Structural studies of proteinase entrapment by human alpha 2-macroglobulin using 3-D electron microscopy

Human a2 -macroglobulin ( a2 M; homotetramer, Mr 720 kDa) is an essential scavenger of proteinases in the serum. Each of its four subunits has a ‘bait region’, with cleavage sequences for almost all endo-proteinases, an unusual thiol ester moiety and a receptor-binding domain (RBD). Bait region cleavage in native a2 M ( a2 M-N) by a proteinase results in rapid thiol ester breakage, with a large-scale structural transformation, in which a2 M uniquely entraps the proteinase in a cage-like structure and exposes receptor-binding domains for rapid endocytosis. Transformed a2 M ( a2 M-TR) contains up to two proteinases, which remain active to small substrates. 3-D electron microscopy is optimally suited to study this unusual structural change at resolutions near (1/30) Å−1. ^ The structural importance of the thiol esters was demonstrated by a genetically-engineered a2 M, with the cysteines involved in thiol ester formation mutated to serines, which appeared structurally homologous to a2 M-TR. This demonstrates that the four highly labile thiol esters alone maintain the a2 M-N structure, while the ‘closed trap’ formed by a2 M-TR is a more stable structural form. ^ Half-transformed a2 M ( a2 M-HT), with cleaved bait regions and thiol esters in only two of its four subunits, provides an important structural link between a2 M-N and a2 M-TR. A comparison with a2 M-N showed the two proteinase-entrapping domains were above and below the plane bisecting the long axis. Both a2 M-N and a2 M-TR consist of two dense, oppositely twisted strands with significant interconnections, indicating that the structural change involves a rotation of these strands. In a2 M-HT these strands were partially untwisted with large central openings, revealing the manner in which the proteinase enters the internal cavity of a2 M. ^ In reconstructions of a2 M-N, a2 M-HT and a2 M-TR labeled with a monoclonal Fab, the Fabs were located on distal ends of each constitutive strand, demonstrating an anti-parallel arrangement of the subunits. Separation between the top and bottom pairs of Fabs was nearly the same on all structures, but the pairs were rotated about the long axis. Taken together, these results indicate that upon proteinase cleavage the two strands in a2 M-N separate. The proteinase enters the structure, while the strands re-twist to encage it. In a2 M-TR, which displays receptor-binding arms, more than two subunits are transformed as strands in the transformed half of a2 M-HT were not separated. ^

TH and XFKBP12 interact and regulate proliferation and differentiation in neural ectoderm through the TOR signaling pathway

During development, embryos must carefully integrate the processes of cell proliferation and differentiation. TH has been identified in Xenopus laevis as a gene product that functions in regulating differentiation of the neural ectoderm through its effect on cell proliferation. However, the mechanism and molecular pathway through which TH functions are not known. We identified the Xenopus FK506 binding protein homolog (XFKBP12) as a protein that interacted with TH in a yeast two-hybrid screen with TH as the bait. The direct and specific interaction between TH and XFKBP12 was supported by several tests including CO-IP, drug competence assay and mutagenesis analysis. To investigate the function of XFKBP12 during embryogenesis, we created an XFKBP12 loss of function embryo using antisense morpholino oligonucleotides (MO). XFKBP12 MO injected embryos displayed similar phenotypes as TH depleted embryos. We also demonstrated that both TH and XFKBP12 functioned through the TOR signaling pathway which is a target for cancer therapies. The interaction between TH and XFKBP 12 was required to regulate the proliferation of neural cells. Therefore, our study indicates that TH represents the endogenous ligand of XFKBP12 and together they coordinate neural cell proliferation and differentiation through the conserved rapamycin sensitive TOR pathway. Thus, understanding how this pathway functions in development will not only provide us important insights into the relationship between proliferation and differentiation, but help design rational cancer therapies targeting this pathway. ^

Elucidation of the role of 53BP1 in DNA double strand break (DSB) repair and tumor suppression

The protein p53 binding protein one (53BP1) was discovered in a yeast two-hybrid screen that used the DNA binding domain of p53 as bait. Cloning of full-length 53BP1 showed that this protein contains several protein domains which help make up the protein, which include two tandem BRCT domains and a amino-terminal serine/glutamine cluster domain (SCD). These are two protein domains are often seen in factors that are involved in the cellular response to DNA damage and control of cell cycle checkpoints and we hypothesize that 53BP1 is involved in the cellular response to DNA damage. In support of this hypothesis we observe that 53BP1 is phosphorylated and undergoes a dramatic nuclear re-localization in response to DNA damaging agents. 53BP1 also interacts with several factors that are important in the cellular response to DNA damage, such as the BRCA1 tumor suppressor, ATM and Rad3 related (ATR), and the phosphorylated version of the histone variant H2AX. Mice deficient in 53BP1 display increased sensitivity ionizing radiation (IR), a DNA damaging agent that introduces DNA double strand breaks (DSBs). In addition, 53BP1-deficient mice do not properly undergo the process of class switch recombination (CSR). We also observe that when a defect in 53BP1 is combined with a defect in p53; the resulting mice have an increased rate of formation of spontaneous tumors, notably the formation of B and T lineage lymphomas. The T lineage tumors arise by two distinct mechanisms: one driven by defects in cell cycle regulation and a second driven by defects in the ability to repair DNA DSBs. The B lineage tumors arise by the inability to repair DNA damage and over-expression of the oncogene c-myc. ^ With these observations, we conclude that not only does 53BP1 function in the cellular response to DNA damage, but it also works in concert with p53 to suppress tumor formation. ^