Search

By regulating transcript isoform expression levels, alternative splicing provides an additional layer of protein control. Recent studies show evidence that cancer cells use different splicing events to fulfill their requirements in order to develop, progress and metastasize. However, there has been less attention for the role of the complex catalyzing the complicated multistep splicing reaction: the spliceosome. The spliceosome consists of multiple sub-complexes in total comprising 244 proteins or splice factors and 5 associated RNA molecules. Here we discuss the role of splice factors in the oncogenic processes tumors cells need to fulfill their oncogenic properties (the so-called the hallmarks of cancer). Despite the fact that splice factors have been investigated only recently, they seem to play a prominent role in already five hallmarks of cancer: angiogenesis, resisting cell death, sustaining proliferation, deregulating cellular energetics and invasion and metastasis formation by affecting major signaling pathways such as epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, the Warburg effect, DNA damage response and hormone receptor dependent proliferation. Moreover, we could relate expression of representative genes of four other hallmarks (enabling replicative mortality, genomic instability, avoiding immune destruction and evading growth suppression) to splice factor levels in human breast cancer tumors, suggesting that also these hallmarks could be regulated by splice factors. Since many splice factors are involved in multiple hallmarks of cancer, inhibiting splice factors might provide a new layer of oncogenic control and a powerful method to combat breast cancer progression.

Androgen receptor (AR) inhibitors represent the mainstay of prostate cancer treatment. In a genome-wide CRISPR-Cas9 screen using LNCaP prostate cancer cells, loss of co-repressor TLE3 conferred resistance to AR antagonists apalutamide and enzalutamide. Genes differentially expressed upon TLE3 loss share AR as the top transcriptional regulator, and TLE3 loss rescued the expression of a subset of androgen-responsive genes upon enzalutamide treatment. GR expression was strongly upregulated upon AR inhibition in a TLE3-negative background. This was consistent with binding of TLE3 and AR at the GR locus. Furthermore, GR binding was observed proximal to TLE3/AR-shared genes. GR inhibition resensitized TLE3KO cells to enzalutamide. Analyses of patient samples revealed an association between TLE3 and GR levels that reflected our findings in LNCaP cells, of which the clinical relevance is yet to be determined. Together, our findings reveal a mechanistic link between TLE3 and GR-mediated resistance to AR inhibitors in human prostate cancer.

Oxidative stress leads to the activation of the Nuclear factor-erythroid-2-related factor 2 (Nrf2) pathway. While most studies have focused on the activation of the Nrf2 pathway after single chemical treatment, little is known about the dynamic regulation of the Nrf2 pathway in the context of repeated exposure scenarios. Here we employed single cell live imaging to quantitatively monitor the dynamics of the Nrf2 pathway during repeated exposure, making advantage of two HepG2 fluorescent protein reporter cell lines, expressing GFP tagged Nrf2 or sulfiredoxin 1 (Srxn1), a direct downstream target of Nrf2. High throughput live confocal imaging was used to measure the temporal dynamics of these two components of the Nrf2 pathway after repeated exposure to an extensive concentration range of diethyl maleate (DEM) and tert-butylhydroquinone (tBHQ). Single treatment with DEM or tBHQ induced Nrf2 and Srxn1 over time in a concentration-dependent manner. The Nrf2 response to a second treatment was lower than the response to the first exposure with the same concentration, indicating that the response is adaptive. Moreover, a limited fraction of individual cells committed themselves into the Nrf2 response during the second treatment. Despite the suppression of the Nrf2 pathway, the second treatment resulted in a three-fold higher Srxn1-GFP response compared to the first treatment, with all cells participating in the response. While after the first treatment Srxn1-GFP response was linearly related to Nrf2-GFP nuclear translocation, such a linear relationship was less clear for the second exposure. siRNA-mediated knockdown demonstrated that the second response is dependent on the activity of Nrf2. Several other, clinically relevant, compounds (i.e., sulphorophane, nitrofurantoin and CDDO-Me) also enhanced the induction of Srxn1-GFP upon two consecutive repeated exposure. Together the data indicate that adaptation towards pro-oxidants lowers the Nrf2 activation capacity, but simultaneously primes cells for the enhancement of an antioxidant response which depends on factors other than just Nrf2. These data provide further insight in the overall dynamics of stress pathway activation after repeated exposure and underscore the complexity of responses that may govern repeated dose toxicity.