Targeted Oncology

, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp 281–289

Therapeutically targeting the SUMOylation, Ubiquitination and Proteasome pathways as a novel anticancer strategy

Review

Abstract

The ubiquitin (Ub)+proteasome proteolytic pathway is responsible for the selective degradation of the majority of nuclear and cytosolic proteins. The proteasome is a high molecular weight multicatalytic protease that serves as the catalytic core of the complex Ub-dependent protein degradation pathway and is an exciting new target for the development of novel anticancer therapies. Inhibition of the proteasome, and consequently Ub-dependent proteolysis, with the small molecule pharmacologic agent bortezomib led to approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) that has subsequently been extended to other hematologic malignancies. Inhibition of the proteasome results in the intracellular accumulation of many ubiquitinated proteins that control essential cellular functions such as cellular growth and apoptosis. The accumulation of high molecular weight Ub~protein conjugates eventually triggers apoptosis, with tumor cells more susceptible to proteasome inhibition than non-malignant cells. The defined mechanism of action for proteasome inhibitors has not been completely characterized, not all patients respond to proteasome inhibitor-based therapy, and inevitably patients develop resistance to proteasome inhibitors. Further investigation of the Ub+proteasome system (UPS) is needed to develop more effective inhibitors, to develop agents that overcome bortezomib resistance and to avoid adverse effects such as neuropathy. Furthermore, there are newly uncovered pathways, e.g., the SUMOylation and NEDDylation pathways, which similarly attach Ub-like proteins (ULPs) to protein substrates. The functional consequence of these modifications is only beginning to emerge, but these pathways have been linked to tumorigenesis and may similarly provide therapeutic targets. The immunoproteasome is a specialized form of the proteasome that produces peptides that are presented at the cell surface as major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I antigens. Proteasome inhibitors decrease the presentation of antigenic peptides to reduce tumor cell recognition by cytotoxic T cells (CTLs) but unexpectedly increase tumor cell recognition by natural killer (NK) cells. Inhibitors of the UPS are validated, cytotoxic agents that may be further exploited in immunotherapy since they modulate tumor cell recognition by effectors of the immune system. Targeting the UPS, SUMOylation and NEDDylation pathways offers great promise in the treatment of hematologic and solid malignancies.

Keywords

Ubiquitin Proteasome Bortezomib SUMOylation NEDDylation 

References

  1. 1.
    Hershko A, Ciechanover A, Varshavsky A (2000) Basic Medical Research Award. The ubiquitin system. Nature Med 6:1073–1081CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hershko A, Ciechanover A (1998) The ubiquitin system. Annu Rev Biochem 67:425–479CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ciechanover A (2004) The ubiquitin-proteasome proteolytic pathway. Cell 7;79(1):13–21Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ganoth D, Leshinsky E, Eytan E, Hershko A (1988) A multicomponent system that degrades proteins conjugated to ubiquitin. Resolution of factors and evidence for ATP-dependent complex formation. J Biol Chem 263:12412–12419PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Driscoll J, Goldberg AL (1990) The proteasome (multicatalytic protease) is a component of the 1500-kDa proteolytic complex which degrades ubiquitin-conjugated proteins. J Biol Chem 265:4789–4792PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hochstrasser M (1995) Ubiquitin, proteasomes, and the regulation of intracellular protein degradation. Curr Opin Cell Biol 7(2):215–223CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hochstrasser M (1996) Protein degradation or regulation: Ub the judge. Cell 84:813–815CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Glotzer M, Murray AW, Kirschner MW (1991) Cyclin is degraded by the ubiquitin pathway. Nature 10;349(6305):132–138Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hoeller D, Dikic I (2009) Targeting the ubiquitin in cancer therapy. Nature 458:438–444CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bernassola M, Karin M, Ciechanover A, Melino G (2008) The HECT family of E3 ubiquitin ligases: multiple players in cancer development. Cancer Cell 14:11–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ang XI, Harper W (2005) SCF-mediated protein degradation and cell cycle control. Oncogene 24:2860–2870CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Crews CM (2003) Feeding the machine: mechanisms of protein catalyzed degradation of ubiquitinated proteins. Curr Op Chem Biol 7:534–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Baumeister W, Walz J, Zuhl F, Seemuller E (1998) The proteasome: paradigm of a self-compartmentalizing protease. Cell 92:367–380CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wolf DH, Hilt W (2004) The proteasome: a proteolytic nanomachine of cell regulation and waste disposal. Biochem Biophys Actas 19–31Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Orlowski M, Wilk S (2000) Catalytic activities of the 20S proteasome, a multicatalytic proteinase complex. Arch Biochem Biophys 383:1–16CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hartmann-Petersen R, Gordon C (2004) Proteins interacting with the 26S proteasome. Cell Mol Life Sci 61:1589–1595CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Löwe J, Stock D, Jap B, Zwickl P, Baumeister W, Huber R (1995) Crystal structure of the 20S proteasome from the archæon T. acidophilum at 3.4 Å resolution. Science 268:533–539CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Groll M, Ditzel L, Lowe J, Stock D, Bochtler M, Bartunik HD, Huber R (2007) Structure of 20S proteasome from yeast at 2.4 A resolution. Nature 386:463–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Groll M, Bajorek M, Köhler A, Moroder L, Rubin DM, Huber R, Glickman MH, Finley D (2000) A gated channel into the proteasome core particle. Nat Struct Biol 7:1062–1067CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Driscoll J, De Chowdhury R, Burris J, Annunziata CM (2010) The expanding role of proteasome-based therapy in the treatment of hematologic malignancies. Open J Hem 1:1–4Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Braun BC, Glickman M, Kraft R, Dahlmann B, Kloetzel PM, Finley D et al (1995) The base of the proteasome regulatory particle exhibits chaperone-like activity. Nat Cell Biol 1:221–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Groll M, Bajorek M, Kohler A, Moroder L, Rubin DM, Huber R et al (2000) A gated channel into the proteasome coreparticle. Nat Struct Biol 7:1062–1067CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Deveraux Q, Ustrell V, Pickart C, Rechsteiner M (1994) A 26S protease subunit that binds ubiquitin conjugates. J Biol Chem 269:7059–7061PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hofmann K, Falquet L (2001) A ubiquitin-interacting motif conserved in components of the proteasomal and lysosomal protein degradation systems. Trends Biochem Sci 26:347–350CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Holzl H, Kapelari B, Kellermann J, Seemuller E, Sumegi M, Udvardy A et al (2000) The regulatory complex of Drosophila melanogaster 26S proteasomes. Subunit composition and localization of a deubiquitylating enzyme. J Cell Biol 150:119–130CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li T, Naqvi NI, Yang H, Teo TS (2000) Identification of a 26S proteasome-associated UCH in fission yeast. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 272:270–275CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wilkinson CR, Wallace M, Seeger M, Dubiel W, Gordon C (2000) Mts4, a non-ATPase subunit of the 26S protease in fission yeast, is essential for mitosis and interacts directly with the ATPase subunit Mts2. J Biol Chem 272:25768–25777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Verma R, Aravind L, Oania R, McDonald WH, Yates JR III, Koonin EV et al (2002) Role of Rpn11 metalloprotease in deubiquitination and degradation by the 26S proteasome. Science 298:611–615CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wilkinson CR, Ferrell K, Penney M, Wallace M, Dubiel W, Gordon C (2000) Analysis of a gene encoding Rpn10 of the fission yeast proteasome reveals that the polyubiquitinbinding site of this subunit is essential when Rpn12/Mts3 activity is compromised. J Biol Chem 275:15182–15192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hendil KB, Hartmann-Petersen R, Tanaka K (2002) 26S proteasomes function as stable entities. J Mol Biol 315:627–636CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Glickman MH, Rubin DM, Coux O, Wefes I, Pfeifer G, Cjeka Z et al (1998) A subcomplex of the proteasome regulatory particle required for ubiquitin-conjugate degradation and related to the COP9-signalosome and eIF3. Cell 94:615–623CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kapelari B, Bech-Otschir D, Hegerl R, Schade R, Dumdey R, Dubiel W (2000) Electron microscopy and subunit-subunit interaction studies reveal a first architecture of COP9 signalosome. J Mol Biol 300:1169–1178CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Leggett DS, Hanna J, Borodovsky A, Crosas B, Schmidt M, Baker RT et al (2002) Multiple associated proteins regulate proteasome structure and function. Mol Cell 10:495–507CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Adams J (2002) Proteasome inhibition: a novel approach to cancer therapy. Trends Mol Med 8(4 Suppl):S49–S54CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hideshima T, Richardson P, Chauhan D et al (2002) The proteasome inhibitor PS-341 inhibits growth, induces apoptosis, and overcomes drug resistance in human multiple myeloma cells. Cancer Res 61(7):3071–3076Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mitsiades N, Mitsiades CS, Poulaki V et al (2002) Molecular sequelae of proteasome inhibition in human multiple myeloma cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99(22):14374–14379CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Carvalho P, Goder V, Rapoport TA (2006) Distinct ubiquitin-ligase complexes define convergent pathways for the degradation of ER proteins. Cell 126:361–373CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Raasi S, Wolf DH (2007) Ubiquitin receptors and ERAD: a network of pathways to the proteasome. Semin Cell Dev Biol 18:780–791CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kane RC, Bross PF, Farrell AT, Pazdur R (2003) Velcade: U.S. FDA approval for the treatment of multiple myeloma progressing on prior therapy. Oncologist 8(6):508–515CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Richardson PG, Barlogie B, Berenson J et al (2003) A phase 2 study of bortezomib in relapsed, refractory myeloma. N Engl J Med 348(26):2609–2617CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Richardson PG, Sonneveld P, Schuster MW et al (2005) Bortezomib or high-dose dexamethasone for relapsed multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med 352(24):2487–2498CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    San Miguel JF, Schlag R, Khuageva NK et al (2008) Bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med 359(9):906–917CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Richardson PG, Briemberg H, Jagannath S et al (2006) Frequency, characteristics, and reversibility of peripheral neuropathy during treatment of advanced multiple myeloma with bortezomib. J Clin Oncol 24(19):3113–3120CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kupperman et al (2010) Evaluation of the proteasome inhibitor MLN9708 in preclinical models of human cancer. Can Res 70(5):1970–1980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Soucy TA, Smith PG, Milhollen MA, Berger AJ, Gavin JM, Adhikari S et al (2009) An inhibitor of NEDD8-activating enzyme as a new approach to treat cancer. Nature 458:732–736CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Kerscher O, Felberbaum R, Hochstrasser M (2006) Modification of proteins by ubiquitin and ubiquitin-like proteins. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 22:159–180CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Johnson ES (2004) Protein modification by SUMO. Annu Rev Biochem 73:355–382CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Melchior F, Schergaut M, Pichler A (2008) SUMO: ligases, isopeptidases and nuclear pores. Trends Biochem Sci 28:612–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kamitani T, Kito K, Nguyen HP, Yeh ET (1997) Characterization of NEDD8, a developmentally down-regulated ubiquitin- like protein. J Biol Chem 272:28557–28562CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Muller S, Ledl A, Schmidt D (2004) SUMO: a regulator of gene expression and genome integrity. Oncogene 23:1998–2008CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Seeler JS, Dejean A (2003) Nuclear and unclear functions of SUMO. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 4:690–699CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ulrich HD (2008) The fast-growing business of SUMO chains. Mol Cell 32:301–305CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Geoffroy MC, Hay RT (2009) An additional role for SUMO in ubiquitin-mediated proteolysis. Nature 10:364–368Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Tatham MH et al (2008) RNF4 is a poly-SUMO-specific E3 ubiquitin ligase required for arsenic-induced PML degradation. Nature Cell Biol 10:538–546CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Driscoll J, Pelluru D, Lefkimmiatis K et al (2010) The SUMOylation pathway is dysregulated in multiple myeloma and is associated with adverse patient outcome. Blood 115:2827–2834CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mo Y-Y, Moschos S (2005) Targeting Ubc9 for cancer therapy. Exp Opin Therap Targets 9:1203–1216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Wu F, Zhu S, Ding Y, Beck WT, Mo YY (2009) MicroRNA-mediated regulation of Ubc9 expression in cancer cells. Clin Cancer Res 1;15(5):1550–1557Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Sun H, Lverson JD, Hunter T (2007) Conserved function of RNF4 family proteins in eukaryotes: targeting a ubiquitin ligase to SUMOylated proteins. EMBO J 26:4102–4112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kosoy A, Calonge TM, Outwin EA, O’Connell MJ (2007) Fission yeast RNF4 homologs are required for DNA repair. J Biol Chem 282:20388–20394CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Prudden J, Pebernard S, Raffa G, Slavin DA, Perry JJ, Tainer JA, McGowan CH, Boddy MN (2007) SUMO-targeted ubiquitin ligases in genome stability. EMBO J 26:4089–4101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Uzunova K, Gottsche K, Miteva M, Weisshaar SR, Glanemann C, Schnellhardt M, Niessen M, Scheel H, Hofmann K, Johnson ES, Praefcke GJ, Dohmen RJ (2007) Ubiquitin-dependent proteolytic control of SUMO conjugates. J Biol Chem 282:34167–34175CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Xie Y, Kerscher O, Kroetz MB, McConchie HF, Sung P, Hochstrasser M (2007) The yeast Hex3·Slx8 heterodimer is a ubiquitin ligase stimulated by substrate sumoylation. J Biol Chem 282:34176–34184CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Weissman AM (2001) Themes and variations on ubiquitylation. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2:169–178CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Deshaies RJ (1999) SCF and Cullin/Ring H2-based ubiquitin ligases. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 15:435–467CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Kloetzel P (2001) Antigen processing by the proteasome. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2:179–188CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Nencioni A, Schwarzenberg K, Brauer KM, Schmidt SM, Ballestrero A, Grunebach F, Brossart P (2006) Proteasome inhibitor bortezomib modulates TLR4-induced dendritic cell activation. Blood 108:551–558CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Tseng CW, Monie A, Wu CY, Huang B, Wang MC, Hung CF, Wu TC (2008) Treatment with proteasome inhibitor bortezomib enhances antigen-specific CD8+ T-cell-mediated antitumor immunity induced by DNA vaccination. J Mol Med 86:899–908CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Shi J, Tricot GJ, Garg TK, Malaviarachchi PA, Szmania SM, Kellum RE, Storrie B, Mulder A, Shaughnessy JD Jr, Barlogie B et al (2009) Bortezomib down-regulates the cell-surface expression of HLA class I and enhances natural killer cell-mediated lysis of myeloma. Blood 111:1309–1317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Bakker A, Phillips J, Figdor C, Lanier LL (1998) Killer cell inhibitory receptors for MHC class I molecules regulate lysis of melanoma cells mediated by NK cells, γδT cells, and antigen-specific CTL. J Immunol 160:5239–5245PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Lundqvist A, Su S, Rao S, Childs R (2010) Cutting edge: bortezomib-treated tumors sensitized to NK cell apoptosis paradoxically acquire resistance to antigen-specific T cells. J Immunol 184(3):1139–1142CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag (outside the USA) 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Medical Oncology Branch, Magnuson Cancer Center, National Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthBethesdaUSA

Personalised recommendations