Refine
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (24)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Journal article (24)
Language
- English (24)
Keywords
- apoptosis (6)
- TNF (5)
- TNFR2 (5)
- cell death (5)
- Fn14 (3)
- NFκB (3)
- TNFR1 (3)
- TWEAK (3)
- death receptors (3)
- CD40 (2)
- TNF receptor superfamily (2)
- TNF superfamily (2)
- TRAF2 (2)
- TRAIL (2)
- antibody (2)
- antibody fusion proteins (2)
- cancer therapy (2)
- caspase-8 (2)
- cytokines (2)
- inflammation (2)
- multiple myeloma (2)
- necroptosis (2)
- necrotic cell death (2)
- regulatory T cells (2)
- 14.7K (1)
- AMPK (1)
- Alpha therapy (1)
- Autoimmune diseases (1)
- B cells (1)
- Bioluminescence (1)
- Bone marrow transplantantation (1)
- C1q/TNF related protein (CTRP) (1)
- CD40L (1)
- CD95 (1)
- Callyspongia siphonella (1)
- CysLTR1 (1)
- Cysteine‐Rich Domain (CRD) (1)
- E3 14.7-kilodalton protein (1)
- Expression (1)
- Factor receptor (1)
- FcγR receptor (1)
- GVHD (1)
- Graft-versus-leukemia (1)
- GvHD (1)
- HT29 cells (1)
- LC-HRESIMS (1)
- MDSC (1)
- NF-kappa-B (1)
- NFkappaB (1)
- Pre‐Ligand Assembly Domain (PLAD) (1)
- RAF1 (1)
- Regulatory-cells (1)
- Rheumatoid arthritis (1)
- Single‐Molecule Localization Microscopy (SMLM) (1)
- Suppression (1)
- T cells (1)
- TNF ligand superfamily (1)
- TNF receptor (TNFR) family (1)
- TNF receptor 2 (TNFR2) (1)
- TNF receptor associated factor 1 and 2 (TRAF1, TRAF2) (1)
- TNFR family costimulatory receptors (1)
- TNFR2 agonists (1)
- TNFR2 antagonism (1)
- TRAF1 (1)
- TRAILR1 (1)
- TRAILR2 (1)
- Tregs (regulatory T cells) (1)
- Tumor-necrosis-factor (1)
- adiponectin (1)
- agonist (1)
- agonistic antibodies (1)
- anti-TNFRSF receptor (TNFR) antibodies (1)
- antibacterial (1)
- antibiofilm (1)
- antibody fusion protein (1)
- anticancer (1)
- antitrypanosomal (1)
- binding (1)
- cancer (1)
- cancer treatment (1)
- cell cycle and cell division (1)
- cell metabolism (1)
- cell staining (1)
- cell viability testing (1)
- cells (1)
- compartmentalization (1)
- costimulation (1)
- cytokine storm (1)
- drug-delivery (1)
- gene expression (1)
- graft vs. host disease (1)
- immune cells (1)
- immune regulation (1)
- immunotherapy (1)
- inhibitor (1)
- metabolism (1)
- metabolomic profiling (1)
- metastasis (1)
- molecular medicine (1)
- myosin-VI (1)
- nanoparticles (1)
- oxindole alkaloids (1)
- phosphorylation (1)
- receptor cluster (1)
- regulatory T cell (1)
- regulatory T-cell (Treg) (1)
- ripk1 (1)
- ripk3 (1)
- serum retention (1)
- signal inhibition (1)
- signal transduction (1)
- small interfering RNAs (1)
- surface modification (1)
- tisindoline (1)
- tumor necrosis factor (1)
- tumor necrosis factor (TNF) (1)
Institute
- Abteilung für Molekulare Innere Medizin (in der Medizinischen Klinik und Poliklinik II) (24) (remove)
Sonstige beteiligte Institutionen
EU-Project number / Contract (GA) number
- 813871 (3)
Membrane lymphotoxin-α\(_2\)β is a novel tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor 2 (TNFR2) agonist
(2021)
In the early 1990s, it has been described that LTα and LTβ form LTα\(_2\)β and LTαβ\(_2\) heterotrimers, which bind to TNFR1 and LTβR, respectively. Afterwards, the LTαβ\(_2\)–LTβR system has been intensively studied while the LTα\(_2\)β–TNFR1 interaction has been ignored to date, presumably due to the fact that at the time of identification of the LTα\(_2\)β–TNFR1 interaction one knew already two ligands for TNFR1, namely TNF and LTα. Here, we show that LTα\(_2\)β interacts not only with TNFR1 but also with TNFR2. We furthermore demonstrate that membrane-bound LTα\(_2\)β (memLTα\(_2\)β), despite its asymmetric structure, stimulates TNFR1 and TNFR2 signaling. Not surprising in view of its ability to interact with TNFR2, LTα\(_2\)β is inhibited by Etanercept, which is approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and also inhibits TNF and LTα.
Tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) and its death receptors TRAILR1/death receptor 4 (DR4) and TRAILR2/DR5 trigger cell death in many cancer cells but rarely exert cytotoxic activity on non-transformed cells. Against this background, a variety of recombinant TRAIL variants and anti-TRAIL death receptor antibodies have been developed and tested in preclinical and clinical studies. Despite promising results from mice tumor models, TRAIL death receptor targeting has failed so far in clinical studies to show satisfying anti-tumor efficacy. These disappointing results can largely be explained by two issues: First, tumor cells can acquire TRAIL resistance by several mechanisms defining a need for combination therapies with appropriate sensitizing drugs. Second, there is now growing preclinical evidence that soluble TRAIL variants but also bivalent anti-TRAIL death receptor antibodies typically require oligomerization or plasma membrane anchoring to achieve maximum activity. This review discusses the need for oligomerization and plasma membrane attachment for the activity of TRAIL death receptor agonists in view of what is known about the molecular mechanisms of how TRAIL death receptors trigger intracellular cell death signaling. In particular, it will be highlighted which consequences this has for the development of next generation TRAIL death receptor agonists and their potential clinical application.
Tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) and its death receptors TRAILR1/death receptor 4 (DR4) and TRAILR2/DR5 trigger cell death in many cancer cells but rarely exert cytotoxic activity on non-transformed cells. Against this background, a variety of recombinant TRAIL variants and anti-TRAIL death receptor antibodies have been developed and tested in preclinical and clinical studies. Despite promising results from mice tumor models, TRAIL death receptor targeting has failed so far in clinical studies to show satisfying anti-tumor efficacy. These disappointing results can largely be explained by two issues: First, tumor cells can acquire TRAIL resistance by several mechanisms defining a need for combination therapies with appropriate sensitizing drugs. Second, there is now growing preclinical evidence that soluble TRAIL variants but also bivalent anti-TRAIL death receptor antibodies typically require oligomerization or plasma membrane anchoring to achieve maximum activity. This review discusses the need for oligomerization and plasma membrane attachment for the activity of TRAIL death receptor agonists in view of what is known about the molecular mechanisms of how TRAIL death receptors trigger intracellular cell death signaling. In particular, it will be highlighted which consequences this has for the development of next generation TRAIL death receptor agonists and their potential clinical application.
TNFR1 is a crucial regulator of NF‐ĸB‐mediated proinflammatory cell survival responses and programmed cell death (PCD). Deregulation of TNFα‐ and TNFR1‐controlled NF‐ĸB signaling underlies major diseases, like cancer, inflammation, and autoimmune diseases. Therefore, although being routinely used, antagonists of TNFα might also affect TNFR2‐mediated processes, so that alternative approaches to directly antagonize TNFR1 are beneficial. Here, we apply quantitative single‐molecule localization microscopy (SMLM) of TNFR1 in physiologic cellular settings to validate and characterize TNFR1 inhibitory substances, exemplified by the recently described TNFR1 antagonist zafirlukast. Treatment of TNFR1‐mEos2 reconstituted TNFR1/2 knockout mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) with zafirlukast inhibited both ligand‐independent preligand assembly domain (PLAD)‐mediated TNFR1 dimerization as well as TNFα‐induced TNFR1 oligomerization. In addition, zafirlukast‐mediated inhibition of TNFR1 clustering was accompanied by deregulation of acute and prolonged NF‐ĸB signaling in reconstituted TNFR1‐mEos2 MEFs and human cervical carcinoma cells. These findings reveal the necessity of PLAD‐mediated, ligand‐independent TNFR1 dimerization for NF‐ĸB activation, highlight the PLAD as central regulator of TNFα‐induced TNFR1 oligomerization, and demonstrate that TNFR1‐mEos2 MEFs can be used to investigate TNFR1‐antagonizing compounds employing single‐molecule quantification and functional NF‐ĸB assays at physiologic conditions.
With the exception of a few signaling incompetent decoy receptors, the receptors of the tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily (TNFRSF) are signaling competent and engage in signaling pathways resulting in inflammation, proliferation, differentiation, and cell migration and also in cell death induction. TNFRSF receptors (TNFRs) become activated by ligands of the TNF superfamily (TNFSF). TNFSF ligands (TNFLs) occur as trimeric type II transmembrane proteins but often also as soluble ligand trimers released from the membrane-bound form by proteolysis. The signaling competent TNFRs are efficiently activated by the membrane-bound TNFLs. The latter recruit three TNFR molecules, but there is growing evidence that this is not sufficient to trigger all aspects of TNFR signaling; rather, the formed trimeric TNFL–TNFR complexes have to cluster secondarily in the cell-to-cell contact zone for full TNFR activation. With respect to their response to soluble ligand trimers, the signaling competent TNFRs can be subdivided into two groups. TNFRs of one group, designated as category I TNFRs, are robustly activated by soluble ligand trimers. The receptors of a second group (category II TNFRs), however, failed to become properly activated by soluble ligand trimers despite high affinity binding. The limited responsiveness of category II TNFRs to soluble TNFLs can be overcome by physical linkage of two or more soluble ligand trimers or, alternatively, by anchoring the soluble ligand molecules to the cell surface or extracellular matrix. This suggests that category II TNFRs have a limited ability to promote clustering of trimeric TNFL–TNFR complexes outside the context of cell–cell contacts. In this review, we will focus on three aspects on the relevance of receptor oligomerization for TNFR signaling: (i) the structural factors which promote clustering of free and liganded TNFRs, (ii) the signaling pathway specificity of the receptor oligomerization requirement, and (iii) the consequences for the design and development of TNFR agonists.
Fibroblast growth factor-inducible 14 (Fn14) is a member of the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor superfamily (TNFRSF) and is activated by its ligand TNF-like weak inducer of apoptosis (TWEAK). The latter occurs as a homotrimeric molecule in a soluble and a membrane-bound form. Soluble TWEAK (sTWEAK) activates the weakly inflammatory alternative NF-κB pathway and sensitizes for TNF-induced cell death while membrane TWEAK (memTWEAK) triggers additionally robust activation of the classical NF-κB pathway and various MAP kinase cascades. Fn14 expression is limited in adult organisms but becomes strongly induced in non-hematopoietic cells by a variety of growth factors, cytokines and physical stressors (e.g., hypoxia, irradiation). Since all these Fn14-inducing factors are frequently also present in the tumor microenvironment, Fn14 is regularly found to be expressed by non-hematopoietic cells of the tumor microenvironment and most solid tumor cells. In general, there are three possibilities how the tumor-Fn14 linkage could be taken into consideration for tumor therapy. First, by exploitation of the cancer associated expression of Fn14 to direct cytotoxic activities (antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC), cytotoxic payloads, CAR T-cells) to the tumor, second by blockade of potential protumoral activities of the TWEAK/Fn14 system, and third, by stimulation of Fn14 which not only triggers proinflammtory activities but also sensitizes cells for apoptotic and necroptotic cell death. Based on a brief description of the biology of the TWEAK/Fn14 system and Fn14 signaling, we discuss the features of the most relevant Fn14-targeting biologicals and review the preclinical data obtained with these reagents. In particular, we address problems and limitations which became evident in the preclinical studies with Fn14-targeting biologicals and debate possibilities how they could be overcome.
An intricate network of molecular and cellular actors orchestrates the delicate balance between effector immune responses and immune tolerance. The pleiotropic cytokine tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF) proves as a pivotal protagonist promoting but also suppressing immune responses. These opposite actions are accomplished through specialist cell types responding to TNF via TNF receptors TNFR1 and TNFR2. Recent findings highlight the importance of TNFR2 as a key regulator of activated natural FoxP3+ regulatory T cells (Tregs) in inflammatory conditions, such as acute graft-vs.-host disease (GvHD) and the tumor microenvironment. Here we review recent advances in our understanding of TNFR2 signaling in T cells and discuss how these can reconcile seemingly conflicting observations when manipulating TNF and TNFRs. As TNFR2 emerges as a new and attractive target we furthermore pinpoint strategies and potential pitfalls for therapeutic targeting of TNFR2 for cancer treatment and immune tolerance after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation.
Multiple myeloma (MM), a malignancy of the bone marrow, is characterized by a pathological increase in antibody-producing plasma cells and an increase in immunoglobulins (plasmacytosis). In recent years, bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) have been reported to be activators of apoptotic cell death in neoplastic B cells in MM. Here, we use bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP2) to show that the "apoptotic" effect of BMPs on human neoplastic B cells is dominated by anti-proliferative activities and cell cycle arrest and is apoptosis-independent. The anti-proliferative effect of BMP2 was analysed in the human cell lines KMS12-BM and L363 using WST-1 and a Coulter counter and was confirmed using CytoTox assays with established inhibitors of programmed cell death (zVAD-fmk and necrostatin-1). Furthermore, apoptotic activity was compared in both cell lines employing western blot analysis for caspase 3 and 8 in cells treated with BMP2 and FasL. Additionally, expression profiles of marker genes of different cell death pathways were analysed in both cell lines after stimulation with BMP2 for 48h using an RT-PCR-based array. In our experiments we observed that there was rather no reduction in absolute cell number, but cells stopped proliferating following treatment with BMP2 instead. The time frame (48–72 h) after BMP2 treatment at which a reduction in cell number is detectable is too long to indicate a directly BMP2-triggered apoptosis. Moreover, in comparison to robust apoptosis induced by the approved apoptotic factor FasL, BMP2 only marginally induced cell death. Consistently, neither the known inhibitor of apoptotic cell death zVAD-fmk nor the necroptosis inhibitor necrostatin-1 was able to rescue myeloma cell growth in the presence of BMP2.
Multiple myeloma (MM) displays an NFκB activity-related gene expression signature and about 20% of primary MM samples harbor genetic alterations conducive to intrinsic NFκB signaling activation. The relevance of blocking the classical versus the alternative NFκB signaling pathway and the molecular execution mechanisms involved, however, are still poorly understood. Here, we comparatively tested NFκB activity abrogation through TPCA-1 (an IKK2 inhibitor), BAY 11-7082 (an IKK inhibitor poorly selective for IKK1 and IKK2), and MLN4924 (an NEDD8 activating enzyme (NAE)-inhibitor), and analyzed their anti-MM activity. Whereas TPCA-1 interfered selectively with activation of the classical NFκB pathway, the other two compounds inhibited classical and alternative NFκB signaling without significant discrimination. Noteworthy, whereas TPCA-1 and MLN4924 elicited rather mild anti-MM effects with slight to moderate cell death induction after 1 day BAY 11-7082 was uniformly highly toxic to MM cell lines and primary MM cells. Treatment with BAY 11-7082 induced rapid cell swelling and its initial effects were blocked by necrostatin-1 or the ROS scavenger BHA, but a lasting protective effect was not achieved even with additional blockade of caspases. Because MLN4924 inhibits the alternative NFκB pathway downstream of IKK1 at the level of p100 processing, the quite discordant effects between MLN4924 and BAY 11-7082 must thus be due to blockade of IKK1-mediated NFκB-independent necrosis-inhibitory functions or represent an off-target effect of BAY 11-7082. In accordance with the latter, we further observed that concomitant knockdown of IKK1 and IKK2 did not have any major short-term adverse effect on the viability of MM cells.
Soluble tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-like weak inducer of apoptosis (TWEAK), in contrast to membrane TWEAK and TNF, is only a weak activator of the classical NFκB pathway. We observed that soluble TWEAK was regularly more potent than TNF with respect to the induction of TNF receptor-associated factor 1 (TRAF1), a NFκB-controlled signaling protein involved in the regulation of inflammatory signaling pathways. TNF-induced TRAF1 expression was efficiently blocked by inhibition of the classical NFκB pathway using the IKK2 inhibitor, TPCA1. In contrast, in some cell lines, TWEAK-induced TRAF1 production was only partly inhibited by TPCA1. The NEDD8-activating enzyme inhibitor MLN4924, however, which inhibits classical and alternative NFκB signaling, blocked TNF- and TWEAK-induced TRAF1 expression. This suggests that TRAF1 induction by soluble TWEAK is based on the cooperative activity of the two NFκB signaling pathways. We have previously shown that oligomerization of soluble TWEAK results in ligand complexes with membrane TWEAK-like activity. Oligomerization of soluble TWEAK showed no effect on the dose response of TRAF1 induction, but potentiated the ability of soluble TWEAK to trigger production of the classical NFκB-regulated cytokine IL8. Transfectants expressing soluble TWEAK and membrane TWEAK showed similar induction of TRAF1 while only the membrane TWEAK expressing cells robustly stimulated IL8 production. These data indicate that soluble TWEAK may efficiently induce a distinct subset of the membrane TWEAK-targeted genes and argue again for a crucial role of classical NFκB pathway-independent signaling in TWEAK-induced TRAF1 expression. Other TWEAK targets, which can be equally well induced by soluble and membrane TWEAK, remain to be identified and the relevance of the ability of soluble TWEAK to induce such a distinct subset of membrane TWEAK-targeted genes for TWEAK biology will have to be clarified in future studies.