Twist1 suppresses senescence programs and thereby accelerates and maintains mutant Kras-induced lung tumorigenesis.

KRAS mutant lung cancers are generally refractory to chemotherapy as well targeted agents. To date, the identification of drugs to therapeutically inhibit K-RAS have been unsuccessful, suggesting that other approaches are required. We demonstrate in both a novel transgenic mutant Kras lung cancer mouse model and in human lung tumors that the inhibition of Twist1 restores a senescence program inducing the loss of a neoplastic phenotype. The Twist1 gene encodes for a transcription factor that is essential during embryogenesis. Twist1 has been suggested to play an important role during tumor progression. However, there is no in vivo evidence that Twist1 plays a role in autochthonous tumorigenesis. Through two novel transgenic mouse models, we show that Twist1 cooperates with Kras(G12D) to markedly accelerate lung tumorigenesis by abrogating cellular senescence programs and promoting the progression from benign adenomas to adenocarcinomas. Moreover, the suppression of Twist1 to physiological levels is sufficient to cause Kras mutant lung tumors to undergo senescence and lose their neoplastic features. Finally, we analyzed more than 500 human tumors to demonstrate that TWIST1 is frequently overexpressed in primary human lung tumors. The suppression of TWIST1 in human lung cancer cells also induced cellular senescence. Hence, TWIST1 is a critical regulator of cellular senescence programs, and the suppression of TWIST1 in human tumors may be an effective example of pro-senescence therapy.

Probing the role of CXC motif in chemokine CXCL8 for high affinity binding and activation of CXCR1 and CXCR2 receptors.

All chemokines share a common structural scaffold that mediate a remarkable variety of functions from immune surveillance to organogenesis. Chemokines are classified as CXC or CC on the basis of conserved cysteines, and the two subclasses bind distinct sets of GPCR class of receptors and also have markedly different quaternary structures, suggesting that the CXC/CC motif plays a prominent role in both structure and function. For both classes, receptor activation involves interactions between chemokine N-loop and receptor N-domain residues (Site-I), and between chemokine N-terminal and receptor extracellular/transmembrane residues (Site-II). We engineered a CC variant (labeled as CC-CXCL8) of the chemokine CXCL8 by deleting residue X (CXC → CC), and found its structure is essentially similar to WT. In stark contrast, CC-CXCL8 bound poorly to its cognate receptors CXCR1 and CXCR2 (K(i) > 1 µm). Further, CC-CXCL8 failed to mobilize Ca(2+) in CXCR2-expressing HL-60 cells or recruit neutrophils in a mouse lung model. However, most interestingly, CC-CXCL8 mobilizes Ca(2+) in neutrophils and in CXCR1-expressing HL-60 cells. Compared with the WT, CC-CXCL8 binds CXCR1 N-domain with only ∼5-fold lower affinity indicating that the weak binding to intact CXCR1 must be due to its weak binding at Site-II. Nevertheless, this level of binding is sufficient for receptor activation indicating that affinity and activity are separable functions. We propose that the CXC motif functions as a conformational switch that couples Site-I and Site-II interactions for both receptors, and that this coupling is critical for high affinity binding but differentially regulates activation.