Background: Treatment of advanced melanoma has been improved with the advent of the BRAF inhibitors. However, a limitation to such treatment is the occurrence of resistance. Several mechanisms have been identified to be responsible for the development of resistance, either MEK-dependent or MEK-independent. In order to overcome resistance due to reactivation of MEK signaling, MEK inhibitors are being clinically developed with promising results. However, also in this case resistance inevitably occurs. It has been recently reported that ErbB3, a member of the EGFR receptor family, may be involved in the establishment of drug resistance. Methods: Three melanoma cell lines were tested: LOX IMVI (BRAF V600E), MST-L (BRAF V600R) and WM266 (BRAF V600D). Phosphorylation of Receptor Tyrosine Kinases (RTKs) was assessed by an RTK array. Western blot analysis was performed on total protein extracts using anti-ErbB3, anti-AKT and anti-ERK 1/2 antibodies. The expression of neuregulin after vemurafenib treatment was assessed by Real Time PCR and Western blotting. The growth inhibitory effects of vemurafenib, GSK1120212b and/or anti-ErbB3 mAbs were evaluated by in vitro colony formation assays. Results: In the present study we demonstrate that ErbB3 is the main RTK undergoing rapidly hyperphosphorylation upon either treatment with a BRAF inhibitor or with a MEK inhibitor in a panel of melanoma cell lines harboring a variety of V600BRAF mutations and that this results in a strong activation of phospho-AKT. Importantly, ErbB3 activation is fully abrogated by the simultaneous use of anti-ErbB3 monoclonal antibodies, which are also shown to potently synergize with BRAF inhibitors in the inactivation of both AKT and ERK pathways and in the inhibition of melanoma cell growth. We show that upregulation of phospho-ErbB3 is due to an autocrine loop involving increased transcription and production of neuregulin by melanoma cells. Conclusions: On the basis of these results, we propose that initial co-treatment with BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors and anti-ErbB3 antibodies should be pursued as a strategy to reduce the ErbB3-dependent feedback survival mechanism and enhance duration of clinical response.
The keratinocyte growth factor receptor (KGFR)/fibroblast growth factor receptor 2b is activated by high‐affinity‐specific interaction with two different ligands, keratinocyte growth factor (KGF)/fibroblast growth factor (FGF)7 and FGF10/KGF2, which are characterized by an opposite requirement of heparan sulfate proteoglycans and heparin for binding to the receptor. We investigated here the possible different endocytic trafficking of KGFR, induced by the two ligands. Immunofluorescence and immunoelectron microscopy analysis showed that KGFR internalization triggered by either KGF or FGF10 occurs through clathrin‐coated pits. Immunofluorescence confocal microscopy using endocytic markers as well as tumor susceptibility gene 101 (TSG101) silencing demonstrated that KGF drives KGFR to the degradative pathway, while FGF10 targets the receptor to the recycling endosomes. Biochemical analysis showed that KGFR is ubiquitinated and degraded after KGF treatment but not after FGF10 treatment, and that the alternative fate of KGFR might depend on the different ability of the receptor to phosphorylate the fibroblast growth factor receptor substrate 2 (FRS2) substrate and to recruit the ubiquitin ligase c‐Cbl. The recycling endocytic pathway followed by KGFR upon FGF10 stimulation correlates with the higher mitogenic activity exerted by this ligand on epithelial cells compared with KGF, suggesting that the two ligands may play different functional roles through the regulation of the receptor endocytic transport.
Background: Infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) genotypes, mainly HPV16 and HPV18, is a major risk factor for cervical cancer and responsible for its progression. While the transforming role of the HPV E6 and E7 proteins is more characterized, the molecular mechanisms of the oncogenic activity of the E5 product are still only partially understood, but appear to involve deregulation of growth factor receptor expression. Since the signaling of the transforming growth factor beta (TGFbeta) is known to play crucial roles in the epithelial carcinogenesis, aim of this study was to investigate if HPV16 E5 would modulate the TGF-BRII expression and TGFbeta/Smad signaling. Findings: The HPV16 E5 mRNA expression pattern was variable in low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL), while homogeneously reduced in high-grade lesions (HSIL). Parallel analysis of TGFBRII mRNA showed that the receptor transcript levels were also variable in LSILs and inversely related to those of the viral protein. In vitro quantitation of the TGFBRII mRNA and protein in human keratinocytes expressing 16E5 in a dose-dependent and time-dependent manner showed a progressive down-modulation of the receptor. Phosphorylation of Smad2 and nuclear translocation of Smad4 were also decreased in E5-expressing cells stimulated with TGFbeta1. Conclusions: Taken together our results indicate that HPV16 E5 expression is able to attenuate the TGFbeta1/Smad signaling and propose that this loss of signal transduction, leading to destabilization of the epithelial homeostasis at very early stages of viral infection, may represent a crucial mechanism of promotion of the HPV-mediated cervical carcinogenesis.