RNA interference-directed knockdown of urokinase plasminogen activator and urokinase plasminogen activator receptor inhibits prostate cancer cell invasion, survival, and tumorigenicity in vivo

The invasive ability of tumor cells plays a key role in prostate cancer metastasis and is a major cause of treatment failure. Urokinase plasminogen activator-(uPA) and its receptor (uPAR)-mediated signaling have been implicated in tumor cell invasion, survival, and metastasis in a variety of cancers. This study was undertaken to investigate the biological roles of uPA and uPAR in prostate cancer cell invasion and survival, and the potential of uPA and uPAR as targets for prostate cancer therapy. uPA and uPAR expression correlates with the metastatic potential of prostate cancer cells. Thus, therapies designed to inhibit uPA and uPAR expression would be beneficial. LNCaP, DU145, and PC3 are prostate cancer cell lines with low, moderate, and high metastatic potential, respectively, as demonstrated by their capacity to invade the extracellular matrix. In this study we utilized small hairpin RNAs (shRNAs), also referred to as small interfering RNAs, to target human uPA and uPAR. These small interfering RNA constructs significantly inhibited uPA and uPAR expression at both the mRNA and protein levels in the highly metastatic prostate cancer cell line PC3. Our data demonstrated that uPA-uPAR knockdown in PC3 cells resulted in a dramatic reduction of tumor cell invasion as indicated by a Matrigel invasion assay. Furthermore, simultaneous silencing of the genes for uPA and uPAR using a single plasmid construct expressing shRNAs for both uPA and uPAR significantly reduced cell viability and ultimately resulted in the induction of apoptotic cell death. RNA interference for uPA and uPAR also abrogated uPA-uPAR signaling to downstream target molecules such as ERK1/2 and Stat 3. In addition, our results demonstrated that intratumoral injection with the plasmid construct expressing shRNAs for uPA and uPAR almost completely inhibited established tumor growth and survival in an orthotopic mouse prostate cancer model. These findings uncovered evidence of a complex signaling network operating downstream of uPA-uPAR that actively advances tumor cell invasion, proliferation, and survival of prostate cancer cells. Thus, RNA interference-directed targeting of uPA and uPAR is a convenient and novel tool for studying the biological role of the uPA-uPAR system and raises the potential of its application for prostate cancer therapy.     

Urokinase plasminogen activator/urokinase-specific surface receptor expression and matrix invasion by breast cancer cells requires constitutive p38alpha mitogen-activated protein kinase activity

Overexpression of urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA) and its receptor (uPAR) has been well documented in a wide variety of tumor cells. In breast cancer, expression of uPA/uPAR is essential for tumor cell invasion and metastasis. However, the mechanism responsible for uPA/uPAR expression in cancer cells remains unclear. In the studies reported here, we show that endogenous p38 MAPK activity correlates well with breast carcinoma cell invasiveness. Treatment of highly invasive BT549 cells with a specific p38 MAPK inhibitor SB203580 diminished both uPA/uPAR mRNA and protein expression and abrogated the ability of these cells to invade matrigel, suggesting that p38 MAPK signaling pathway is involved in the regulation of uPA/uPAR expression and breast cancer cell invasion. We also demonstrated that SB203580-induced reduction in uPA/uPAR mRNA expression resulted from the de- stabilization of uPA and uPAR mRNA. Finally, by selectively inhibiting p38alpha or p38beta MAPK isoforms, we demonstrate that p38alpha, rather than p38beta, MAPK activity is essential for uPA/uPAR expression. These studies suggest that p38alpha MAPK signaling pathway is important for the maintenance of breast cancer invasive phenotype by promoting the stabilities of uPA and uPAR mRNA.     

Characterization of the functional epitope on the urokinase receptor. Complete alanine scanning mutagenesis supplemented by chemical cross-linking

The high affinity interaction between the serine protease urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and its glycolipid-anchored receptor (uPAR) represents one of the key regulatory steps in cell surface-associated plasminogen activation. On the basis on our crystal structure solved for uPAR in complex with a peptide antagonist, we recently proposed a model for the corresponding complex with the growth factor-like domain of uPA (Llinas et al. (2005) EMBO J. 24, 1655-1663). In the present study, we provide experimental evidence that consolidates and further develops this model using data from a comprehensive alanine scanning mutagenesis of uPAR combined with low resolution distance constraints defined within the complex using chemical cross-linkers as molecular rulers. The kinetic rate constants for the interaction between pro-uPA and 244 purified uPAR mutants with single-site replacements were determined by surface plasmon resonance. This complete alanine scanning of uPAR highlighted the involvement of 20 surface-exposed side chains in this interaction. Mutations causing delta deltaG > or = 1 kcal/mol for the uPA interaction are all located within or at the rim of the central cavity uniquely formed by the assembly of all three domains in uPAR, whereas none are found outside this crevice. Identification of specific cross-linking sites in uPAR and pro-uPA enabled us to build a model of the uPAR x uPA complex in which the kringle domain of uPA was positioned by the constraints established by the range of these cross-linkers. The nature of this interaction is predominantly hydrophobic and highly asymmetric, thus emphasizing the importance of the shape and size of the central cavity when designing low molecular mass antagonists of the uPAR/uPA interaction.     

Antagonistic Anti-urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor (uPAR) Antibodies Significantly Inhibit uPAR-mediated Cellular Signaling and Migration

Interactions between urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR) and its various ligands regulate tumor growth, invasion, and metastasis. Antibodies that bind specific uPAR epitopes may disrupt these interactions, thereby inhibiting these processes. Using a highly diverse and naïve human fragment of the antigen binding (Fab) phage display library, we identified 12 unique human Fabs that bind uPAR. Two of these antibodies compete against urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA) for uPAR binding, whereas a third competes with β1 integrins for uPAR binding. These competitive antibodies inhibit uPAR-dependent cell signaling and invasion in the non-small cell lung cancer cell line, H1299. Additionally, the integrin-blocking antibody abrogates uPAR/β1 integrin-mediated H1299 cell adhesion to fibronectin and vitronectin. This antibody and one of the uPAR/uPA antagonist antibodies shows a significant combined effect in inhibiting cell invasion through Matrigel/Collagen I or Collagen I matrices. Our results indicate that these antagonistic antibodies have potential for the detection and treatment of uPAR-expressing tumors.     

uPA-silica-Particles (SP-uPA): a novel analytical system to investigate uPA-uPAR interaction and to test synthetic uPAR antagonists as potential cancer therapeutics

The urokinase-type plasminogen activation system, including the serine protease uPA (urokinase-type plasminogen activator) and its cell surface receptor (uPAR, CD87), are important key molecules in tumor invasion and metastasis. Besides its proteolytic function, binding of uPA to uPAR on tumor cells exerts various cell responses such as migration, adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation. Hence, the uPA/uPAR system is a potential target for tumor therapy. We have designed a new generation of uPA-derived synthetic cyclic peptides suited to interfere with the binding of uPA to uPAR and present a new technology involving micro silica particles coated with uPA (SP-uPA) and reacting with recombinant soluble uPAR (suPAR), to rapidly assess the antagonistic potential of uPA-peptides by flow cytofluorometry (FACS). For this, we used silica particles of 10 microm in diameter to which HMW-uPA is coupled using the EDC/NHS method. Soluble, recombinant suPAR was added and the interaction of SP-uPA with suPAR verified by reaction with monoclonal antibody HD13.1 directed to uPAR, followed by a cyan dye (cy5)-labeled antibody directed against mouse IgG. Thereby it was possible to test naturally occurring ligands of uPAR (HMW-uPA, ATF) as well as highly effective, synthetic cyclic uPA-derived peptides (cyclo21,29[D-Cys21Cys29]-UPA21-30, cyclo21,29[D-Cys21Nle28Cys29]-uPA21-30, cyclo21,29[D-Cys(21)2-Nal24Cys29]-uPA21-30, and cyclo21,29[D-Cys21Orn23Thi24Thi25Cys29]-uPA21-30. The results obtained with the noncellular SP-uPA/uPAR system are highly comparable to those obtained with a cellular system involving FITC-uPA and the promyeloid cell line U937 as the source of uPAR.     

Downregulation of uPA, uPAR and MMP-9 using small, interfering, hairpin RNA (siRNA) inhibits glioma cell invasion, angiogenesis and tumor growth

The diffuse, extensive infiltration of malignant gliomas into the surrounding normal brain is believed to rely on modification of the proteolysis of extracellular matrix components. Our previous results clearly demonstrate that uPA, uPAR and MMP-9 concentrations increase significantly during tumor progression and that tumor growth can be inhibited with antisense stable clones of these molecules. Because antisense-mediated gene silencing does not completely inhibit the translation of target mRNA and high concentrations of antisense molecules are required to achieve gene silencing, we used the RNAi approach to silence uPA, uPAR and MMP-9 in this study. We examined a cytomegalovirus (CMV) promoter-driven DNA-template approach to induce hairpin RNA (hpRNA)-triggered RNAi to inhibit uPA, uPAR and MMP-9 gene expression with a single construct. uPAR protein levels and enzymatic activity of uPA and MMP-9 were found to significantly decrease in cells transfected with a plasmid expressing hairpin siRNA for uPAR, uPA and MMP-9. pU(2)M-transfected SNB19 cells significantly decreased uPA, uPAR and MMP-9 expression compared to mock and EV/SV-transfected cells, determined by immunohistochemical analysis. Furthermore, the effect of the single constructs for these molecules was a specific inhibition of their respective protein levels, as demonstrated by immunohistochemical analysis. After transfection with a plasmid vector expressing dsRNA for uPA, uPAR and MMP-9, glioma-cell invasion was retarded compared with mock and EV/SV-treated groups, demonstrated by Matrigel-invasion assay and spheroid-invasion assay. Downregulation of uPA, uPAR and MMP-9 using RNAi inhibited angiogenesis in an in vitro (co-culture) model. Direct intratumoral injections of plasmid DNA expressing hpRNA for uPA, uPAR and MMP-9 significantly regressed pre-established intracranial tumors in nude mice. In addition, cells treated with RNAi for uPAR, uPA and MMP-9 showed reduced pERK levels compared with parental and EV/SV-treated SNB19 cells. Our results support the therapeutic potential of RNAi as a method for gene therapy in treating gliomas.     

Antigen-driven lymphocyte recruitment to the lung is diminished in the absence of urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) receptor, but is independent of uPA.

The requirement for urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA) and uPA receptor (uPAR) in T lymphocyte migration is unknown. uPA(-/-) mice have fewer pulmonary lymphocytes in response to certain infections, but its unknown whether this is due to diminished recruitment. Primed, recipient mice were IT inoculated with Ag. Three days later, fluorescently labeled lymphoblasts from background-matched control wild-type (WT), uPA(-/-), or uPAR(-/-) donor mice were injected i.v., and their recruitment was determined. Approximately twice the number of uPA(-/-) compared with WT lymphoblasts were recruited to the lungs of WT recipients. This difference was eliminated when uPA(-/-) and WT lymphoblasts were injected into uPA(-/-) recipients. Thus, the reduced number of lung lymphocytes in infected uPA(-/-) mice is not due to reduced recruitment. However, uPAR is critically involved in recruitment. Markedly fewer uPAR(-/-) compared with WT lymphoblasts were recruited to the lung. These findings suggest that uPAR may be a novel target for immune modulation in T lymphocyte-mediated disorders.     

Plasminogen Activator Promotes Recovery Following Spinal Cord Injury

Plasminogen activators play an important role in synaptic plasticity associated with the crossed phrenic phenomenon (CPP) and recovery of respiratory function after spinal cord injury. A genetic approach using knockout mice lacking various genes in the plasminogen activator/plasmin system has shown that induction of urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA) is required during the first hour after a C2-hemisection for the acquisition of the CPP response. The uPA knockout mice do not show the structural remodeling of phrenic motor neuron synapses characteristic of the CPP response. As shown here uPA acts in a cell signaling manner via binding to its receptor uPAR rather than as a protease, since uPAR knockout mice or knock-in mice possessing a modified uPA that is unable to bind to uPAR both fail to generate a CPP and recover respiratory function. Microarray data and real-time PCR analysis of mRNAs induced in the phrenic motor nucleus after C2-hemisection in C57Bl/6 mice as compared to uPA knockout mice indicate a potential cell signaling cascade downstream possibly involving β-integrin and Src, and other pathways. Identification of these uPA-mediated signaling pathways may provide the opportunity to pharmacologically upregulate the synaptic plasticity necessary for recovery of phrenic motoneuron activity following cervical spinal cord injury.     

Suppression of urokinase plasminogen activator receptor inhibits proliferation and migration of pancreatic adenocarcinoma cells via regulation of ERK/p38 signaling

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) expresses high levels of urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA), its receptor (uPAR) and plasminogen activator inhibitor (PAI)-2, which may play an important role in PDAC progression. The overexpression of uPAR predicted short survival in PDAC patients. In this study, two different PDAC cell lines were used to examine the effect of small interfering (si) RNAs to uPAR, uPA and PAI-2 on proliferation, apoptosis, migration and MAP kinase activation. In both PDAC cell lines, siRNA to uPAR significantly inhibited cell proliferation and migration and stimulated apoptosis, to a greater extent than uPA siRNA. When either PDAC cell line was treated with uPAR siRNA, the level of phosphorylated ERK (p-ERK) decreased substantially, whereas phosphorylated p38 (p-p38) increased when compared to non-silencing control, uPA siRNA or PAI-2 siRNA treatment. This resulted in enhancement of the p-p38/p-ERK ratio which favors cancer cell arrest. Interestingly, uPAR protein expression was suppressed by p-ERK inhibition and stimulated with p-p38 inhibition, suggesting the presence of a positive feedback loop between uPAR and ERK. In summary, our data indicate that, of the uPA system, uPAR exerts the strongest effects on PDAC cells, by acting through the ERK signaling pathway via a positive feedback loop. Disruption of this loop with uPAR siRNA or inhibitor of p-ERK, inhibits PDAC proliferation and migration and promotes apoptosis. These findings suggest that uPAR strongly contributes to PDAC progression and may be considered as a potential anti-pancreatic cancer target.     

Urokinase plasminogen activator cleaves its cell surface receptor releasing the ligand-binding domain.

The cellular receptor for urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPAR) is a glycolipid-anchored three-domain membrane protein playing a central role in pericellular plasminogen activation. We have found that urokinase (uPA) can cleave its receptor between domains 1 and 2 generating a cell-associated uPAR variant without ligand-binding properties. In extracts of U937 cells there are two uPAR variants which after complete deglycosylation have apparent molecular masses of 35,000 and 27,000. Analysis with monoclonal antibodies showed that these variants represented the intact uPAR and a two-domain form, uPAR(2+3), lacking ligand-binding domain 1. Trypsin treatment showed that both variants are present on the outside of the cells. Addition to the culture medium of an anticatalytic monoclonal antibody to uPA inhibited the formation of the uPAR(2+3), indicating that uPA is involved in its generation. Purified uPAR can be cleaved directly by uPA as well as by plasmin. The uPA-catalyzed cleavage does not require binding of the protease to the receptor through its epidermal growth factor-like receptor-binding domain, since low molecular weight uPA that lacks this domain also cleaves uPAR. This unusual reaction in which a specific binding protein is proteolytically inactivated by its own ligand may represent a regulatory step in the plasminogen activation cascade.     

Structural basis of interaction between urokinase-type plasminogen activator and its receptor

Recent studies indicate that binding of the urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) to its high-affinity receptor (uPAR) orchestrates uPAR interactions with other cellular components that play a pivotal role in diverse (patho-)physiological processes, including wound healing, angiogenesis, inflammation, and cancer metastasis. However, notwithstanding the wealth of biochemical data available describing the activities of uPAR, little is known about the exact mode of uPAR/uPA interactions or the presumed conformational changes that accompany uPA/uPAR engagement. Here, we report the crystal structure of soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR), which contains the three domains of the wild-type receptor but lacks the cell-surface anchoring sequence, in complex with the amino-terminal fragment of urokinase-type plasminogen activator (ATF), at the resolution of 2.8 A. We report the 1.9 A crystal structure of free ATF. Our results provide a structural basis, represented by conformational changes induced in uPAR, for several published biochemical observations describing the nature of uPAR/uPA interactions and provide insight into mechanisms that may be responsible for the cellular responses induced by uPA binding.     

Urokinase-type plasminogen activator binding to its receptor stimulates tumor cell migration by enhancing integrin-mediated signal transduction.

Urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and its receptor (uPAR) participate in matrix degradation and cell migration by focusing proteolysis and functioning as a signaling ligand/receptor complex. uPAR, anchored by a lipid moiety in the membrane, is thought to require a transmembrane adapter to transduce signals into the cytoplasm. To study uPAR signaling, we transfected the prostate carcinoma cell line LNCaP, which does not express endogenous uPA or uPAR, with a uPAR encoding cDNA, resulting in high-level surface expression. We studied migration of these cells on fibronectin, which is mediated by the integrin alpha5beta1. Ligation of uPAR with uPA or its amino-terminal fragment enhanced haptotactic migration to fibronectin. In cells on fibronectin, but not on poly-l-lysine, ligation of uPAR also resulted in tyrosine phosphorylation of several proteins, including two proteins involved in integrin signaling, focal adhesion kinase and the crk-associated substrate p130(Cas). Furthermore, after uPAR ligation, uPAR was co-immunoprecipitated with beta1 integrins from the detergent-insoluble fraction of cell lysates. Thus, our data suggest that uPAR occupancy results in an interaction between uPAR and integrins and a potentiation of integrin-mediated signaling, which leads to enhanced cell migration.     

Renal urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) receptor but not uPA deficiency strongly attenuates ischemia reperfusion injury and acute kidney allograft rejection

Central mechanisms leading to ischemia induced allograft rejection are apoptosis and inflammation, processes highly regulated by the urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and its specific receptor (uPAR). Recently, up-regulation of uPA and uPAR has been shown to correlate with allograft rejection in human biopsies. However, the causal connection of uPA/uPAR in mediating transplant rejection and underlying molecular mechanisms remain poorly understood. In this study, we evaluated the role of uPA/uPAR in a mice model for kidney ischemia reperfusion (IR) injury and for acute kidney allograft rejection. uPAR but not uPA deficiency protected from IR injury. In the allogenic kidney transplant model, uPAR but not uPA deficiency of the allograft caused superior recipient survival and strongly attenuated loss of renal function. uPAR-deficient allografts showed reduced generation of reactive oxygen species and apoptosis. Moreover, neutrophil and monocyte/macrophage infiltration was strongly attenuated and up-regulation of the adhesion molecule ICAM-1 was completely abrogated in uPAR-deficient allografts. Inadequate ICAM-1 up-regulation in uPAR(-/-) primary aortic endothelial cells after C5a and TNF-alpha stimulation was confirmed by in vitro experiments. Our results demonstrate that the local renal uPAR plays an important role in the apoptotic and inflammatory responses mediating IR-injury and transplant rejection.     

Critical role of integrin alpha 5 beta 1 in urokinase (uPA)/urokinase receptor (uPAR,CD87) signaling

Urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) induces cell adhesion and chemotactic movement. uPA signaling requires its binding to uPA receptor (uPAR/CD87), but how glycosylphosphatidylinositol-anchored uPAR mediates signaling is unclear. uPAR is a ligand for several integrins (e.g. alpha 5 beta 1) and supports cell-cell interaction by binding to integrins on apposing cells (in trans). We studied whether binding of uPAR to alpha 5 beta 1 in cis is involved in adhesion and migration of Chinese hamster ovary cells in response to immobilized uPA. This process was temperature-sensitive and required mitogen-activated protein kinase activation. Anti-uPAR antibody or depletion of uPAR blocked, whereas overexpression of uPAR enhanced, cell adhesion to uPA. Adhesion to uPA was also blocked by deletion of the growth factor domain (GFD) of uPA and by anti-GFD antibody, whereas neither the isolated uPA kringle nor serine protease domain supported adhesion directly. Interestingly, anti-alpha 5 antibody, RGD peptide, and function-blocking mutations in alpha 5 beta 1 blocked adhesion to uPA. uPA-induced cell migration also required GFD, uPAR, and alpha 5 beta 1, but alpha 5 beta 1 alone did not support uPA-induced adhesion and migration. Thus, binding of uPA causes uPAR to act as a ligand for alpha 5 beta 1 to induce cell adhesion, intracellular signaling, and cell migration. We demonstrated that uPA induced RGD-dependent binding of uPAR to alpha 5 beta 1 in solution. These results suggest that uPA-induced adhesion and migration of Chinese hamster ovary cells occurs as a consequence of (a) uPA binding to uPAR through GFD, (b) the subsequent binding of a uPA.uPAR complex to alpha 5 beta 1 via uPAR, and (c) signal transduction through alpha 5 beta 1.     

Inactivation of uPA and its receptor uPAR by 3,3′‐diindolylmethane (DIM) leads to the inhibition of prostate cancer cell growth and migration

3,3′‐Diindolylmethane (DIM) has been studied for its putative anti‐cancer properties, especially against prostate cancer; however, its exact mechanism of action remains unclear. We recently provided preliminary data suggesting down‐regulation of uPA during B‐DIM (a clinically active DIM)‐induced inhibition of invasion and angiogenesis in prostate cancer cells. Since the expression and activation of uPA plays important role in tumorigenicity, and high endogenous levels of uPA and uPAR are found in advanced metastatic cancers, we investigated their role in B‐DIM‐mediated inhibition of prostate cancer cell growth and motility. Using PC3 cells, we found that B‐DIM treatment as well as the silencing of uPA and uPAR by siRNAs led to the inhibition of cell growth and motility. Conversely, over‐expression of uPA/uPAR in LNCaP and C4‐2B cells resulted in increased cell growth and motility, which was effectively inhibited by B‐DIM. Moreover, we found that uPA as well as uPAR induced the production of VEGF and MMP‐9, and that the down‐regulation of uPA/uPAR by siRNAs or B‐DIM treatment resulted in the inhibition of VEGF and MMP‐9 secretion which could be responsible for the observed inhibition of cell migration. Interestingly, silencing of uPA/uPAR led to decreased sensitivity to B‐DIM indicating important role of uPA/uPAR in B‐DIM‐mediated regulation of prostate cancer cell growth and migration. Our data suggest that chemopreventive and/or therapeutic activity of B‐DIM is in part due to down‐regulation of uPA–uPAR leading to reduced production of VEGF/MMP‐9 which ultimately leads to the inhibition of cell growth and migration of aggressive prostate cancer cells. J. Cell. Biochem. 107: 516–527, 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

The effects of vitronectin on specific interactions between urokinase-type plasminogen activator and its receptor: ab initio molecular orbital calculations

Binding of urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) to its receptor (uPAR) on the surface of a cancer cell is considered to be a trigger for starting cancer invasions. In addition, the somatomedin B (SMB) domain of vitronectin binds simultaneously to uPAR to construct a ternary complex of uPAR–uPA–SMB. Here we present stable structures of the solvated complexes of uPAR–uPA and uPAR–uPA–SMB obtained by classical molecular mechanics simulations, and the specific interactions between uPAR, uPA and SMB are investigated by ab initio fragment molecular orbital calculations. The result indicates that the SMB binding enhances the binding affinity between uPAR and uPA, although there is no direct contact between SMB and uPA. In particular, the specific interaction between uPAR and the Lys36 residue of uPA is significantly affected by the SMB binding. The positively charged Lys23, Lys46 and Lys61 residues of uPA have strong attractive interactions to uPAR in both the uPAR–uPA and uPAR–uPA–SMB complexes, demonstrating the importance of these residues in the specific binding between uPAR and uPA. The current results on the specific interactions are informative for proposing potent antagonists, which block the uPA and SMB bindings to uPAR.