Dehay, H. Kennedy, and W. B. Huttner Making bigger brains-the evolution of neural-progenitor-cell division J. Cell Sci., September 1, 2008; 121(17): 2783 - 2793. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
