The roles and significance of STAT3 in cancer biology have been extensively studied for more than a decade. Mounting evidence has shown that constitutive activation of STAT3 is a frequent biochemical aberrancy in cancer cells, and this abnormality directly contributes to tumorigenesis and shapes many malignant phenotypes in cancer cells. Nevertheless, results from more recent experimental and clinicopathologic studies have suggested that STAT3 also can exert tumor suppressor effects under specific conditions. Importantly, some of these studies have demonstrated that STAT3 can function either as an oncoprotein or a tumor suppressor in the same cell type, depending on the specific genetic background or presence/absence of specific coexisting biochemical defects. Thus, in the context of cancer biology, STAT3 can be a friend or foe. In the first half of this review, we will highlight the “evil” features of STAT3 by summarizing its oncogenic functions and mechanisms. The differences between the canonical and non-canonical pathway will be highlighted. In the second half, we will summarize the evidence supporting that STAT3 can function as a tumor suppressor. To explain how STAT3 may mediate its tumor suppressor effects, we will discuss several possible mechanisms, one of which is linked to the role of STAT3β, one of the two STAT3 splicing isoforms. Taken together, it is clear that the roles of STAT3 in cancer are multi-faceted and far more complicated than one appreciated previously. The new knowledge has provided us with new approaches and strategies when we evaluate STAT3 as a prognostic biomarker or therapeutic target.

Loss of STAT1 (Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription-1) has been implicated in the pathobiology of a number of cancer types. Nonetheless, the biological and clinical significance of STAT1 in esophageal squamous cell carcinomas (ESCC) has not been comprehensively studied. Using immunohistochemistry, we detected the STAT1 expression in a cohort of ESCC patients; In-vitro experiments, we used enforced gene transfection of STAT1C into two STAT1- weak/negative ESCC cell lines and siRNA knockdown of STAT1 in two STAT1-strong ESCC cell lines to detect STAT1 function in ESCC. We found that the expression of STAT1 was heterogeneous in ESCC, with 64 (49.0%) strongly positive cases, 59 (45.0%) weakly positive cases and 8 (6.1%) negative cases. STAT1 expression inversely correlated with the depth of tumor invasion and tumor size (p=0.047 and p=0.029, respectively, Chi square). Furthermore, patients with STAT1-strong/weak tumors had a significantly longer survival compared to those with STAT1-negative tumors (33.6 months versus 13.1 months, p=0.019). In patients carrying tumors of aggressive cytology (n=50), those with STAT1-strong tumors survived significantly longer than those with STAT1-weak/negative tumors (34.6 months versus 20.5 months, p=0.011). Our in-vitro experiments revealed that STAT1 is proapoptotic and inhibitory to cell-cycle progression and colony formation. Lastly, we found evidence that STAT1 signaling in ESCC cells down-regulated the expression and/or activity of NF-κB and STAT3, both of which are known to have oncogenic potential. To conclude, our findings suggest that STAT1 is a tumor suppressor in ESCC. Loss of STAT1, which is frequent in ESCC, contributes to the pathogenesis of these tumors.

Sall4 is a key factor for the maintenance of pluripotency and self-renewal of embryonic stem cells (ESCs). Our previous studies have shown that Sall4 is a robust stimulator for human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell (HSC/HPC) expansion. The purpose of the current study is to further evaluate how Sall4 may affect HSC/HPC activities in a murine system.

Background The role of β-catenin in cancer has been most studied in tumors of epithelial cell origin. The functional status and biological significance of this protein in anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive anaplastic large cell lymphoma is unknown. Design and Methods ALK-positive anaplastic large cell lymphoma cell lines and patients’ tumor samples were examined for status of β-catenin expression and signaling. The subcellular localization of β-catenin was assessed using immunohistochemistry, sub-cellular fractionation and confocal microscopy, while its transcriptional activity was studied using the TOPFlash/FOPFlash luciferase reporter assay. To examine the biological significance of β-catenin, short interfering RNA was used to knock-down its expression; the resulting biological effects were studied using trypan-blue exclusion and MTS assay, and the impact on its various downstream targets was assessed using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction and western blots. Results β-catenin was transcriptionally active in three of three ALK-positive anaplastic large cell lymphoma cell lines, and this finding correlates with the nuclear localization of β-catenin in these cells and the neoplastic cells identified in most of the patients’ tumor samples. β-catenin is biologically significant in ALK-positive anaplastic large cell lymphoma, since down-regulation of β-catenin resulted in a significant reduction in their cell growth. Down-regulation of β-catenin led to a marked reduction in both the total protein level and the activated/phosphorylated form of STAT3, another signaling protein previously shown to be important in the pathogenesis of ALK-positive anaplastic large cell lymphoma. In contrast to some of the oncogenic tyrosine kinases, modulation of nucleophosmin-anaplastic lymphoma kinase expression did not result in any detectable change in the protein level, nuclear localization or tyrosine phosphorylation of β-catenin; however, inhibition of nucleophosmin-anaplastic lymphoma kinase expression significantly down-regulated the transcriptional activity of β-catenin. Conclusions β-catenin signaling is constitutively active in ALK-positive anaplastic large cell lymphoma and represents a previously unknown mechanism by which the high levels of STAT3 expression and activation in these tumors are sustained. Our results suggest that the interaction between oncogenic tyrosine kinases and various cell signaling proteins may be more complex than previously believed.

Purpose: STAT3 is known to have both oncogenic and tumor suppressive effects, but the regulation of these opposing effects is elusive. We hypothesized that STAT3β, one of the two STAT3 isoforms, is the key determinant in this context. Experimental Design: The prognostic significance of STAT3β and phospho-STAT3α^Y705 (pSTAT3α^Y705) was evaluated in 286 cases of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). STAT3β-induced changes in the chemosensitivity to cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil were assessed both in vitro and in vivo. STAT3β-induced changes in the frequency of cancer stem cells were evaluated using Hoechst and CD44 staining. How STAT3β regulates STAT3α was determined using immunoprecipitation, confocal microscopy, DNA-binding, and chromatin immunoprecipitation-PCR. Results: STAT3β expression is an independent protective prognostic marker in patients with ESCC, which strongly correlated with longer overall survival (P = 0.0009) and recurrence-free survival (P = 0.0001). STAT3β significantly decreased the cancer stem cell population, and sensitized ESCC cells to cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil in tumor xenografts. Mechanistically, STAT3β markedly attenuated the transcription activity of STAT3α via inducing STAT3α:STAT3β heterodimers. However, the heterodimer formation decreased the binding between STAT3α and PTPN9 (better known as PTP-MEG2), a protein tyrosine phosphatase, thereby promoting the phosphorylation of STAT3α^Y705 and enhancing its nuclear translocation and DNA binding. Correlating with this, high STAT3β expression converts the prognostic value of pSTAT3α^Y705 from unfavorable to favorable in patients with ESCC. Conclusions: STAT3β suppresses chemoresistance and cancer stemness by blocking the transcriptional activity of STAT3α. The paradoxical increase in pSTAT3α^Y705 induced by STAT3β carries important implications as to how the biologic and prognostic significance of STAT3 in cancers should be interpreted. Clin Cancer Res; 22(3); 691–703. ©2015 AACR.