The Effects of Receptor Activator of NF-κB Ligand-Binding Peptides on Bone Resorption and Bone Formation

Receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (RANKL)-binding peptides inhibit bone resorption and were recently shown to activate bone formation. The stimulatory mechanism underlying bone formation associated with these peptides was explained as RANKL-reverse signaling, wherein RANKL molecules on osteoblasts work as receptors to stimulate osteoblast differentiation. However, why RANKL-binding peptides stimulate osteoblast differentiation while osteoprotegerin (OPG), which is well known to bind to RANKL, cannot activate osteoblast differentiation has remained unclear. In this mini-review, we introduce three main issues: (1) The inhibitory effects of two RANKL-binding peptides (W9 and OP3-4) on bone resorption; (2) The stimulatory effects of the RANKL-binding peptides on osteoblast differentiation; and (3) The accumulation and membrane clustering of RANKL molecules at the cell surface of osteoblasts as a potential molecular switch stimulating osteoblast differentiation by RANKL-binding peptides.

Bifunctional Role of CrkL during Bone Remodeling

Coupled signaling between bone-forming osteoblasts and bone-resorbing osteoclasts is crucial to the maintenance of bone homeostasis. We previously reported that v-crk avian sarcoma virus CT10 oncogene homolog-like (CrkL), which belongs to the Crk family of adaptors, inhibits bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP2)-mediated osteoblast differentiation, while enhancing receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL)-induced osteoclast differentiation. In this study, we investigated whether CrkL can also regulate the coupling signals between osteoblasts and osteoclasts, facilitating bone homeostasis. Osteoblastic CrkL strongly decreased RANKL expression through its inhibition of runt-related transcription factor 2 (Runx2) transcription. Reduction in RANKL expression by CrkL in osteoblasts resulted in the inhibition of not only osteoblast-dependent osteoclast differentiation but also osteoclast-dependent osteoblast differentiation, suggesting that CrkL participates in the coupling signals between osteoblasts and osteoclasts via its regulation of RANKL expression. Therefore, CrkL bifunctionally regulates osteoclast differentiation through both a direct and indirect mechanism while it inhibits osteoblast differentiation through its blockade of both BMP2 and RANKL reverse signaling pathways. Collectively, these data suggest that CrkL is involved in bone homeostasis, where it helps to regulate the complex interactions of the osteoblasts, osteoclasts, and their coupling signals.

Glypiated FGF directs contact-mediated bidirectional signaling to self-regulate tissue-specific dispersion

ABSTRACTDuring development, a handful of signals sculpt diverse tissue architectures. How the same signal produces different tissue/context-specific information and outcomes is poorly understood. We explored the basis that programs tissue-specific FGF dispersion and interpretation by cytoneme-mediated contact-dependent communication. Although aDrosophilaFGF was thought to be freely secreted, we discovered that it is glypiated and GPI-anchored on the source cell surface, which inhibits non-specific secretion but facilitates tissue-specific cytoneme contact formation and contact-dependent release. For long-distance signaling, source and recipient cells extend FGF-containing and FGFR-containing cytonemes that contact and recognize each other by CAM-like receptor-ligand binding. FGF-FGFR binding reciprocally induces forward and reverse signaling in recipient and source cells, responses of which polarize their cytonemes toward each other to mutually self-sustain contacts. FGFR-bound FGF’s subsequent unanchoring hand-delivers FGF to receiving cytonemes and dissociates contacts. Thus, while cytonemes spatiotemporally control FGF dispersion/interpretation, FGF selfregulates its tissue-specific signaling by controlling cytonemes.

Ultrasound May Suppress Tumor Growth, Inhibit Inflammation, and Establish Tolerogenesis by Remodeling Innatome via Pathways of ROS, Immune Checkpoints, Cytokines, and Trained Immunity/Tolerance

Background. The immune mechanisms underlying low-intensity ultrasound- (LIUS-) mediated suppression of inflammation and tumorigenesis remain poorly determined. Methods. We used microarray datasets from the NCBI GEO DataSet repository and conducted comprehensive data-mining analyses, where we examined the gene expression of 1376 innate immune regulators (innatome genes (IGs) in cells treated with LIUS. Results. We made the following findings: (1) LIUS upregulates proinflammatory IGs and downregulates metastasis genes in cancer cells, and LIUS upregulates adaptive immunity pathways but inhibits danger-sensing and inflammation pathways and promote tolerogenic differentiation in bone marrow (BM) cells. (2) LIUS upregulates IGs encoded for proteins localized in the cytoplasm, extracellular space, and others, but downregulates IG proteins localized in nuclear and plasma membranes, and LIUS downregulates phosphatases. (3) LIUS-modulated IGs act partially via several important pathways of reactive oxygen species (ROS), reverse signaling of immune checkpoint receptors B7-H4 and BTNL2, inflammatory cytokines, and static or oscillatory shear stress and heat generation, among which ROS is a dominant mechanism. (4) LIUS upregulates trained immunity enzymes in lymphoma cells and downregulates trained immunity enzymes and presumably establishes trained tolerance in BM cells. (5) LIUS modulates chromatin long-range interactions to differentially regulate IGs expression in cancer cells and noncancer cells. Conclusions. Our analysis suggests novel molecular mechanisms that are utilized by LIUS to induce tumor suppression and inflammation inhibition. Our findings may lead to development of new treatment protocols for cancers and chronic inflammation.

Reverse Signaling by MHC-I Molecules in Immune and Non-Immune Cell Types

Major histocompatibility complex (MHC) molecules are well-known for their role in antigen (cross-) presentation, thereby functioning as key players in the communication between immune cells, for example dendritic cells (DCs) and T cells, or immune cells and their targets, such as T cells and virus-infected or tumor cells. However, much less appreciated is the fact that MHC molecules can also act as signaling receptors. In this process, here referred to as reverse MHC class I (MHC-I) signaling, ligation of MHC molecules can lead to signal-transduction and cell regulatory effects in the antigen presenting cell. In the case of MHC-I, reverse signaling can have several outcomes, including apoptosis, migration, induced or reduced proliferation and cytotoxicity towards target cells. Here, we provide an overview of studies showing the signaling pathways and cell outcomes upon MHC-I stimulation in various immune and non-immune cells. Signaling molecules like RAC-alpha serine/threonine-protein kinase (Akt1), extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 (ERK1/2), and nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) were common signaling molecules activated upon MHC-I ligation in multiple cell types. For endothelial and smooth muscle cells, the in vivo relevance of reverse MHC-I signaling has been established, namely in the context of adverse effects after tissue transplantation. For other cell types, the role of reverse MHC-I signaling is less clear, since aspects like the in vivo relevance, natural MHC-I ligands and the extended downstream pathways are not fully known.The existing evidence, however, suggests that reverse MHC-I signaling is involved in the regulation of the defense against bacterial and viral infections and against malignancies. Thereby, reverse MHC-I signaling is a potential target for therapies against viral and bacterial infections, cancer immunotherapies and management of organ transplantation outcomes.

The Pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidine-Based Kinase Inhibitor NVP-BHG712: Effects of Regioisomers on Tumor Growth, Perfusion, and Hypoxia in EphB4-Positive A375 Melanoma Xenografts

In a previous study, EphB4 was demonstrated to be a positive regulator of A375-melanoma growth but a negative regulator of tumor vascularization and perfusion. To distinguish between EphB4 forward and ephrinB2 reverse signaling, we used the commercially available EphB4 kinase inhibitor NVP-BHG712 (NVP), which was later identified as its regioisomer NVPiso. Since there have been reported significant differences between the inhibition profiles of NVP and NVPiso, we compared the influence of NVP and NVPiso on tumor characteristics under the same experimental conditions. Despite the different inhibitory profiles of NVP and NVPiso, the comparative study conducted here showed the same EphB4-induced effects in vivo as in the previous investigation. This confirmed the conclusion that EphB4-ephrinB2 reverse signaling is responsible for increased tumor growth as well as decreased tumor vascularization and perfusion. These results are further substantiated by microarrays showing differences between mock-transfected and EphB4-transfected (A375-EphB4) cells with respect to at least 9 angiogenesis-related proteins. Decreased expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), angiotensin 1 (Ang-1), and protein kinase B (Akt/PKB), together with the increased expression of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 (TIMP-1) and transforming growth factor beta-2 (TGF-β2), is consistent with the impaired vascularization of A375-EphB4 xenografts. Functional overexpression of EphB4 in A375-EphB4 cells was confirmed by activation of a variety of signaling pathways, including the Janus kinase/signal transducers and activators of transcription (JAK/STAT), rat sarcoma virus/rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma/mitogen activated protein kinase kinase (Ras/Raf/MEK), and nuclear factor kappa-B (NFkB) pathways.