Plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 detaches cells from extracellular matrices by inactivating integrins.

The binding of urokinase plaminogen activator (uPA) to its cell surface receptor (uPAR; CD87) promotes cell adhesion by increasing the affinity of the receptor for both vitronectin (VN) and integrins. We provide evidence that plasminogen activator inhibitor (PAI)-1 can detach cells by disrupting uPAR-VN and integrin-VN interactions and that it does so by binding to the uPA present in uPA-uPAR-integrin complexes on the cell surface. The detached cells cannot reattach to VN unless their surface integrins are first activated by treatment with MnCl2. Immunoprecipitation and subcellular fractionation experiments reveal that PAI-1 treatment triggers deactivation and disengagement of uPA-uPAR-integrin complexes and their endocytic clearance by the low density lipoprotein receptor-related protein. Transfection experiments demonstrate that efficient cell detachment by PAI-1 requires an excess of matrix-engaged uPA-uPAR-integrin complexes over free engaged integrins and that changes in this ratio alter the efficacy of PAI-1. Together, these results suggest a VN-independent, uPA-uPAR-dependent mechanism by which PAI-1 induces cell detachment. This pathway may represent a general mechanism, since PAI-1 also can detach cells from fibronectin and type-1 collagen. This novel "deadhesive" activity of PAI-1 toward a variety of cells growing on different extracellular matrices may begin to explain why high PAI-1 levels often are associated with a poor prognosis in human metastatic disease.

The reduced, denatured somatomedin B domain of vitronectin refolds into a stable, biologically active molecule.

The high-affinity binding site in human vitronectin (VN) for plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) has been localized to the NH(2)-terminal cysteine-rich somatomedin B (SMB) domain (residues 1-44). A number of published structural and biochemical studies show conflicting results for the disulfide bonding pattern and the overall fold of the SMB domain, possibly because this domain may undergo disulfide shuffling and/or conformational changes during handling. Here we show that bacterially expressed recombinant SMB (rSMB) can be refolded to a single form that shows maximal activity in binding to PAI-1 and to a conformation-dependent monoclonal antibody (mAb 153). The oxidative refolding pathway of rSMB can be followed in the presence of glutathione redox buffers. This approach allowed the isolation and analysis of a number of intermediate folding species and of the final stably folded species at equilibrium. Competitive surface plasmon resonance analysis demonstrated that the stably refolded rSMB regained biological activity since it bound efficiently to PAI-1 and to mAb 153. In contrast, none of the folding intermediates bound to PAI-1 or to mAb 153. We also show by NMR analysis that the stably refolded rSMB is identical to the material used for the solution structure determination [Kamikubo et al. (2004) Biochemistry 43, 6519] and that it binds specifically to mAb 153 via an interface that includes the three aromatic side chains previously implicated in binding to PAI-1.

Kinetic analysis of the interaction between vitronectin and the urokinase receptor.

Although the urokinase receptor (uPAR) binds to vitronectin (VN) and promotes the adhesion of cells to this matrix protein, the biochemical details of this interaction remain unclear. VN variants were employed in BIAcore experiments to examine the uPAR-VN interaction in detail and to compare it to the interaction of VN with other ligands. Heparin and plasminogen bound to VN fragments containing the heparin-binding domain, indicating that this domain was functionally active in the recombinant peptides. However, no significant binding was detected when uPAR was incubated with this domain, and neither heparin nor plasminogen competed with it for binding to VN. In fact, uPAR only bound to fragments containing the somatomedin B (SMB) domain, and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that bind to this domain competed with uPAR for binding to VN. Monoclonal antibody 8E6 also inhibited uPAR binding to VN, and this mAb was shown to recognize sulfated tyrosine residues 56 and 59 in the region adjacent to the SMB domain. Destruction of this site by acid treatment eliminated mAb 8E6 binding but had no effect on uPAR binding. Thus, there appears to be a single binding site for uPAR in VN, and it is located in the SMB domain and is distinct from the epitope recognized by mAb 8E6. Inhibition of uPAR binding to VN by mAb 8E6 probably results from steric hindrance.