Inducers of the endothelial cell barrier identified through chemogenomic screening in genome-edited hPSC-endothelial cells.

The blood-retina barrier and blood-brain barrier (BRB/BBB) are selective and semipermeable and are critical for supporting and protecting central nervous system (CNS)-resident cells. Endothelial cells (ECs) within the BRB/BBB are tightly coupled, express high levels of Claudin-5 (CLDN5), a junctional protein that stabilizes ECs, and are important for proper neuronal function. To identify novel CLDN5 regulators (and ultimately EC stabilizers), we generated a CLDN5-P2A-GFP stable cell line from human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs), directed their differentiation to ECs (CLDN5-GFP hPSC-ECs), and performed flow cytometry-based chemogenomic library screening to measure GFP expression as a surrogate reporter of barrier integrity. Using this approach, we identified 62 unique compounds that activated CLDN5-GFP. Among them were TGF-ß pathway inhibitors, including RepSox. When applied to hPSC-ECs, primary brain ECs, and retinal ECs, RepSox strongly elevated barrier resistance (transendothelial electrical resistance), reduced paracellular permeability (fluorescein isothiocyanate-dextran), and prevented vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGFA)-induced barrier breakdown in vitro. RepSox also altered vascular patterning in the mouse retina during development when delivered exogenously. To determine the mechanism of action of RepSox, we performed kinome-, transcriptome-, and proteome-profiling and discovered that RepSox inhibited TGF-ß, VEGFA, and inflammatory gene networks. In addition, RepSox not only activated vascular-stabilizing and barrier-establishing Notch and Wnt pathways, but also induced expression of important tight junctions and transporters. Taken together, our data suggest that inhibiting multiple pathways by selected individual small molecules, such as RepSox, may be an effective strategy for the development of better BRB/BBB models and novel EC barrier-inducing therapeutics.

Quantitative chemical proteomics profiling differentiates erlotinib from gefitinib in EGFR wild-type non-small cell lung carcinoma cell lines.

Although both erlotinib and gefitinib target the EGF receptor (EGFR), erlotinib is effective in patients with EGFR wild-type or mutated tumors, whereas gefitinib is only beneficial for patients with activating mutations. To determine whether these differences in clinical outcomes can be attributed to their respective protein interaction profiles, a label-free, quantitative chemical proteomics study was conducted. Using this method, 24 proteins were highlighted in the binding profiles of erlotinib and gefitinib. Unlike gefinitib, erlotinib displaced the ternary complex formed by integrin-linked kinase (ILK), α-parvin, and PINCH (IPP). The docking of erlotinib in the three-dimensional structure of ILK showed that erlotinib has the ability to bind to the ATP-binding site, whereas gefitinib is unlikely to bind with high affinity. As the IPP complex has been shown to be involved in epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) and erlotinib sensitivity has been correlated with EMT status, we used a cellular model of inducible transition and observed that erlotinib prevented EMT in a more efficient way than gefitinib by acting on E-cadherin expression as well as on IPP levels. A retrospective analysis of the MERIT trial indicated that, besides a high level of E-cadherin, a low level of ILK could be linked to clinical benefit with erlotinib. In conclusion, we propose that, in an EGFR wild-type context, erlotinib may have a complementary mode of action by inhibiting IPP complex activities, resulting in the slowing down of the metastatic process of epithelial tumors.