Abstract
The unfolded protein response (UPR) is a cellular mechanism that protects cells during stress conditions in which there is an accumulation of misfolded proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). UPR activates three signaling pathways that function to alleviate stress conditions and promote cellular homeostasis and cell survival. During unmitigated stress conditions, however, UPR activation signaling changes to promote cell death through apoptosis. Interestingly, cancer cells take advantage of this pathway to facilitate survival and avoid apoptosis even during prolonged cell stress conditions. Here, we discuss different signaling pathways associated with UPR and focus specifically on one of the ER signaling pathways activated during UPR, inositol-requiring enzyme 1α (IRE1). The rationale is that the IRE1 pathway is associated with cell fate decisions and recognized as a promising target for cancer therapeutics. Here we discuss IRE1 inhibitors and how they might prove to be an effective cancer therapeutic.
Graphical abstract
![](http://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs12079-023-00784-5/MediaObjects/12079_2023_784_Figa_HTML.png)
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
During tumor development and progression, transformed cells adapt to their increased demands on protein and lipid production required for rapid growth by enhancing endoplasmic reticulum (ER) function and expansion (Bartoszewska et al. 2022; Madden et al. 2019). To accomplish this, cancer cells take advantage of an adaptive multifunctional signalling pathway called the unfolded protein response (UPR) (Madden et al. 2019). The function of this pathway is to protect cells from an accumulation of unfolded or misfolded proteins in ER. UPR does this by activating three ER transmembrane sensors, inositol-requiring enzyme 1α (IRE1), protein kinase RNA-like endoplasmic reticulum kinase (PERK) and activating transcription factor 6 (ATF6). The function of UPR and these signalling pathways is to restore proper ER function and thus promote cell survival. If cellular homeostasis is difficult or potentially impossible to restore, cell death occurs usually through apoptosis (Madden et al. 2019; Karagoz et al. 2019; Almanza et al. 2019). Interestingly, cancer cells avoid this UPR transition to apoptosis, and therefore strategies that inhibit the survival pathways have become an attractive target for anticancer therapies (Bartoszewska et al. 2022; Lhomond et al. 2022; Balkwill et al. 2012). Although all three UPR sensors provide appealing therapeutic candidates, recently IRE1 activity has been a major focus since elevated levels of IRE1 are associated with poor cancer prognosis (Bartoszewska et al. 2022; Lhomond et al. 2022). IRE1 splices an inactive unspliced form of XBP1 to generate a highly active prosurvival transcription factor, spliced XBP1 (XBP1s). XBP1s’s function is to enhance the expression of ER-resident chaperones and to promote ER expansion (Marchant et al. 2010; Bartoszewska et al. 2019). IRE1 also cleaves other mRNAs localized to the ER membrane through regulated IRE1-dependent decay (RIDD) (Hollien et al. 2009). IRE1 activity can serve both adaptive and apoptotic branches of UPR (Bartoszewska et al. 2022; Martinez-Turtos et al. 2022) (Fig. 1), and therefore inhibiting IRE1 activity has consequences for both branches of UPR, which makes targeting IRE1 in anticancer therapies quite challenging (Martinez-Turtos et al. 2022).
Schematic representation of the cell fate downstream consequences of ER stress-induced IRE1 activation that includes (i) the proadaptive XBP1s-dependent transcriptional signaling and (ii) the apoptotic RNA degradation (RIDD) and JNK pathway activation. The stabilization of the oligomeric form of IRE1 leads to continuous UPR activation
The UPR
ER membranes prevent direct coupling between mRNA translation and protein folding making this organelle crucial for transmembrane and secretory proteins maturation (Bravo et al. 2013). However, although maintaining ER homeostasis is an absolute requirement for proper cellular function, numerous endogenous and exogenous insults can deregulate ER function and lead to ER stress. ER stress results from an accumulation of unfolded or incompletely folded proteins in the ER lumen and that requires elevated chaperones levels (Almanza et al. 2019). Hence, to improve ER protein folding, glucose-regulated protein 78 (GRP78 also known as BiP (binding immunoglobin protein)) is released into the ER lumen from three ER transmembrane sensors: PERK, IRE1α, and ATF6 (Almanza et al. 2019; Hetz 2012). With BiP removal, these three sensors become activated and launch the UPR.
In other words, during basal conditions BiP is associated with the ER stress sensors, keeping them inactive. Under stress, however, BiP is released into ER lumen to bind misfolded peptides, and this enables activation of the ER stress sensors and consequently initiation of UPR (Hetz et al. 2020). Released BiP allows ATF6 to exit the ER and traffic to Golgi apparatus where it is cleaved by site 1 and site 2 proteases, yielding a nuclear-targeted transcription factor ATF6f (p50) (Schroder and Kaufman 2005; Ye and Koumenis 2009; Haze et al. 1999).
IRE1 and PERK share a similar mechanism of activation (Zhou et al. 2006; Carrara et al. 2015) and loss of BiP permits both kinases to self-associate and undergo trans-autophosphorylation to become active. Activated PERK is able to phosphorylate the alpha subunit of the eukaryotic initiation factor 2 (eIF2). eIF2 is a GTP-binding protein necessary for the cap-dependent mRNA translation since it delivers the initiator methionyl-tRNA to the ribosome. Although the phosphorylated eIF2 inhibits the activity of its own guanine nucleotide exchange factor, this leads to the reduction of global rates of protein synthesis (Baird and Wek 2012). This also allows a subset of mRNAs to be translated more efficiently, including growth arrest and DNA damage inducible protein (GADD34) that in complex with G-actin and protein phosphatase 1 (PP1) dephosphorylates eIF2 to restore normal rates of translation when the ER stress is mitigated (Novoa et al. 2001). Other mRNAs translated more efficiently are the proapoptotic CCAAT/enhancer binding homologous protein (CHOP) and activating transcription factor 4 (ATF4) (Rutkowski and Kaufman 2003). PERK activation and its downstream effects have been termed the integrated stress response (ISR) (Calabrese et al. 2007; Rzymski and Harris 2007; Blais and Bell 2006; Herman 2006).
IRE1 is a type I transmembrane ER resident protein that contains two enzymatic activities, serine/threonine kinase and endoribonuclease (RNase) activities. Kinase activity’s only function is for autophosphorylation. Trans-autophosphorylation activates its endonuclease domain that splices the mRNA transcript of X-box binding-protein (XBP) transcription factor into a transcriptionally active isoform (XBP1s) (Yoshida et al. 2001) and the endonuclease activity degrades a subset of mRNAs to relieve the ER load of newly translated proteins. This latter function is termed IRE1-dependent decay (RIDD) (Han et al. 2013; Maurel et al. 2014).
As shown in Fig. 2A, the domain structure of IRE1α consists of a signal sequence, a BiP-binding domain, a transmembrane region, a serine/threonine kinase domain, and the RNAse domain. (Liu et al. 2003, 2002). The ER lumen exposed domain of IRE1 provides binding site for BiP (Fig. 2B), and it’s connected thorough a single-pass transmembrane segment with the catalytically active cytoplasmic region of this protein (Fig. 2B) (Zhou et al. 2006). Upon BiP dissociation, a triangular plate-like structure within this domain is formed by three β-sheets clusters, and this provides a scaffold for IRE1 dimerization (Fig. 2C) (Zhou et al. 2006). Starting from ER membrane, the cytosolic part of IRE1 contains serine/threonine protein kinase domain that is responsible for the trans-autophosphorylation is located within its serine residues (S724, S726, and S729) and this is followed by the RNAse domain (Fig. 2D) (Ferri et al. 2020).
Domain structure of human IRE1α. A IRE1 contains an 18-amino acid N-terminal signal sequence directing the protein to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). Lumenal domain of IRE1 is a binding site for binding immunoglobin protein (BiP). Transmembrane domain is a single-pass peptide and is followed by cytoplasmic part, consisting of two catalytic domains: serine/threonine protein kinase and endoribonuclease (RNase). The only known substrates of IRE1α kinase activity are S724, S726, and S729 residues of IRE1 itself. B The schematic topology of IRE1 dimer. C The crystal structure of the IRE1α lumenal domain dimer (PDB ID: 2HZ6), the side and top view. The IRE1 lumenal domain comprises a triangular plate of three β-sheet clusters (colored in purple, orange, and cyan) forming an extensive dimerization interface. D The crystal structure of the cytoplasmic part of the IRE1 dimer (PDB ID: 6W3C). Phosphorylated S724, S726, and S729 residues are depicted in red
The main function of UPR is to adjust the cellular signaling pathways in order for stressed cells to survive an insult and restore normal ER function (Bartoszewska et al. 2022; Gebert et al. 2021). The consequence of this is that the ER protein influx is reduced, and misfolded proteins are degraded by ER-associated degradation (ERAD) (Ruggiano et al. 2014; Bartoszewski et al. 2016). ATF6f and XBP1s promote ER membrane biosynthesis, increased folding capacity of the ER and increased expression of genes involved in ERAD and N-glycosylation (Baird and Wek 2012; Gebert et al. 2021; Zhang and Kaufman 2004; Mori et al. 1996; Yoshida et al. 2000). Furthermore, along with these transcription factors, ATF4 prevents cell death by increasing pro-survival and antiapoptotic signaling (Wortel et al. 2017).
If cells are exposed to persistent and intense ER stress that prevents effective restoration of ER homeostasis, the UPR triggers an intrinsic apoptotic pathway. Although the molecular basis of this cell fate switch is still poorly understood, it is mediated by all 3 UPR sensors. This includes the accumulation of CHOP (PERK and ATF6f) and the activation of the Janus N-terminal kinase (JNK) (IRE1) (Hollien et al. 2009; Obiedat et al. 2019; Pozzi et al. 2016; Carlesso et al. 2019). Furthermore, UPR cell fate decisions are also determined by a network of apoptotic factors such as growth arrest and DNA damage-inducible alpha (GADD45A), p53 upregulated modulator of apoptosis (PUMA), and phorbol-12-myristate-13-acetate-induced protein 1 (PMAIP1, also known as NOXA) (Bartoszewska et al. 2022; Gebert et al. 2021, 2018; Reimertz et al. 2003; Gupta et al. 2012; Wang et al. 2009; Rosebeck et al. 2011). Finally, in addition to the transcriptional and translational mechanisms involved in the UPR, posttranscriptional miRNA-based modulation of both survival and apoptotic activities of this pathway have been reported (Bartoszewska et al. 2013, 2017, 2019, 2022; Byrd and Brewer 2013, 2011; Kim and Croce 2021; Mukherji et al. 2011; Maurel and Chevet 2013; Cheung et al. 2008).
Cancer cells benefit from the UPR
Given the critical role of UPR in both maintaining ER function and determining cell fate decisions, it is not surprising that this complex pathway accompanies many human diseases including metabolic disorders, neurological disorders, and cancer. In cancer cells, rapid proliferation requires increased lipid and protein synthesis (Chen and Cubillos-Ruiz 2021; Babour et al. 2010), whereas solid tumor microenvironments are often limiting in both nutrients and oxygen (Lane et al. 2020). Furthermore, the oncogenic transformations and chromosomal abnormalities can increase the fraction of misfolded proteins in ER lumen. Nevertheless, despite the fact that cancer cells are often exposed to persistent ER stress, they benefit from deregulation of the prosurvival UPR signals. For example, ATF6-related pro-survival signaling was reported in gastric tumors (Jeong et al. 2015) and mutant p53 cancer cells (Sicari et al. 2019), whereas both XBP1s and IRE1 allow for the cells to tolerate high levels of MYC proto-oncogene and to avoid cell death (Tameire et al. 2015; Sheng et al. 2019; Zhang et al. 2020; Shajahan-Haq et al. 2014).
Multiple myeloma cells frequently overproduce immunoglobulins subunits and have become the target of the first clinical UPR-targeted therapy to impair ERAD with the proteasome inhibitor, bortezomib (Bross et al. 2004; Meister et al. 2007; Kane et al. 2003; Obeng et al. 2006). Interestingly, bortezomib treatments lead to ER stress that is above the limits these cancers cells can adapt and therefore this leads to cell death and clinical improvement (Wang et al. 2009; Bross et al. 2004; Auner et al. 2013). That being said, cancer stem cells survive these treatments due to their lower translational needs and eventually mutate the proteasome proteins to acquire drug resistance that leads to the cancer relapse (Oerlemans et al. 2008; Balsas et al. 2012; Uyuklu et al. 2007). Furthermore, proteasome inhibition was also promising in vitro against glioblastoma multiform cells (Yoo et al. 2017; Lee et al. 2017). Currently, besides bortezomib, two other proteasome inhibitors are in clinical use (carfilzomib and ixazomib). In contrast, indirect approaches to limit ERAD have failed clinical trials due to off-target effects or poor specificity (Marciniak et al. 2022; Zhai et al. 2021; Ding et al. 2022; Alrasheed et al. 2021).
PERK activity has also been utilized by cancer cells to adjust the proliferation-related rate of protein synthesis to modulate growth rates (Atkins et al. 2013; Bi et al. 2005). Furthermore, in glycolytic cancer cells, PERK activity induces carbonic anhydrase 9 (CA9) and thus prevents cells acidosis (Beucken et al. 2009). Whereas ATF4 and CHOP enhance defense against redox disturbance and reactive oxygen species (ROS) (Rouschop et al. 2013; Harding et al. 2003; Baker et al. 2012; Melber and Haynes 2018; Shpilka and Haynes 2018; Loinard et al. 2012). In agreement with these findings, PERK and ATF4 have been shown to protect glioblastoma cells from radiotherapy and hypoxia-related oxidative damage (Mujcic et al. 2013; Mudassar et al. 2020). Both PERK and ATF4 were also shown to support autophagy in many hypoxic and nutrient-deprived tumors and cell lines (Rzymski et al. 2010; Rouschop et al. 2010; Singleton and Harris 2012). Interestingly, in some tumors CHOP expression was modest and did not accelerate cell death (Koumenis et al. 2002), whereas in the others hypoxic tumors accumulation of CHOP resulted in increased ROS production (Marciniak et al. 2004). Hence, further studies are needed to clarify the background and consequences of CHOP activity in tumors. Taken together, the PERK pathway is an extremely attractive target for cancer therapies. However, despite the fact that the PERK inhibitor (GSK2656157) effectively prevented tumor growth in preclinical models, the toxicity of this molecule against pancreatic β-cells prevented it from reaching the clinic (Atkins et al. 2013; Magnaghi et al. 2013, 2012). This failure of PERK inhibition as a cancer therapeutic was expected since both mice and humans with a genetic loss of PERK suffer from rapid β-cell death (Harding et al. 2001; Zhang et al. 2002). Notably, the integrated stress response inhibitor (ISRIB, in preclinical development), unlike PERK inhibitors, limits the ISR activated by chronic low-level stress, but preserves enough activity to protect against acute stress. In other words, ISRIB rescues translation only if eIF2 phosphorylation is below the threshold and reduces tumor size in transgenic mice and in patient-derived xenografts without provoking type 1 diabetes (Rabouw et al. 2019).
Notably, UPR branches are only partially independent of each other, and therefore the effectiveness of approaches that inhibit the activity of PERK or IRE1 and their off-target effects are difficult to accomplish. For example, prostate cancer cells often have loss of phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) that is accompanied by IRE1-driven MYC hyperactivation (in fatal-metastatic cases) (Sheng et al. 2019). Although such a phenotype would be expected to increase protein synthesis, the overexpression of Myc in a Pten knockdown murine model of prostate cancer resulted in a PERK-dependent reduction of translation (Nguyen et al. 2018). It has been also reported that proteasome inhibition is more effective against glioblastoma cells in vitro when accompanied by STK047915, a putative inhibitor of the IRE1–ASK–JNK pathway (Kim et al. 2009). Taken together the complexity of the UPR signaling and cancer specific mutations remain serious obstacles for the development of anticancer therapies.
The role of IRE1 in cell fate decisions
Ire1 is the only major UPR sensor that is present in budding yeast, plants, and metazoans, and is often referred to as the most conserved UPR branch (Hollien 2013). The original studies identified the UPR function of Ire1 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Cox et al. 1993; Mori et al. 1993). Ire1 activation allows it to cleave at two specific sites in the mRNA encoding Hac1 (Mori et al. 1996; Cox and Walter 1996) that removes a regulatory intron from the message to form transcriptionally active Hac1p protein. Hac1p upregulates expression of genes responsible for the secretory pathway as well as BiP (Travers et al. 2000). This pathway is conserved in most eukaryotes and homologous to IRE1-XBP1 branch in mammals (Hollien 2013). Two isoforms of Ire1 have been identified in mammals. Ire1α that we refer to here as IRE1 and is expressed ubiquitously (Tirasophon et al. 1998) and essential for both embryonic development and the UPR (Iwawaki et al. 2009). The second is Ire1β whose expression is limited to intestinal epithelial cells and its deletion sensitizes mice to colitis (Bertolotti et al. 2001). Notably, although both these isoforms can splice XBP1 mRNA (Calfon et al. 2002), Ire1α is the more efficient, however, Ire1β exerts a stronger RIDD activity (Imagawa et al. 2008).
IRE1 RNase activity is the most prominent activity and has two distinct signaling outcomes, XBP1 splicing and RIDD induction (Iwakoshi et al. 2003). Furthermore, the cytoprotective effects are mainly related to XBP1 splicing, whereas apoptosis is RIDD-related (Iwakoshi et al. 2003). Importantly, it has been shown that initially XBP1 mRNA splicing prevails over the RIDD, but at the time when the maximum levels of XBP1 are reached, RIDD activity increases until apoptosis occurs (Iwakoshi et al. 2003). This suggests that although stress intensity enhances RIDD to favor cell death, this IRE1 activity may have other functions (Iwakoshi et al. 2003). Thus, IRE1 activity with two distinct outcomes indicates IRE1’s important role in determining cell fate during ER stress.
Production of XBP1s mRNA is a result of IRE1 catalyzed removal of a 26-nucleotide intron from XBP1 mRNA and ligation of the remaining fragments by the tRNA ligase RtcB (Yoshida et al. 2001, 2000). The resulting XBP1s mRNA, due to the splicing-related frameshift (upon splicing 3’UTR fragment becomes a coding sequence) provides a template for a longer and transcriptionally active XBP1s protein. Thus, the XBP1s protein (~ 48 kDa) has the same N-terminus, but a longer and distinct C-terminus which contains the transactivation domain (Yoshida et al. 2001, 2000). In the absence of IRE1 activity, the unspliced XBP1 protein (~ 29 kDa) is rapidly degraded (Tirosh et al. 2006), while during ER stress, XBP1 transcription is enhanced by ATF6f (Yoshida et al. 2001, 2000). XBP1s enhances expression of ERAD components (EDEM1), chaperones (HSPA5, DNAJB9, and DNAJC3), and vesicle-trafficking components (SEC23B) (Bartoszewska et al. 2019, 2017; Gebert et al. 2021; Lee et al. 2003; Misiewicz et al. 2013). The activity of XBP1s cooperates or overlaps with ATF6f, and ATF6f in islet cells has been shown to be necessary to fully activate XBP1s targets. In contrast XBP1s was not required for the activation of ATF6f targets (Sharma et al. 2020). However, genes that contain unfolded protein response elements (UPRE) in their promoter sequences depend solely on XBP1 (Yamamoto et al. 2004). Moreover, XBP1s has been shown to regulate genes involved in the inflammatory responses (Shaffer et al. 2004), as well as genes not related to UPR pathways including adipocyte and myogenic differentiation (C/EBP and MIST1) in a tissue-dependent manner (He et al. 2010).
In a recent study, we demonstrated that elevating XBP1s expression during ER stress using an inducible cell line correlated with a clear prosurvival effect and reduced PERK-related proapoptotic PUMA protein expression (Gebert et al. 2021). We also identified a novel negative-feedback regulatory loop between XBP1 and IRE1 and showed that XBP1s attenuates ERN1 expression and thus reduces IRE1 activity, further evidence that XBP1s is crucial for the UPR cell fate decisions (Gebert et al. 2021).
RIDD is IRE1-mediated cleavage of ER-bound RNA (mRNA, miRNA, and rRNA) and was first described in Drosophila melanogaster (Hollien and Weissman 2006), and later found to be conserved in mammals (Hollien et al. 2009). RIDD was first believed to be a sequence-specific process in which ER-localized mRNAs were cleaved at a consensus motif similar to XBP1 splicing sites (Hollien et al. 2009; Maurel et al. 2014; Tirasophon et al. 2000). The free ends of generated mRNA fragments are then substrates for cellular exoribonucleases that rapidly degrade them (Iqbal et al. 2008). Although a later report questioned the requirement of the splicing motif and suggested RIDD to be a default pathway for ER-localized mRNA (Gaddam et al. 2013). To date, there is no experimental proof that IRE1 is able to cleave at a non-XBP1-like site (Maurel et al. 2014). Nevertheless, several studies have identified RIDD-degraded mRNAs that encode cytosolic or nuclear proteins (including XBP1), illustrating that the IRE1 substrates do not necessarily require an ER a signal sequence (Kraut-Cohen and Gerst 2010; Pyhtila et al. 2008; Lerner et al. 2003; Diehn et al. 2000). Importantly, IRE1 has also been shown to degrade several pre-miRNAs (Upton et al. 2012; Gebert et al. 2023) and to facilitate maturation of miRNA precursors in a DICER-independent manner (Avril and Chevet 2020). Because IRE1 is also localized in the inner nuclear envelope (Schroder and Kaufman 2005), these precursors could be processed as they encounter IRE1 while traversing the nuclear pore on their way to the cytoplasm (Upton et al. 2012).
Given that miRNA expression profiles are strongly affected by the ER stress (Gebert et al. 2018; Maurel and Chevet 2013; Bartoszewska et al. 2013), RIDD may indirectly fine tune a variety of UPR outputs at the posttranscriptional level. Mouse miRNAs were shown to be degraded by RIDD and this action was proposed to permit increased expression of caspase-2 (Lerner et al. 2012). Follow-up studies, however, questioned this miRNA-CASP2 mRNA interaction (Sandow et al. 2014). Nevertheless, RIDD-dependent degradation of one of these miRNAs precursors, pre-miR-17, was shown to enhance the expression of the pro-oxidant thioredoxin-interacting protein (TXNIP) that led to an inflammatory response-related cell death (Lerner et al. 2012). Although more detailed studies are required to understand miRNA-related consequences of RIDD, this aspect of IRE1 activity seems to accelerate cell death. In support of this, examples of cells under irremediable ER stress indicate that IRE1 becomes hyperactive and besides enhancing RIDD, also serves as a scaffold for the activation of proinflammatory and apoptotic ASK1-JNK and NF-κB pathways (Zeng et al. 2015; Ghosh et al. 2014).
A number of reports have indicated that RIDD activity allows for the degradation of mRNAs encoding growth-promoting proteins and linked to proliferation, and thus lead to cell death (Hetz 2012; Maurel et al. 2014). Since RIDD activity has been also shown crucial for the accelerated cell death of glioblastoma multiform and triple negative breast cancer (Lhomond et al. 2022; Martinez-Turtos et al. 2022), this aspect of IRE1 activity might be considered to be an important candidate for anticancer therapies. However, such a RIDD-oriented approach may be limited by the basal activity of this pathway and potential off-targets effects. In mammals under no stress conditions, RIDD remains active and can serve a cytoprotective role and this is termed basal RIDD (Dejeans et al. 2012; Pluquet et al. 2013; So et al. 2012). Our studies have indicated that while IRE1 RNAse activity supports HIF-1α accumulation in hypoxia exposed human endothelial cells, XBP1 splicing is absent (Moszynska et al. 2020). Thus, RIDD modulates the adaptive response to hypoxia (Moszynska et al. 2020). RIDD-mediated degradation of transcripts encoding P450 cytochrome variants prevents liver cells from acetaminophen-induced toxicity and modulates proinsulin secretion (Hur et al. 2012; Lipson et al. 2006). Furthermore, IRE1β-related RIDD has been shown to be significantly active in the presence or absence of ER stress. Taking into an account that RIDD activity increases progressively with ER stress intensity/duration, this suggests that UPR is the only mechanism for enhancing RIDD activity (Hollien et al. 2009; Pluquet et al. 2013). Furthermore, the XBP1 deficient models display enhanced RIDD, suggesting that there is crosstalk mechanism between these two RNase activities (So et al. 2012; Osorio et al. 2014). Taken together, basal RIDD modulates the entry of proteins into the ER in response to the cellular requirements and provides a physiological way of maintaining ER homeostasis (Maurel et al. 2014). Under ER stress, however, basal RIDD is inefficient and therefore IRE1’s XBP1s splicing activity is initiated, whereas RIDD gradually increases. If the stress is too strong or persistent and this fails, RIDD remains hyperactive despite the inactivation of XBP1s signaling and this leads to cell death (Maurel et al. 2014). Taken together, the RIDD activity threshold controls the switch between survival and apoptotic function of this IRE1 activity.
Deregulation of IRE1 signaling, including overactivation of XBP1 splicing, has been reported as promoting proliferation of several cancer types, including glioblastoma, breast, prostate, and pancreas (Sheng et al. 2019; Chen et al. 2014; Pommier et al. 2018). Notably, this IRE1-related cancer-promoting mechanism is not limited to UPR but also include immunomodulation (Logue et al. 2018; Obacz et al. 2019). In this regard, activation of IRE1 signaling may protect tumors from the immune system by interfering with immune responses (Chen and Cubillos-Ruiz 2021). For example, XBP1s has been shown to reduce major histocompatibility complex class I (MHC-I) surface presentation (Almeida et al. 2007) and XBP1s-induced miR-346 has been shown to inhibit MHC-I assembly (Bartoszewski et al. 2011). Numerous studies have also connected the altered function of immune cells against cancer cells through XBP1s-mediated expression of the proinflammatory factors (Logue et al. 2018; Obiedat et al. 2019; Chopra et al. 2019; Thevenot et al. 2014; Mohamed et al. 2020; Harnoss et al. 2020; Hurst et al. 2019; Bottcher and Sousa 2018). Breast cancer cells, including triple negative breast cancer, upon pharmacological IRE1 inhibition, display reduced expression of immune modulators such as interleukin 8 (IL-8), C-X-C Motif Chemokine Ligand 1 (CXCL1), or transforming growth factor-beta 2 (TGF2) (Logue et al. 2018). Interestingly, some anticancer drugs like paclitaxel can increase XBP1s levels and the secretion of the above-mentioned cytokines, and lead to restored cancer proliferation following the chemotherapy (Marciniak et al. 2022; Raymundo et al. 2020). This would agree with the report from triple-negative breast cancer mouse xenografts cotreated with both paclitaxel and an IRE1 inhibitor (MKC8866) (Sanches et al. 2014). Although the IRE1 inhibitor was inefficient alone, its combination with paclitaxel delayed the time to tumor regrowth after stopping the treatment (Marciniak et al. 2022; Raymundo et al. 2020). Furthermore, some cetumximab-treated cancer cells that are resistant to immunogenic cell death, display increased XBP1s expression, and inhibition of XBP1 splicing restored tumor immunogenicity (Huo et al. 2020; Pozzi et al. 2016).
Pharmacological targeting of IRE1 in anticancer approaches
Gaining pharmacological control over IRE1 activities has been the focus of several anticancer drug development strategies, and these can be divided into two main approaches: (i) inhibiting IRE1 activity to impair adaptability of tumor cells to challenging tumor microenvironment and (ii) activating or hyperactivating IRE1 to initiate its RIDD that leads to cell death. Furthermore, downstream IRE1 signaling components have also been shown to be of interest to drug discovery programs (Marciniak et al. 2022; Raymundo et al. 2020; Carlesso et al. 2019, 2020; Mahdizadeh et al. 2020, 2021; Doultsinos et al. 2021; Mercado and Hetz 2017; Dufey et al. 2020).
Preventing IRE1 involvement in the cancer UPR with small molecules represents the main course of drug development pipelines. Their goal is to identify compounds targeting either the kinase domain or the RNase domain (Table 1). Since IRE1 phosphorylation is required for the activation of endoribonuclease-based production of proadaptive XBP1s, an ATP-competitive inhibitor such as type II kinase-inhibiting RNase-attenuators (KIRAs) has been shown to be effective in reducing the IRE1 RNase activity (Ghosh et al. 2014; Wang et al. 2012; Papandreou et al. 2011; Morita et al. 2017) (reviewed in Raymundo et al. (2020). Furthermore, other compounds with a different mechanism of action were selected based on the high throughput screening approaches (Doultsinos et al. 2017). Many of these molecules are direct inhibitors (including 4μ8C) that specifically target at lysine 907 in RNAse domain and this impairs RNA splicing (Sanches et al. 2014; Sun et al. 2016; Tang et al. 2014; Mimura et al. 2012). Notably one of these compounds, STF-083010, has been shown to block IRE1 endonuclease activity without affecting its kinase activity and it displays selective cytotoxicity towards cancer cells including breast cancer (Papandreou et al. 2011). In contrast to STF-083010, 4μ8C inhibits the IRE1 autophosphorylation by interaction with lysine 599 in the kinase domain (Stewart et al. 2017; Cross et al. 2012). Another class of compounds, salicylaldehydes, was shown to compete against the XBP1 stem-loop RNA substrate (Volkmann et al. 2011). Moreover, although other compounds (including toyocamycin, doxorubicin, quinotrierixin, and trierixin) were reported to inhibit IRE1/XBP1s activity in vitro and in vivo, but their mode of action remains unknown (Raymundo et al. 2020).
Some kinase type I inhibitors such as sunitinib have been shown to activate IRE1 RNase activity by promoting oligomerization of this enzyme (Feldman et al. 2016a; Korennykh et al. 2009). Another IRE1 activating compound, CXC195, interacts with cysteine 645 in the kinase domain and leads to increased IRE1 scaffolding activity (Rosen et al. 2019; Chen et al. 2015). Many of the IRE1 targeting compounds were not originally identified as such. For example, sunitinib malate (Pfizer Sutent®) was identified as an oral multi-kinase inhibitor preventing the growth, proliferation, and spread of cancers by targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) (Raymond et al. 2011). In our study, we identified triazoloacridone C-1305, a microtubule stabilizing agent that also has topoisomerase II inhibitory activity, to also be a direct IRE1’s RNase inhibitor (Kroliczewski et al. 2020; Bartoszewska et al. 2021; Switalska et al. 2022). However, the wide range of other activities that many IRE1 targeting compounds have may increase the risk of off-target effects, and thus this may limit their clinical application.
In summary, many attempts have been made to translate IRE1 targeting compounds into anticancer therapies (Table 1). Both treatments with IRE1 inhibitors alone or in combination with other cancer drugs have been shown to be effective against many tumors in both in vitro and in vivo models as well as some in clinical treatments (Table 1) (Logue et al. 2018; Sun et al. 2016; Ri et al. 2012; Jiang et al. 2016; Harnoss et al. 2019). Notably, adjuvant use of MKC8866 was found to be supportive in anti-glioblastoma multiform therapy (Reste et al. 2019).
Furthermore, in recent years numerous natural compounds have been reported to activate UPR-related cell death signaling pathways in different types of cancer cells (reviewed in Limonta et al. 2019). Notably, some of these compounds were reported to affect IRE1 levels and signaling and thus they may provide a starting point for the next generation of IRE1 inhibitors or activators (Table 2). However, further studies to define the pharmacological properties of these compounds as well as molecular mechanisms associated with their impact on IRE1 expression and activity are required before therapeutic approaches can be tested and utilized.
Besides IRE1’s potential role in cancer, this enzyme is crucial for human metabolic regulation, and therefore alterations in function can lead to metabolic diseases (Huang et al. 2019) as well as neurological disorders (Marciniak et al. 2022; Vasquez et al. 2022). Indeed, the UPR has been associated with obesity-related metabolic disorders, insulin resistance, and inflammatory responses. IRE1 signaling has also been recognized as crucial for the integration of metabolic stress signals (reviewed in Huang et al. 2019). Thus, pharmacological strategies that aim to restore balance between IRE1s’ XBP1s and RIDD activities are not only limited to anticancer therapies but can also be crucial for effective treatments of metabolic disorders such as diabetes. Nevertheless, gaining specific control over both types of IRE1 activities remains a major challenge for therapeutic strategies. For example, this can be seen in mouse pancreatic islet cells, where both continuous Xbp1s overexpression or Xbp1 knockdown result in impaired insulin secretion, increased RIDD activity, and β cells death (Allagnat et al. 2010; Lee et al. 2011). Basal IRE1 activity is essential for pancreatic islet growth and oxidative stress resistance (Hassler et al. 2015; Tsuchiya et al. 2018; Xu et al. 2014). Taken together, these studies demonstrate that IRE1-related therapeutic approaches that aim to restore β cells homeostasis and increase their ability to produce insulin will require careful modulation of both XBP1s splicing and RIDD activity. Furthermore, the importance of UPR is highlighted by the fact that basal IRE1 activity and XBP1s production is required for brain homeostasis, and this suggests a novel therapeutic strategy for aging-related neurodegeration (Krukowski et al. 2020; Cabral-Miranda et al. 2022). However, the complexity of the UPR pathway remains the major challenge of dedicated therapies, limiting the number of dedicated compounds that make it to clinical use (as reviewed in Marciniak et al. 2022). Currently, there is only one marketed IRE1 inhibitor (sunitinib), and the other UPR-related drugs are either specific protein-dedicated pharmacological chaperones (lumacaftor for cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR)) or proteasome inhibitors (like bortezomib, ixazmomib, and carfilzomib) (Marciniak et al. 2022). Hopefully, ongoing clinical trials will expand this list.
Conclusions
Despite the ongoing research studies on UPR, the complexity of this pathway impedes its straightforward application in anticancer therapies. The molecular crosstalk between UPR branches in both nonmalignant and cancer cells remains understudied and is at this point beyond therapeutic control. The main research barriers include the incredible variability of the different cancers, the complexity of their microenvironments, and how this complexity affects the UPR output signaling.
Even though all the UPR branches provide attractive anticancer therapeutic targets, IRE1 pathways appear to have the most potential given their clear role in cell fate decisions. Since XBP1 splicing has a prosurvival output, which is often overactive in cancer, it remains a promising target. Targeting RIDD activity, however, with all of its different targets makes it potentially more complex at least at this point. Furthermore, it should not be ignored that the basal RIDD is crucial for maintaining ER homeostasis, and thus further studies of this aspect of IRE1 function are required to minimize the risk of off-target effects. That being said, the identification of compounds that would selectively activate or inhibit a specific aspect of IRE1 RNAse activities is of foremost importance. Finally, although numerous compounds that modulate IRE1 activity are known, their clinical use remains limited (Raymundo et al. 2020), and therefore the search for alternative solutions that will prevent XBP1 splicing or hyperactivate RIDD are clearly needed.
Data availability
Not applicable.
References
Allagnat F, Christulia F, Ortis F, Pirot P, Lortz S, Lenzen S et al (2010) Sustained production of spliced X-box binding protein 1 (XBP1) induces pancreatic beta cell dysfunction and apoptosis. Diabetologia 53(6):1120–1130
Almanza A, Carlesso A, Chintha C, Creedican S, Doultsinos D, Leuzzi B et al (2019) Endoplasmic reticulum stress signalling - from basic mechanisms to clinical applications. Febs J 286(2):241–278
Alrasheed M, Alsuhibani A, Hincapie AL, Guo JF (2021) Safety evaluation of panobinostat, ixazomib, elotuzumab, and daratumumab using FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) database 2015–2020. Pharmacoepidem Dr S 30:333
Alves-Fernandes DK, Oliveira EA, Faiao-Flores F, Alicea-Rebecca G, Weeraratna AT, Smalley KSM et al (2019) ER stress promotes antitumor effects in BRAFi/MEKi resistant human melanoma induced by natural compound 4-nerolidylcathecol (4-NC). Pharmacol Res 141:63–72
Atkins C, Liu Q, Minthorn E, Zhang SY, Figueroa DJ, Moss K et al (2013) Characterization of a novel PERK kinase inhibitor with antitumor and antiangiogenic activity. Cancer Res 73(6):1993–2002
Auner HW, Moody AM, Ward TH, Kraus M, Milan E, May P et al (2013) Combined inhibition of p97 and the proteasome causes lethal disruption of the secretory apparatus in multiple myeloma cells. PLoS ONE 8(9):e74415
Avril T, Chevet E (2020) IRE1-mediated miRNA maturation in macrophage phosphoinositide signaling. Embo Rep 21(12):e51929
Babour A, Bicknell AA, Tourtellotte J, Niwa M (2010) A surveillance pathway monitors the fitness of the endoplasmic reticulum to control its inheritance. Cell 142(2):256–269
Baird TD, Wek RC (2012) Eukaryotic initiation factor 2 phosphorylation and translational control in metabolism. Adv Nutr 3(3):307–321
Baker BM, Nargund AM, Sun T, Haynes CM (2012) Protective coupling of mitochondrial function and protein synthesis via the eIF2alpha kinase GCN-2. Plos Genet 8(6):e1002760
Balkwill FR, Capasso M, Hagemann T (2012) The tumor microenvironment at a glance. J Cell Sci 125(Pt 23):5591–5596
Balsas P, Galan-Malo P, Marzo I, Naval J (2012) Bortezomib resistance in a myeloma cell line is associated to PSMbeta5 overexpression and polyploidy. Leuk Res 36(2):212–218
Bartoszewska S, Kochan K, Madanecki P, Piotrowski A, Ochocka R, Collawn JF et al (2013) Regulation of the unfolded protein response by microRNAs. Cell Mol Biol Lett 18(4):555–578
Bartoszewska S, Kamysz W, Jakiela B, Sanak M, Kroliczewski J, Bebok Z et al (2017) miR-200b downregulates CFTR during hypoxia in human lung epithelial cells. Cell Mol Biol Lett 22:23
Bartoszewska S, Cabaj A, Dabrowski M, Collawn JF, Bartoszewski R (2019) miR-34c-5p modulates X-box-binding protein 1 (XBP1) expression during the adaptive phase of the unfolded protein response. Faseb J 33(10):11541–11554
Bartoszewska S, Kroliczewski J, Crossman DK, Pogorzelska A, Baginski M, Collawn JF et al (2021) Triazoloacridone C-1305 impairs XBP1 splicing by acting as a potential IRE1alpha endoribonuclease inhibitor. Cell Mol Biol Lett 26(1):11
Bartoszewska S, Collawn JF, Bartoszewski R (2022) The role of the hypoxia-related unfolded protein response (UPR) in the tumor microenvironment. Cancers 14(19):4870
Bartoszewski R, Brewer JW, Rab A, Crossman DK, Bartoszewska S, Kapoor N et al (2011) The unfolded protein response (UPR)-activated transcription factor X-box-binding protein 1 (XBP1) induces microRNA-346 expression that targets the human antigen peptide transporter 1 (TAP1) mRNA and governs immune regulatory genes. J Biol Chem 286(48):41862–41870
Bartoszewski R, Kroliczewski J, Piotrowski A, Jasiecka AJ, Bartoszewska S, Vecchio-Pagan B et al (2016) Codon bias and the folding dynamics of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator. Cell Mol Biol Lett 21:23
Bertolotti A, Wang X, Novoa I, Jungreis R, Schlessinger K, Cho JH et al (2001) Increased sensitivity to dextran sodium sulfate colitis in IRE1beta-deficient mice. J Clin Invest 107(5):585–593
Bi M, Naczki C, Koritzinsky M, Fels D, Blais J, Hu N et al (2005) ER stress-regulated translation increases tolerance to extreme hypoxia and promotes tumor growth. Embo J 24(19):3470–3481
Blais J, Bell JC (2006) Novel therapeutic target: the PERKs of inhibiting the integrated stress response. Cell Cycle 5(24):2874–2877
Bottcher JP, Sousa CR (2018) The role of type 1 conventional dendritic cells in cancer immunity. Trends Cancer 4(11):784–792
Bravo R, Parra V, Gatica D, Rodriguez AE, Torrealba N, Paredes F et al (2013) Endoplasmic reticulum and the unfolded protein response: dynamics and metabolic integration. Int Rev Cell Mol Biol 301:215–290
Bross PF, Kane R, Farrell AT, Abraham S, Benson K, Brower ME et al (2004) Approval summary for bortezomib for injection in the treatment of multiple myeloma. Clin Cancer Res 10(12 Pt 1):3954–3964
Byrd A, Brewer J (2011) MicroRNA-mediated repression of XBP1: a novel mechanism for regulation of a UPR transcriptional activator. J Immunol 186:62
Byrd AE, Brewer JW (2013) Micro(RNA)managing endoplasmic reticulum stress. IUBMB Life 65(5):373–381
Cabral-Miranda F, Tamburini G, Martinez G, Ardiles AO, Medinas DB, Gerakis Y et al (2022) Unfolded protein response IRE1/XBP1 signaling is required for healthy mammalian brain aging. Embo J 41(22):e111952
Calabrese EJ, Bachmann KA, Bailer AJ, Bolger PM, Borak J, Cai L et al (2007) Biological stress response terminology: Integrating the concepts of adaptive response and preconditioning stress within a hormetic dose-response framework. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 222(1):122–128
Calfon M, Zeng HQ, Urano F, Till JH, Hubbard SR, Harding HP et al (2002) IRE1 couples endoplasmic reticulum load to secretory capacity by processing the XBP-1 mRNA. Nature 420(6912):202
Carlesso A, Chintha C, Gorman AM, Samali A, Eriksson LA (2018) Binding analysis of the inositol-requiring enzyme 1 kinase domain. ACS Omega 3(10):13313–13322
Carlesso A, Chintha C, Gorman AM, Samali A, Eriksson LA (2019) Merits and pitfalls of conventional and covalent docking in identifying new hydroxyl aryl aldehyde like compounds as human IRE1 inhibitors. Sci Rep 9(1):3407
Carlesso A, Horberg J, Reymer A, Eriksson LA (2020) New insights on human IRE1 tetramer structures based on molecular modeling. Sci Rep 10(1):17490
Carrara M, Prischi F, Nowak PR, Ali MM (2015) Crystal structures reveal transient PERK luminal domain tetramerization in endoplasmic reticulum stress signaling. Embo J 34(11):1589–1600
Cevatemre B, Erkisa M, Aztopal N, Karakas D, Alper P, Tsimplouli C et al (2018) A promising natural product, pristimerin, results in cytotoxicity against breast cancer stem cells in vitro and xenografts in vivo through apoptosis and an incomplete autopaghy in breast cancer. Pharmacol Res 129:500–514
Chen X, Cubillos-Ruiz JR (2021) Endoplasmic reticulum stress signals in the tumour and its microenvironment. Nat Rev Cancer 21(2):71–88
Chen X, Iliopoulos D, Zhang Q, Tang Q, Greenblatt MB, Hatziapostolou M et al (2014) XBP1 promotes triple-negative breast cancer by controlling the HIF1alpha pathway. Nature 508(7494):103–107
Chen XL, Fu JP, Shi J, Wan P, Cao H, Tang ZM (2015) CXC195 induces apoptosis and endoplastic reticulum stress in human hepatocellular carcinoma cells by inhibiting the PI3K/Akt/mTOR signaling pathway. Mol Med Rep 12(6):8229–8236
Cheung O, Mirshahi F, Min H, Zhou H, Fuchs M, Sanyal AJ (2008) Silencing microrna Mir-34a and 451 promotes recovery from unfolded protein response (Upr) and reverses nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (Nafld). Hepatology 48(4):366a-a367
Chopra S, Giovanelli P, Alvarado-Vazquez PA, Alonso S, Song M, Sandoval TA et al (2019) IRE1alpha-XBP1 signaling in leukocytes controls prostaglandin biosynthesis and pain. Science 365(6450):248
Chow SE, Kao CH, Liu YT, Cheng ML, Yang YW, Huang YK et al (2014) Resveratrol induced ER expansion and ER caspase-mediated apoptosis in human nasopharyngeal carcinoma cells. Apoptosis 19(3):527–541
Colombano G, Caldwell JJ, Matthews TP, Bhatia C, Joshi A, McHardy T et al (2019) Binding to an unusual inactive kinase conformation by highly selective inhibitors of inositol-requiring enzyme 1α kinase-endoribonuclease. J Med Chem 62(5):2447–2465
Comitato R, Guantario B, Leoni G, Nesaretnam K, Ronci MB, Canali R et al (2016) Tocotrienols induce endoplasmic reticulum stress and apoptosis in cervical cancer cells. Genes Nutr 11(1):32
Concha NO, Smallwood A, Bonnette W, Totoritis R, Zhang G, Federowicz K et al (2015) Long-range inhibitor-induced conformational regulation of human IRE1α endoribonuclease activity. Mol Pharmacol 88(6):1011–1023
Cox JS, Walter P (1996) A novel mechanism for regulating activity of a transcription factor that controls the unfolded protein response. Cell 87(3):391–404
Cox JS, Shamu CE, Walter P (1993) Transcriptional induction of genes encoding endoplasmic reticulum resident proteins requires a transmembrane protein kinase. Cell 73(6):1197–1206
Cross BC, Bond PJ, Sadowski PG, Jha BK, Zak J, Goodman JM et al (2012) The molecular basis for selective inhibition of unconventional mRNA splicing by an IRE1-binding small molecule. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(15):E869–E878
de Almeida SF, Fleming JV, Azevedo JE, Carmo-Fonseca M, de Sousa M (2007) Stimulation of an unfolded protein response impairs MHC class I expression. J Immunol 178(6):3612–3619
Dejeans N, Pluquet O, Lhomond S, Grise F, Bouchecareilh M, Juin A et al (2012) Autocrine control of glioma cells adhesion and migration through IRE1alpha-mediated cleavage of SPARC mRNA. J Cell Sci 125(Pt 18):4278–4287
Diehn M, Eisen MB, Botstein D, Brown PO (2000) Large-scale identification of secreted and membrane-associated gene products using DNA microarrays. Nat Genet 25(1):58–62
Ding C, Tang W, Xia B, Peng H, Liu Y, Wang J et al (2022) High-throughput screening of FDA-approved drug library reveals ixazomib is a broad-spectrum antiviral agent against arboviruses. Viruses 14(7):1381
Doultsinos D, Avril T, Lhomond S, Dejeans N, Guedat P, Chevet E (2017) Control of the unfolded protein response in health and disease. SLAS Discov 22(7):787–800
Doultsinos D, Carlesso A, Chintha C, Paton JC, Paton AW, Samali A et al (2021) Peptidomimetic-based identification of FDA-approved compounds inhibiting IRE1 activity. Febs J 288(3):945–960
Dufey E, Bravo-San Pedro JM, Eggers C, Gonzalez-Quiroz M, Urra H, Sagredo AI et al (2020) Genotoxic stress triggers the activation of IRE1alpha-dependent RNA decay to modulate the DNA damage response. Nat Commun 11(1):2401
Feldman HC, Tong M, Wang L, Meza-Acevedo R, Gobillot TA, Lebedev I et al (2016a) Structural and functional analysis of the allosteric inhibition of IRE1α with ATP-competitive ligands. ACS Chem Biol 11(8):2195–2205
Feldman HC, Tong M, Wang L, Meza-Acevedo R, Gobillot TA, Lebedev I et al (2016b) Structural and functional analysis of the allosteric inhibition of IRE1alpha with ATP-competitive ligands. ACS Chem Biol 11(8):2195–2205
Feldman HC, Vidadala VN, Potter ZE, Papa FR, Backes BJ, Maly DJ (2019) Development of a chemical toolset for studying the paralog-specific function of IRE1. ACS Chem Biol 14(12):2595–2605
Ferri E, Le Thomas A, Wallweber HA, Day ES, Walters BT, Kaufman SE et al (2020) Activation of the IRE1 RNase through remodeling of the kinase front pocket by ATP-competitive ligands. Nat Commun 11(1):6387
Gaddam D, Stevens N, Hollien J (2013) Comparison of mRNA localization and regulation during endoplasmic reticulum stress in Drosophila cells. Mol Biol Cell 24(1):14–20
Gebert M, Bartoszewska S, Janaszak-Jasiecka A, Moszynska A, Cabaj A, Kroliczewski J et al (2018) PIWI proteins contribute to apoptosis during the UPR in human airway epithelial cells. Sci Rep 8(1):16431
Gebert M, Sobolewska A, Bartoszewska S, Cabaj A, Crossman DK, Kroliczewski J et al (2021) Genome-wide mRNA profiling identifies X-box-binding protein 1 (XBP1) as an IRE1 and PUMA repressor. Cell Mol Life Sci 78(21–22):7061–7080
Gebert M, Bartoszewska S, Opalinski L, Collawn JF, (2023) Bartoszewski R. IRE1-mediated degradation of pre-miR-301a promotes apoptosis through upregulation of GADD45A. bioRxiv. 2023.06.21.545854
Ghosh R, Wang L, Wang ES, Perera BGK, Igbaria A, Morita S et al (2014) Allosteric inhibition of the IRE1α RNase preserves cell viability and function during endoplasmic reticulum stress. Cell 158(3):534–548
Grandjean JMD, Madhavan A, Cech L, Seguinot BO, Paxman RJ, Smith E et al (2020) Pharmacologic IRE1/XBP1s activation confers targeted ER proteostasis reprogramming. Nat Chem Biol 16(10):1052–1061
Gupta S, Giricz Z, Natoni A, Donnelly N, Deegan S, Szegezdi E et al (2012) NOXA contributes to the sensitivity of PERK-deficient cells to ER stress. Febs Lett 586(22):4023–4030
Han J, Back SH, Hur J, Lin YH, Gildersleeve R, Shan J et al (2013) ER-stress-induced transcriptional regulation increases protein synthesis leading to cell death. Nat Cell Biol 15(5):481–490
Harding HP, Zeng H, Zhang Y, Jungries R, Chung P, Plesken H et al (2001) Diabetes mellitus and exocrine pancreatic dysfunction in perk-/- mice reveals a role for translational control in secretory cell survival. Mol Cell 7(6):1153–1163
Harding HP, Zhang Y, Zeng H, Novoa I, Lu PD, Calfon M et al (2003) An integrated stress response regulates amino acid metabolism and resistance to oxidative stress. Mol Cell 11(3):619–633
Harnoss JM, Le Thomas A, Shemorry A, Marsters SA, Lawrence DA, Lu M et al (2019) Disruption of IRE1α through its kinase domain attenuates multiple myeloma. Proc Natl Acad Sci 116(33):16420–16429
Harnoss JM, Le Thomas A, Reichelt M, Guttman O, Wu TD, Marsters SA et al (2020) IRE1alpha disruption in triple-negative breast cancer cooperates with antiangiogenic therapy by reversing ER stress adaptation and remodeling the tumor microenvironment. Cancer Res 80(11):2368–2379
Hassler JR, Scheuner DL, Wang S, Han J, Kodali VK, Li P et al (2015) The IRE1alpha/XBP1s pathway is essential for the glucose response and protection of beta cells. PLoS Biol 13(10):e1002277
Haze K, Yoshida H, Yanagi H, Yura T, Mori K (1999) Mammalian transcription factor ATF6 is synthesized as a transmembrane protein and activated by proteolysis in response to endoplasmic reticulum stress. Mol Biol Cell 10(11):3787–3799
He Y, Sun S, Sha H, Liu Z, Yang L, Xue Z et al (2010) Emerging roles for XBP1, a sUPeR transcription factor. Gene Expr 15(1):13–25
Herman JP (2006) Integrated circuits controlling the stress response. Neurosci Res 55:S25
Hetz C (2012) The unfolded protein response: controlling cell fate decisions under ER stress and beyond. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 13(2):89–102
Hetz C, Zhang K, Kaufman RJ (2020) Mechanisms, regulation and functions of the unfolded protein response. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 21(8):421–438
Hollien J (2013) Evolution of the unfolded protein response. Biochim Biophys Acta 1833(11):2458–2463
Hollien J, Weissman JS (2006) Decay of endoplasmic reticulum-localized mRNAs during the unfolded protein response. Science 313(5783):104–107
Hollien J, Lin JH, Li H, Stevens N, Walter P, Weissman JS (2009) Regulated Ire1-dependent decay of messenger RNAs in mammalian cells. J Cell Biol 186(3):323–331
Huang S, Xing Y, Liu Y (2019) Emerging roles for the ER stress sensor IRE1alpha in metabolic regulation and disease. J Biol Chem 294(49):18726–18741
Huo M, Zhao Y, Liu X, Gao Y, Zhang D, Chang M et al (2020) EGFR targeting enhances the efficiency of chemotherapy through inhibiting IRE1alpha-XBP1s pathway in colorectal cancer cells. J Cancer 11(15):4464–4473
Hur KY, So JS, Ruda V, Frank-Kamenetsky M, Fitzgerald K, Koteliansky V et al (2012) IRE1alpha activation protects mice against acetaminophen-induced hepatotoxicity. J Exp Med 209(2):307–318
Hurst KE, Lawrence KA, Essman MT, Walton ZJ, Leddy LR, Thaxton JE (2019) Endoplasmic reticulum stress contributes to mitochondrial exhaustion of CD8(+) T cells. Cancer Immunol Res 7(3):476–486
Imagawa Y, Hosoda A, Sasaka S, Tsuru A, Kohno K (2008) RNase domains determine the functional difference between IRE1alpha and IRE1beta. Febs Lett 582(5):656–660
Iqbal J, Dai K, Seimon T, Jungreis R, Oyadomari M, Kuriakose G et al (2008) IRE1beta inhibits chylomicron production by selectively degrading MTP mRNA. Cell Metab 7(5):445–455
Iwakoshi NN, Lee AH, Vallabhajosyula P, Otipoby KL, Rajewsky K, Glimcher LH (2003) Plasma cell differentiation and the unfolded protein response intersect at the transcription factor XBP-1. Nat Immunol 4(4):321–329
Iwawaki T, Akai R, Yamanaka S, Kohno K (2009) Function of IRE1 alpha in the placenta is essential for placental development and embryonic viability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106(39):16657–16662
Jeong K, Kim K, Kim H, Oh Y, Kim SJ, Jo Y et al (2015) Hypoxia induces cyclophilin B through the activation of transcription factor 6 in gastric adenocarcinoma cells. Oncol Lett 9(6):2854–2858
Jiang D, Lynch C, Medeiros BC, Liedtke M, Bam R, Tam AB et al (2016) Identification of doxorubicin as an inhibitor of the IRE1α-XBP1 axis of the unfolded protein response. Sci Rep UK 6(1):1–8
Joshi A, Newbatt Y, McAndrew PC, Stubbs M, Burke R, Richards MW et al (2015) Molecular mechanisms of human IRE1 activation through dimerization and ligand binding. Oncotarget 6(15):13019–13035
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):508–13
Karagoz GE, Acosta-Alvear D, Walter P (2019) The unfolded protein response: detecting and responding to fluctuations in the protein-folding capacity of the endoplasmic reticulum. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 11(9):a033886
Kim T, Croce CM (2021) MicroRNA and ER stress in cancer. Semin Cancer Biol 75:3–14
Kim I, Shu CW, Xu W, Shiau CW, Grant D, Vasile S et al (2009) Chemical biology investigation of cell death pathways activated by endoplasmic reticulum stress reveals cytoprotective modulators of ASK1. J Biol Chem 284(3):1593–1603
Ko YC, Lien JC, Liu HC, Hsu SC, Ji BC, Yang MD et al (2015) Demethoxycurcumin induces the apoptosis of human lung cancer NCI-H460 cells through the mitochondrial-dependent pathway. Oncol Rep 33(5):2429–2437
Korennykh AV, Egea PF, Korostelev AA, Finer-Moore J, Zhang C, Shokat KM et al (2009) The unfolded protein response signals through high-order assembly of Ire1. Nature 457(7230):687–693
Koumenis C, Naczki C, Koritzinsky M, Rastani S, Diehl A, Sonenberg N et al (2002) Regulation of protein synthesis by hypoxia via activation of the endoplasmic reticulum kinase PERK and phosphorylation of the translation initiation factor eIF2alpha. Mol Cell Biol 22(21):7405–7416
Krajarng A, Imoto M, Tashiro E, Fujimaki T, Shinjo S, Watanapokasin R (2015) Apoptosis induction associated with the ER stress response through up-regulation of JNK in HeLa cells by gambogic acid. BMC Complement Altern Med 15(1):26
Kraut-Cohen J, Gerst JE (2010) Addressing mRNAs to the ER: cis sequences act up! Trends Biochem Sci 35(8):459–469
Kroliczewski J, Bartoszewska S, Dudkowska M, Janiszewska D, Biernatowska A, Crossman DK et al (2020) Utilizing genome-wide mRNA profiling to identify the cytotoxic chemotherapeutic mechanism of triazoloacridone C-1305 as direct microtubule stabilization. Cancers 12(4):864
Krukowski K, Nolan A, Frias ES, Boone M, Ureta G, Grue K et al (2020) Small molecule cognitive enhancer reverses age-related memory decline in mice. Elife 9:e62048
Lane AN, Higashi RM, Fan TW (2020) Metabolic reprogramming in tumors: contributions of the tumor microenvironment. Genes Dis 7(2):185–198
Lee AH, Iwakoshi NN, Glimcher LH (2003) XBP-1 regulates a subset of endoplasmic reticulum resident chaperone genes in the unfolded protein response. Mol Cell Biol 23(21):7448–7459
Lee AH, Heidtman K, Hotamisligil GS, Glimcher LH (2011) Dual and opposing roles of the unfolded protein response regulated by IRE1alpha and XBP1 in proinsulin processing and insulin secretion. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108(21):8885–8890
Lee D-H, Oh SC, Kwon YT, Lee YJ, Yoo YD (2017) Abstract 5327: Glioma derived cancer stem cells are hypersensitive to proteasomal inhibition. Cancer Res 77:5327
Lerner RS, Seiser RM, Zheng T, Lager PJ, Reedy MC, Keene JD et al (2003) Partitioning and translation of mRNAs encoding soluble proteins on membrane-bound ribosomes. RNA 9(9):1123–1137
Lerner A, Upton JP, Praveen P, Ghosh R, Igbaria A, Nguyen V et al (2012) IRE1 alpha induces thioredoxin-interacting protein to activate the NLRP3 inflammasome and promote programmed cell death during ER stress. Mol Biol Cell 23:250–264
Lhomond S, Avril T, Dejeans N, Voutetakis K, Doultsinos D, McMahon M et al (2022) Dual IRE1 RNase functions dictate glioblastoma development. EMBO Mol Med 14(2):e15622
Limonta P, Moretti RM, Marzagalli M, Fontana F, Raimondi M, Montagnani MM (2019) Role of endoplasmic reticulum stress in the anticancer activity of natural compounds. Int J Mol Sci. 20(4):961
Lipson KL, Fonseca SG, Ishigaki S, Nguyen LX, Foss E, Bortell R et al (2006) Regulation of insulin biosynthesis in pancreatic beta cells by an endoplasmic reticulum-resident protein kinase IRE1. Cell Metab 4(3):245–254
Liu CY, Wong HN, Schauerte JA, Kaufman RJ (2002) The protein kinase/endoribonuclease IRE1alpha that signals the unfolded protein response has a luminal N-terminal ligand-independent dimerization domain. J Biol Chem 277(21):18346–18356
Liu CY, Xu Z, Kaufman RJ (2003) Structure and intermolecular interactions of the luminal dimerization domain of human IRE1alpha. J Biol Chem 278(20):17680–17687
Logue SE, McGrath EP, Cleary P, Greene S, Mnich K, Almanza A et al (2018) Inhibition of IRE1 RNase activity modulates the tumor cell secretome and enhances response to chemotherapy. Nat Commun 9(1):3267
Loinard C, Zouggari Y, Rueda P, Ramkhelawon B, Cochain C, Vilar J et al (2012) C/EBP homologous protein-10 (CHOP-10) limits postnatal neovascularization through control of endothelial nitric oxide synthase gene expression. Circulation 125(8):1014–1026
Madden E, Logue SE, Healy SJ, Manie S, Samali A (2019) The role of the unfolded protein response in cancer progression: from oncogenesis to chemoresistance. Biol Cell 111(1):1–17
Magnaghi P, D’Alessio R, Valsasina B, Avanzi NR, Rizzi S, Asa D et al (2012) Identification of potent VCP/p97/CDC48 inhibitors with distinct biochemical mechanisms including a reversible, allosteric inhibitor that activates the unfolded protein response, induce autophagy and cancer cell death. Cancer Res 72:2940
Magnaghi P, D’Alessio R, Valsasina B, Avanzi N, Rizzi S, Asa D et al (2013) Covalent and allosteric inhibitors of the ATPase VCP/p97 induce cancer cell death. Nat Chem Biol 9(9):548–556
Mahameed M, Wilhelm T, Darawshi O, Obiedat A, Tommy WS, Chintha C et al (2019) The unfolded protein response modulators GSK2606414 and KIRA6 are potent KIT inhibitors. Cell Death Dis 10(4):300
Mahdizadeh SJ, Carlesso A, Eriksson LA (2020) Deciphering the selectivity of inhibitor MKC9989 towards residue K907 in IRE1alpha; a multiscale in silico approach. Rsc Adv 10(33):19720–19729
Mahdizadeh SJ, Thomas M, Eriksson LA (2021) Reconstruction of the fas-based death-inducing signaling complex (DISC) using a protein-protein docking meta-approach. J Chem Inf Model 61(7):3543–3558
Marchant R, Barker J, Klappa P, Dickson A, Smales M (2010) The unfolded protein response and recombinant protein production from in vitro cultured mammalian cells. Esact Proceed 4:437–440
Marciniak SJ, Yun CY, Oyadomari S, Novoa I, Zhang Y, Jungreis R et al (2004) CHOP induces death by promoting protein synthesis and oxidation in the stressed endoplasmic reticulum. Genes Dev 18(24):3066–3077
Marciniak SJ, Chambers JE, Ron D (2022) Pharmacological targeting of endoplasmic reticulum stress in disease. Nat Rev Drug Discov 21(2):115–140
Martinez-Turtos A, Paul R, Grima-Reyes M, Issaoui H, Krug A, Mhaidly R et al (2022) IRE1alpha overexpression in malignant cells limits tumor progression by inducing an anti-cancer immune response. Oncoimmunology 11(1):2116844
Martinotti S, Ranzato E, Burlando B (2018) (-)- Epigallocatechin-3-gallate induces GRP78 accumulation in the ER and shifts mesothelioma constitutive UPR into proapoptotic ER stress. J Cell Physiol 233(10):7082–7090
Maurel M, Chevet E (2013) Endoplasmic reticulum stress signaling: the microRNA connection. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 304(12):C1117–C1126
Maurel M, Chevet E, Tavernier J, Gerlo S (2014) Getting RIDD of RNA: IRE1 in cell fate regulation. Trends Biochem Sci 39(5):245–254
Meister S, Schubert U, Neubert K, Herrmann K, Burger R, Gramatzki M et al (2007) Extensive immunoglobulin production sensitizes myeloma cells for proteasome inhibition. Cancer Res 67(4):1783–1792
Melber A, Haynes CM (2018) UPR(mt) regulation and output: a stress response mediated by mitochondrial-nuclear communication. Cell Res 28(3):281–295
Mendez AS, Alfaro J, Morales-Soto MA, Dar AC, McCullagh E, Gotthardt K et al (2015) Endoplasmic reticulum stress-independent activation of unfolded protein response kinases by a small molecule ATP-mimic. Elife 4:e05434
Mercado G, Hetz C (2017) Drug repurposing to target proteostasis and prevent neurodegeneration: accelerating translational efforts. Brain 140(6):1544–1547
Mimura N, Fulciniti M, Gorgun G, Tai Y-T, Cirstea D, Santo L et al (2012) Blockade of XBP1 splicing by inhibition of IRE1α is a promising therapeutic option in multiple myeloma. Blood J Am Soc Hematol 119(24):5772–5781
Misiewicz M, Dery MA, Foveau B, Jodoin J, Ruths D, LeBlanc AC (2013) Identification of a novel endoplasmic reticulum stress response element regulated by XBP1. J Biol Chem 288(28):20378–20391
Mohamed E, Sierra RA, Trillo-Tinoco J, Cao Y, Innamarato P, Payne KK et al (2020) The unfolded protein response mediator PERK governs myeloid cell-driven immunosuppression in tumors through inhibition of STING signaling. Immunity 52(4):668
Montagnani Marelli M, Marzagalli M, Moretti RM, Beretta G, Casati L, Comitato R et al (2016) Vitamin E delta-tocotrienol triggers endoplasmic reticulum stress-mediated apoptosis in human melanoma cells. Sci Rep 6(1):30502
Mori K, Ma WZ, Gething MJ, Sambrook J (1993) A transmembrane protein with a Cdc2+/Cdc28-related kinase-activity is required for signaling from the Er to the nucleus. Cell 74(4):743–756
Mori K, Kawahara T, Yoshida H, Yanagi H, Yura T (1996) Signalling from endoplasmic reticulum to nucleus: transcription factor with a basic-leucine zipper motif is required for the unfolded protein-response pathway. Genes Cells 1(9):803–817
Morita S, Villalta SA, Feldman HC, Register AC, Rosenthal W, Hoffmann-Petersen IT et al (2017) Targeting ABL-IRE1α signaling spares ER-stressed pancreatic β cells to reverse autoimmune diabetes. Cell Metab 25(4):883–897
Moszynska A, Collawn JF, Bartoszewski R (2020) IRE1 endoribonuclease activity modulates hypoxic HIF-1alpha signaling in human endothelial cells. Biomolecules 10(6):895
Mudassar F, Shen H, O’Neill G, Hau E (2020) Targeting tumor hypoxia and mitochondrial metabolism with anti-parasitic drugs to improve radiation response in high-grade gliomas. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 39(1):208
Mujcic H, Nagelkerke A, Rouschop KM, Chung S, Chaudary N, Span PN et al (2013) Hypoxic activation of the PERK/eIF2alpha arm of the unfolded protein response promotes metastasis through induction of LAMP3. Clin Cancer Res 19(22):6126–6137
Mukherji S, Ebert MS, Zheng GX, Tsang JS, Sharp PA, van Oudenaarden A (2011) MicroRNAs can generate thresholds in target gene expression. Nat Genet 43(9):854–859
Nguyen HG, Conn CS, Kye Y, Xue L, Forester CM, Cowan JE et al (2018) Development of a stress response therapy targeting aggressive prostate cancer. Sci Transl Med 10:439
Novoa I, Zeng H, Harding HP, Ron D (2001) Feedback inhibition of the unfolded protein response by GADD34-mediated dephosphorylation of eIF2alpha. J Cell Biol 153(5):1011–1022
Obacz J, Avril T, Rubio-Patino C, Bossowski JP, Igbaria A, Ricci JE et al (2019) Regulation of tumor-stroma interactions by the unfolded protein response. Febs J 286(2):279–296
Obeng EA, Carlson LM, Gutman DM, Harrington WJ Jr, Lee KP, Boise LH (2006) Proteasome inhibitors induce a terminal unfolded protein response in multiple myeloma cells. Blood 107(12):4907–4916
Obiedat A, Seidel E, Mahameed M, Berhani O, Tsukerman P, Voutetakis K et al (2019) Transcription of the NKG2D ligand MICA is suppressed by the IRE1/XBP1 pathway of the unfolded protein response through the regulation of E2F1. Faseb J 33(3):3481–3495
Oerlemans R, Franke NE, Assaraf YG, Cloos J, van Zantwijk I, Berkers CR et al (2008) Molecular basis of bortezomib resistance: proteasome subunit beta5 (PSMB5) gene mutation and overexpression of PSMB5 protein. Blood 112(6):2489–2499
Osorio F, Tavernier SJ, Hoffmann E, Saeys Y, Martens L, Vetters J et al (2014) The unfolded-protein-response sensor IRE-1α regulates the function of CD8α dendritic cells. Nature 201:4
Papandreou I, Denko NC, Olson M, Van Melckebeke H, Lust S, Tam A et al (2011) Identification of an Ire1alpha endonuclease specific inhibitor with cytotoxic activity against human multiple myeloma. Blood 117(4):1311–1314
Park SK, Sanders BG, Kline K (2010) Tocotrienols induce apoptosis in breast cancer cell lines via an endoplasmic reticulum stress-dependent increase in extrinsic death receptor signaling. Breast Cancer Res Treat 124(2):361–375
Pluquet O, Dejeans N, Bouchecareilh M, Lhomond S, Pineau R, Higa A et al (2013) Posttranscriptional regulation of PER1 underlies the oncogenic function of IREalpha. Cancer Res 73(15):4732–4743
Pommier A, Anaparthy N, Memos N, Kelley ZL, Gouronnec A, Yan R et al (2018) Unresolved endoplasmic reticulum stress engenders immune-resistant, latent pancreatic cancer metastases. Science 360(6394):1202
Pozzi C, Cuomo A, Spadoni I, Magni E, Silvola A, Conte A et al (2016) The EGFR-specific antibody cetuximab combined with chemotherapy triggers immunogenic cell death. Nat Med 22(6):624–631
Pyhtila B, Zheng T, Lager PJ, Keene JD, Reedy MC, Nicchitta CV (2008) Signal sequence- and translation-independent mRNA localization to the endoplasmic reticulum. RNA 14(3):445–453
Rabouw HH, Langereis MA, Anand AA, Visser LJ, de Groot RJ, Walter P et al (2019) Small molecule ISRIB suppresses the integrated stress response within a defined window of activation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USdA 116(6):2097–2102
Raymond E, Dahan L, Raoul JL, Bang YJ, Borbath I, Lombard-Bohas C et al (2011) Sunitinib malate for the treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. N Engl J Med 364(6):501–513
Raymundo DP, Doultsinos D, Guillory X, Carlesso A, Eriksson LA, Chevet E (2020) Pharmacological targeting of IRE1 in cancer. Trends Cancer 6(12):1018–1030
Reimertz C, Kogel D, Rami A, Chittenden T, Prehn JH (2003) Gene expression during ER stress-induced apoptosis in neurons: induction of the BH3-only protein Bbc3/PUMA and activation of the mitochondrial apoptosis pathway. J Cell Biol 162(4):587–597
Reste PL, Pineau R, Jouan F, Samal J, Jegou G, Patterson J et al (2019) P11.61 Development of a novel preclinical GBM model and therapeutic impact of IRE1 inhibition. Neuro Oncol 21(Supplement_3):iii57
Ri M, Tashiro E, Oikawa D, Shinjo S, Tokuda M, Yokouchi Y et al (2012) Identification of Toyocamycin, an agent cytotoxic for multiple myeloma cells, as a potent inhibitor of ER stress-induced XBP1 mRNA splicing. Blood Cancer J 2(7):e79
Rivera M, Ramos Y, Rodriguez-Valentin M, Lopez-Acevedo S, Cubano LA, Zou J et al (2017) Targeting multiple pro-apoptotic signaling pathways with curcumin in prostate cancer cells. PLoS ONE 12(6):e0179587
Rosebeck S, Sudini K, Chen T, Leaman DW (2011) Involvement of Noxa in mediating cellular ER stress responses to lytic virus infection. Virology 417(2):293–303
Rosen DA, Seki SM, Fernández-Castañeda A, Beiter RM, Eccles JD, Woodfolk JA et al (2019) Modulation of the sigma-1 receptor–IRE1 pathway is beneficial in preclinical models of inflammation and sepsis. Sci Transl Med 11(478):eaau5266
Rouschop KM, van den Beucken T, Dubois L, Niessen H, Bussink J, Savelkouls K et al (2010) The unfolded protein response protects human tumor cells during hypoxia through regulation of the autophagy genes MAP1LC3B and ATG5. J Clin Invest 120(1):127–141
Rouschop KM, Dubois LJ, Keulers TG, van den Beucken T, Lambin P, Bussink J et al (2013) PERK/eIF2alpha signaling protects therapy resistant hypoxic cells through induction of glutathione synthesis and protection against ROS. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110(12):4622–4627
Ruggiano A, Foresti O, Carvalho P (2014) Quality control: ER-associated degradation: protein quality control and beyond. J Cell Biol 204(6):869–879
Rutkowski DT, Kaufman RJ (2003) All roads lead to ATF4. Dev Cell 4(4):442–444
Rzymski T, Harris AL (2007) The unfolded protein response and integrated stress response to anoxia. Clin Cancer Res 13(9):2537–2540
Rzymski T, Milani M, Pike L, Buffa F, Mellor HR, Winchester L et al (2010) Regulation of autophagy by ATF4 in response to severe hypoxia. Oncogene 29(31):4424–4435
Sanches M, Duffy NM, Talukdar M, Thevakumaran N, Chiovitti D, Canny MD et al (2014) Structure and mechanism of action of the hydroxy-aryl-aldehyde class of IRE1 endoribonuclease inhibitors. Nat Commun 5:4202
Sandow JJ, Dorstyn L, O’reilly L, Tailler M, Kumar S, Strasser A et al (2014) ER stress does not cause upregulation and activation of caspase-2 to initiate apoptosis. Cell Death Differ 21(3):475–480
Schroder M, Kaufman RJ (2005) The mammalian unfolded protein response. Annu Rev Biochem 74:739–789
Shaffer AL, Shapiro-Shelef M, Iwakoshi NN, Lee AH, Qian SB, Zhao H et al (2004) XBP1, downstream of Blimp-1, expands the secretory apparatus and other organelles, and increases protein synthesis in plasma cell differentiation. Immunity 21(1):81–93
Shajahan-Haq A, Cook K, Schwartz-Roberts J, Eltayeb A, Demas D, Warri A et al (2014) Glutamine metabolism and the unfolded protein response in MYC-driven breast cancer. Cancer Metab 2:1–1
Sharma RB, Darko C, Alonso LC (2020) Intersection of the ATF6 and XBP1 ER stress pathways in mouse islet cells. J Biol Chem 295(41):14164–14177
Sheng X, Nenseth HZ, Qu S, Kuzu OF, Frahnow T, Simon L et al (2019) IRE1alpha-XBP1s pathway promotes prostate cancer by activating c-MYC signaling. Nat Commun 10(1):323
Shpilka T, Haynes CM (2018) The mitochondrial UPR: mechanisms, physiological functions and implications in ageing. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 19(2):109–120
Sicari D, Fantuz M, Bellazzo A, Valentino E, Apollonio M, Pontisso I et al (2019) Mutant p53 improves cancer cells’ resistance to endoplasmic reticulum stress by sustaining activation of the UPR regulator ATF6. Oncogene 38(34):6184–6195
Singleton DC, Harris AL (2012) Targeting the ATF4 pathway in cancer therapy. Expert Opin Ther Targets 16(12):1189–1202
So JS, Hur KY, Tarrio M, Ruda V, Frank-Kamenetsky M, Fitzgerald K et al (2012) Silencing of lipid metabolism genes through IRE1alpha-mediated mRNA decay lowers plasma lipids in mice. Cell Metab 16(4):487–499
Stewart C, Estrada A, Kim P, Wang D, Wei Y, Gentile C et al (2017) Regulation of IRE1alpha by the small molecule inhibitor 4mu8c in hepatoma cells. Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress Dis 4(1):1–10
Sun H, Lin D-C, Guo X, Masouleh BK, Gery S, Cao Q et al (2016) Inhibition of IRE1α-driven pro-survival pathways is a promising therapeutic application in acute myeloid leukemia. Oncotarget 7(14):18736
Switalska M, Filip-Psurska B, Milczarek M, Psurski M, Moszynska A, Dabrowska AM et al (2022) Combined anticancer therapy with imidazoacridinone analogue C-1305 and paclitaxel in human lung and colon cancer xenografts-modulation of tumour angiogenesis. J Cell Mol Med 26(14):3950–3964
Tameire F, Verginadis II, Koumenis C (2015) Cell intrinsic and extrinsic activators of the unfolded protein response in cancer: mechanisms and targets for therapy. Semin Cancer Biol 33:3–15
Tang CHA, Ranatunga S, Kriss CL, Cubitt CL, Tao JG, Pinilla-Ibarz JA et al (2014) Inhibition of ER stress-associated IRE-1/XBP-1 pathway reduces leukemic cell survival. J Clin Invest 124(6):2585–2598
Tashiro E, Hironiwa N, Kitagawa M, Futamura Y, Suzuki S, Nishio M et al (2007) Trierixin, a novel Inhibitor of ER stress-induced XBP1 activation from Streptomyces sp. 1. Taxonomy, fermentation, isolation and biological activities. J Antibiot 60(9):547–53
Thamsen M, Ghosh R, Auyeung VC, Brumwell A, Chapman HA, Backes BJ et al (2019) Small molecule inhibition of IRE1alpha kinase/RNase has anti-fibrotic effects in the lung. PLoS ONE 14(1):e0209824
Thevenot PT, Sierra RA, Raber PL, Al-Khami AA, Trillo-Tinoco J, Zarreii P et al (2014) The stress-response sensor chop regulates the function and accumulation of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in tumors. Immunity 41(3):389–401
Tirasophon W, Welihinda AA, Kaufman RJ (1998) A stress response pathway from the endoplasmic reticulum to the nucleus requires a novel bifunctional protein kinase/endoribonuclease (Ire1p) in mammalian cells. Genes Dev 12(12):1812–1824
Tirasophon W, Lee K, Callaghan B, Welihinda A, Kaufman RJ (2000) The endoribonuclease activity of mammalian IRE1 autoregulates its mRNA and is required for the unfolded protein response. Genes Dev 14(21):2725–2736
Tirosh B, Iwakoshi NN, Glimcher LH, Ploegh HL (2006) Rapid turnover of unspliced Xbp-1 as a factor that modulates the unfolded protein response. J Biol Chem 281(9):5852–5860
Travers KJ, Patil CK, Wodicka L, Lockhart DJ, Weissman JS, Walter P (2000) Functional and genomic analyses reveal an essential coordination between the unfolded protein response and ER-associated degradation. Cell 101(3):249–258
Tsuchiya Y, Saito M, Kadokura H, Miyazaki JI, Tashiro F, Imagawa Y et al (2018) IRE1-XBP1 pathway regulates oxidative proinsulin folding in pancreatic beta cells. J Cell Biol 217(4):1287–1301
Upton JP, Wang L, Han D, Wang ES, Huskey NE, Lim L et al (2012) IRE1alpha cleaves select microRNAs during ER stress to derepress translation of proapoptotic Caspase-2. Science 338(6108):818–822
Uyuklu T, Ural AU, Sarper M, Avcu F, Baran Y, Elci P et al (2007) A study of multiple drug resistance mechanisms improved against Bortezomib on multiple myeloma cell lines in vitro. Blood 110(11):113
van den Beucken T, Koritzinsky M, Niessen H, Dubois L, Savelkouls K, Mujcic H et al (2009) Hypoxia-induced expression of carbonic anhydrase 9 is dependent on the unfolded protein response. J Biol Chem 284(36):24204–24212
Vasquez GE, Medinas DB, Urra H, Hetz C (2022) Emerging roles of endoplasmic reticulum proteostasis in brain development. Cells Dev 170:203781
Volkmann K, Lucas JL, Vuga D, Wang X, Brumm D, Stiles C et al (2011) Potent and selective inhibitors of the inositol-requiring enzyme 1 endoribonuclease. J Biol Chem 286(14):12743–12755
Wang Q, Mora-Jensen H, Weniger MA, Perez-Galan P, Wolford C, Hai T et al (2009) ERAD inhibitors integrate ER stress with an epigenetic mechanism to activate BH3-only protein NOXA in cancer cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106(7):2200–2205
Wang L, Perera BGK, Hari SB, Bhhatarai B, Backes BJ, Seeliger MA et al (2012) Divergent allosteric control of the IRE1α endoribonuclease using kinase inhibitors. Nat Chem Biol 8(12):982–989
Wiseman RL, Zhang Y, Lee KP, Harding HP, Haynes CM, Price J et al (2010) Flavonol activation defines an unanticipated ligand-binding site in the kinase-RNase domain of IRE1. Mol Cell 38(2):291–304
Wortel IMN, van der Meer LT, Kilberg MS, van Leeuwen FN (2017) Surviving stress: modulation of ATF4-mediated stress responses in normal and malignant cells. Trends Endocrinol Metab 28(11):794–806
Xu T, Yang L, Yan C, Wang X, Huang P, Zhao F et al (2014) The IRE1alpha-XBP1 pathway regulates metabolic stress-induced compensatory proliferation of pancreatic beta-cells. Cell Res 24(9):1137–1140
Xu XH, Liu QY, Li T, Liu JL, Chen X, Huang L et al (2017) Garcinone E induces apoptosis and inhibits migration and invasion in ovarian cancer cells. Sci Rep 7(1):10718
Yamamoto K, Yoshida H, Kokame K, Kaufman RJ, Mori K (2004) Differential contributions of ATF6 and XBP1 to the activation of endoplasmic reticulum stress-responsive cis-acting elements ERSE UPRE and ERSE-II. J Biochem 136(3):343–350
Yang ST, Huang AC, Tang NY, Liu HC, Liao CL, Ji BC et al (2016) Bisdemethoxycurcumin-induced S phase arrest through the inhibition of cyclin A and E and induction of apoptosis via endoplasmic reticulum stress and mitochondria-dependent pathways in human lung cancer NCI H460 cells. Environ Toxicol 31(12):1899–1908
Ye J, Koumenis C (2009) ATF4, an ER stress and hypoxia-inducible transcription factor and its potential role in hypoxia tolerance and tumorigenesis. Curr Mol Med 9(4):411–416
Yoo YD, Lee DH, Cha-Molstad H, Kim H, Mun SR, Ji C et al (2017) Glioma-derived cancer stem cells are hypersensitive to proteasomal inhibition. Embo Rep 18(9):1671
Yoshida H, Okada T, Haze K, Yanagi H, Yura T, Negishi M et al (2000) ATF6 activated by proteolysis binds in the presence of NF-Y (CBF) directly to the cis-acting element responsible for the mammalian unfolded protein response. Mol Cell Biol 20(18):6755–6767
Yoshida H, Matsui T, Yamamoto A, Okada T, Mori K (2001) XBP1 mRNA is induced by ATF6 and spliced by IRE1 in response to ER stress to produce a highly active transcription factor. Cell 107(7):881–891
Zeng T, Peng L, Chao H, Xi H, Fu B, Wang Y et al (2015) IRE1alpha-TRAF2-ASK1 complex-mediated endoplasmic reticulum stress and mitochondrial dysfunction contribute to CXC195-induced apoptosis in human bladder carcinoma T24 cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 460(3):530–536
Zhai Y, Ye X, Hu F, Xu J, Guo X, Cao Y et al (2021) Cardiovascular toxicity of carfilzomib: the real-world evidence based on the adverse event reporting system database of the FDA, the United States. Front Cardiovasc Med 8:735466
Zhang K, Kaufman RJ (2004) Signaling the unfolded protein response from the endoplasmic reticulum. J Biol Chem 279(25):25935–25938
Zhang P, McGrath B, Li S, Frank A, Zambito F, Reinert J et al (2002) The PERK eukaryotic initiation factor 2 alpha kinase is required for the development of the skeletal system, postnatal growth, and the function and viability of the pancreas. Mol Cell Biol 22(11):3864–3874
Zhang T, Li N, Sun C, Jin Y, Sheng X (2020) MYC and the unfolded protein response in cancer: synthetic lethal partners in crime? EMBO Mol Med 12(5):e11845
Zhou J, Liu CY, Back SH, Clark RL, Peisach D, Xu Z et al (2006) The crystal structure of human IRE1 luminal domain reveals a conserved dimerization interface required for activation of the unfolded protein response. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103(39):14343–14348
Acknowledgements
Not applicable
Funding
This research was funded by National Science Center “Opus” Program under contract UMO-2020/37/B/NZ3/00861 (R.B.).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors written and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Bartoszewska, S., Sławski, J., Collawn, J.F. et al. Dual RNase activity of IRE1 as a target for anticancer therapies. J. Cell Commun. Signal. 17, 1145–1161 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12079-023-00784-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12079-023-00784-5