Eph Receptors and Ephrins Are Key Regulators of Morphogenesis

2000 ◽  
pp. 123-149
Author(s):  
N. Holder ◽  
L. Durbin ◽  
J. Cooke ◽  
Stephen Wilson
Keyword(s):  
2004 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 419-433 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanna Surawska ◽  
Patrick C. Ma ◽  
Ravi Salgia
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (15) ◽  
pp. 8098
Author(s):  
Abdul Shukkur Ebrahim ◽  
Zeyad Hailat ◽  
Sudeshna Bandyopadhyay ◽  
Daniel Neill ◽  
Mustapha Kandouz

Cell–cell communication proteins Eph and ephrin constitute the largest family of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs). They are distinguished by the fact that both receptors and ligands are membrane-bound, and both can drive intracellular signaling in their respective cells. Ever since these RTKs have been found to be involved in cancer development, strategies to target them therapeutically have been actively pursued. However, before this goal can be rationally achieved, the contributions of either Eph receptors or their ephrin ligands to cancer development and progression should be scrutinized in depth. To assess the clinical pertinence of this concern, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prognostic/predictive value of EphB2 and its multiple cognate ephrin ligands in breast cancer. We found that EphB2 has prognostic value, as indicated by the association of higher EphB2 expression levels with lower distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and the association of lower EphB2 expression levels with poorer relapse-free survival (RFS). We also found that higher EphB2 expression could be a prognostic factor for distant metastasis, specifically in the luminal subtypes of breast cancer. EFNB2 showed a marked correlation between higher expression levels and shorter DMFS. EFNA5 or EFNB1 overexpression is correlated with longer RFS. Increased EFNB1 expression is correlated with longer OS in lymph node (LN)-negative patients and the luminal B subtype. Higher levels of EFNB2 or EFNA5 are significantly correlated with shorter RFS, regardless of LN status. However, while this correlation with shorter RFS is true for EFNB2 in all subtypes except basal, it is also true for EFNA5 in all subtypes except HER2+. The analysis also points to possible predictive value for EphB2. In systemically treated patients who have undergone either endocrine therapy or chemotherapy, we found that higher expression of EphB2 is correlated with better rates of RFS. Bearing in mind the limitations inherent to any mRNA-based profiling method, we complemented our analysis with an immunohistochemical assessment of expression levels of both the EphB2 receptor and cognate ephrin ligands. We found that the latter are significantly more expressed in cancers than in normal tissues, and even more so in invasive and metastatic samples than in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Finally, in an in vitro cellular model of breast cancer progression, based on H-Ras-transformation of the MCF10A benign mammary cell line, we observed dramatic increases in the mRNA expression of EphB2 receptor and EFNB1 and EFNB2 ligands in transformed and invasive cells in comparison with their benign counterparts. Taken together, these data show the clinical validity of a model whereby EphB2, along with its cognate ephrin ligands, have dual anti- and pro-tumor progression effects. In so doing, they reinforce the necessity of further biological investigations into Ephs and ephrins, prior to using them in targeted therapies.


Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 700
Author(s):  
Mario Cioce ◽  
Vito Michele Fazio

The Eph receptors represent the largest group among Receptor Tyrosine kinase (RTK) families. The Eph/ephrin signaling axis plays center stage during development, and the deep perturbation of signaling consequent to its dysregulation in cancer reveals the multiplicity and complexity underlying its function. In the last decades, they have emerged as key players in solid tumors, including colorectal cancer (CRC); however, what causes EphA2 to switch between tumor-suppressive and tumor-promoting function is still an active theater of investigation. This review summarizes the recent advances in understanding EphA2 function in cancer, with detail on the molecular determinants of the oncogene-tumor suppressor switch function of EphA2. We describe tumor context-specific examples of EphA2 signaling and the emerging role EphA2 plays in supporting cancer—stem—cell-like populations and overcoming therapy-induced stress. In such a frame, we detail the interaction of the EphA2 and EGFR pathway in solid tumors, including colorectal cancer. We discuss the contribution of the EphA2 oncogenic signaling to the resistance to EGFR blocking agents, including cetuximab and TKIs.


1999 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis DM O'Leary ◽  
David G Wilkinson

Science ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 275 (5306) ◽  
pp. 1640-1643 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Bruckner ◽  
E. B. Pasquale ◽  
R. Klein

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria J Serrano ◽  
Symone San Miguel ◽  
Ashneet Sachar ◽  
Kathy Svoboda ◽  
M Douglas Benson
Keyword(s):  

2004 ◽  
Vol 164 (5) ◽  
pp. 661-666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabine H. Wimmer-Kleikamp ◽  
Peter W. Janes ◽  
Anthony Squire ◽  
Philippe I.H. Bastiaens ◽  
Martin Lackmann

Eph receptors and their cell membrane–bound ephrin ligands regulate cell positioning and thereby establish or stabilize patterns of cellular organization. Although it is recognized that ephrin clustering is essential for Eph function, mechanisms that relay information of ephrin density into cell biological responses are poorly understood. We demonstrate by confocal time-lapse and fluorescence resonance energy transfer microscopy that within minutes of binding ephrin-A5–coated beads, EphA3 receptors assemble into large clusters. While remaining positioned around the site of ephrin contact, Eph clusters exceed the size of the interacting ephrin surface severalfold. EphA3 mutants with compromised ephrin-binding capacity, which alone are incapable of cluster formation or phosphorylation, are recruited effectively and become phosphorylated when coexpressed with a functional receptor. Our findings reveal consecutive initiation of ephrin-facilitated Eph clustering and cluster propagation, the latter of which is independent of ephrin contacts and cytosolic Eph signaling functions but involves direct Eph–Eph interactions.


Development ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 127 (7) ◽  
pp. 1397-1410 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Imondi ◽  
C. Wideman ◽  
Z. Kaprielian

In the developing spinal cord, axons project in both the transverse plane, perpendicular to the floor plate, and in the longitudinal plane, parallel to the floor plate. For many axons, the floor plate is a source of long- and short-range guidance cues that govern growth along both dimensions. We show here that B-class transmembrane ephrins and their receptors are reciprocally expressed on floor plate cells and longitudinally projecting axons in the mouse spinal cord. During the period of commissural axon pathfinding, B-class ephrin protein is expressed at the lateral floor plate boundaries, at the interface between the floor plate and the ventral funiculus. In contrast, B-class Eph receptors are expressed on decussated commissural axon segments projecting within the ventral funiculus, and on ipsilaterally projecting axons constituting the lateral funiculus. Soluble forms of all three B-class ephrins bind to, and induce the collapse of, commissural growth cones in vitro. The collapse-inducing activity associated with B-class ephrins is likely to be mediated by EphB1. Taken together, these data support a possible role for repulsive B-class Eph receptor/ligand interactions in constraining the orientation of longitudinal axon projections at the ventral midline.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document