Prepublished online as a Blood First Edition Paper on October 24, 2002; DOI 10.1182/blood-2002-07-2034.
Previous Article | Table of Contents | Next Article 
Blood, 15 February 2003, Vol. 101, No. 4, pp. 1336-1343
HEMATOPOIESIS
The peripheral cannabinoid receptor Cb2, a novel oncoprotein,
induces a reversible block in neutrophilic
differentiation
Meritxell Alberich Jordà,
Bob Löwenberg, and
Ruud Delwel
From The Institute for Hematology, Erasmus Medical
Center, The Netherlands.
 |
Abstract |
We previously identified a novel common virus integration
site, Evi11, by means of retroviral insertional
mutagenesis. We demonstrated that the gene encoding the peripheral
cannabinoid receptor (Cb2) is the potential target,
suggesting that Cb2 is a proto-oncogene. To elucidate a
role for this G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) in leukemic
transformation we generated a Cb2-EGFP cDNA construct that
was introduced into 32D/G-CSF-R cells. These cells require interleukin
3 (IL-3) to proliferate in vitro, whereas in the presence of
granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) they differentiate
toward mature neutrophils. We demonstrate that 32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP
cells migrate in a transwell assay in reponse to the Cb2 ligand
2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG), indicating that the fusion protein was
functional. When cultured in the presence of G-CSF neutrophilic
differentiation of Cb2-EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R cells was
completely blocked. Moreover, a Cb2-specific antagonist fully recovered
the G-CSF-induced neutrophilic differentiation of 32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP
cells. To investigate which signal transduction pathway(s) may be
involved in the block of neutrophilic maturation, differentiation
experiments were carried out using specific inhibitors of signaling
routes. Interestingly, full rescue of G-CSF-induced neutrophilic
differentiation was observed when cells were cultured with the
mitogen-induced extracellular kinase (MEK) inhibitors, PD98059 or
U0126, and partial recovery was detected with the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3-K) inhibitor LY-294002. These studies demonstrate that
the Cb2 receptor is an oncoprotein that blocks neutrophilic differentiation when overexpressed in myeloid precursor cells. Cb2
appears to mediate its activity through MEK/extracellular signal-related kinase (ERK) and PI3-K pathways.
(Blood. 2003;101:1336-1343)
© 2003 by The American Society of Hematology.
 |
Introduction |
Cb2, the gene encoding the peripheral
cannabinoid receptor, has previously been identified as a common virus
integration site (cVIS) in retrovirally induced leukemias, suggesting
that it is a proto-oncogene.1,2 The peripheral as well as
the central cannabinoid receptor (Cb1) are 7 transmembrane proteins and
belong to the family of G protein-coupled receptors
(GPCRs).3,4 Previous studies have shown that the rank
order of Cb2 mRNA in hematopoietic cells is as follows: B
cells > natural killer cells > monocytes > neutrophils > T8 cells > T4 cells.5,6
Moreover, we and others have shown that Cb2 protein is normally
expressed in areas enriched for B lymphocytes, that is, in the
marginal zone of the spleen, the cortex of lymph nodes, the nodular
corona of Peyer patches, and the mantle zones of secondary follicles in
tonsils3,6-8 (N. Rayman and R.D., unpublished
observation, June 2002). We recently described a role of the Cb2
receptor in migration of hematopoietic cells.9 Using
transwell assays we observed strong migration of Cb2-expressing spleen
cells in response to 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG), the endogenous
ligand for the Cb2 receptor. This migration could be completely
abolished by a Cb2-specific antagonist, SR144528, whereas the
Cb1-specific antagonist SR141716 had no effect. Immunophenotyping
revealed that the 2-AG-responding cells express B220, CD19,
immunoglobulin M (IgM), and IgD, suggesting a role for this GPCR in
chemoattraction, mobilization, and/or activation of splenic B
lymphocytes during the immune response.9
In acute myeloid leukemia (AML), immature myeloid precursor cells
accumulate in marrow and blood (for review see Lowenberg et
al10). Although several genes involved in leukemia
development have been identified by cloning of breakpoints at
chromosomal translocations,11-13 little is known about the
genetic defects and aberrant signaling causing a block of myeloid
differentiation. Retroviral insertional mutagenesis has been
extensively used by different research groups in the past 2 decades and
several novel disease genes involved in leukemia and lymphoma
development have been identified by means of this
procedure.2,14-17 Our previous observation that the
Cb2 gene is a frequent proviral target in Cas-Br-M
MuLV-induced myeloid leukemias suggests a role for this receptor in
myeloid transformation.1,2,18
In the present study we investigated whether overexpression of the Cb2
receptor in myeloid precursor cells could interfere with neutrophilic
development, the major characteristic of myeloid leukemia. For this
purpose we generated a Cb2-EGFP fusion construct that was cloned into the viral vector pLNCX and introduced into cells
from the 32D/G-CSF receptor (32D/G-CSF-R) cell line. This cell
system has been demonstrated to be a powerful in vitro model to study
the molecular mechanisms involved in granulocytic
differentiation.19-21 32D/G-CSF-R cells proliferate in
vitro in the presence of interleukin 3 (IL-3) and are capable of fully
differentiating toward mature neutrophils upon
granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) stimulation. Cb2
expression levels are low in the 32D/G-CSF-R cells, as has been shown
by radiolabeled ligand binding studies.9 To determine
exogenous Cb2 protein levels, Cb2-EGFP fusion constructs were generated and transfected into 32D/G-CSF-R cells. After
demonstrating that the Cb2-EGFP fusion protein was expressed on the
surface membrane of 32D/G-CSF-R cells and fully functional, we
investigated whether overexpression of Cb2 could affect G-CSF-induced
neutrophilic differentiation. We studied whether activation of the
receptor by agonists or inactivation by antagonists could influence
neutrophilic development. Using specific signal transduction
inhibitors, we investigated through which intracellular signaling
pathway Cb2 might alter normal development. We demonstrate that (1)
G-CSF-induced granulocytic differentiation of 32D/G-CSF-R is fully
blocked by Cb2-EGFP overexpression, (2) addition of the Cb2-specific
antagonist SR144528 fully recovers neutrophilic differentiation, and
(3) the differentiation arrest conferred by the Cb2 receptor may
involve activation of MEK/ERK (mitogen-induced extracellular
kinase/extracellular signal-related kinase) and phosphoinositide
3-kinase (PI3-K) signaling routes.
 |
Materials and methods |
Cannabinoid ligands, cytokines, and inhibitors of
intracellular signaling
The Cb2 cannabinoid ligand 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG) was
obtained from Sigma (Zwijndrecht, The Netherlands). Cb1-specific antagonist SR141716 and Cb2-specific antagonist SR144528 were kindly
donated by Dr Casellas (Sanofi Recherche, Montpellier, France). Murine
IL-3 was obtained from an IL-3-producing Chinese hamster ovary (CHO)
cell line and G-CSF was from Amgen (Thousand Oaks, CA). Dibutyryl
cyclic adenosine monophosphate (AMP) (dbcAMP), LY-294002 (PI3-K
inhibitor), SB203580 (p38/MAPK [mitogen-activated protein kinase]
inhibitor), and U0126 (MEK inhibitor) were from Kordia Life Science
(Leiden, The Netherlands), whereas PD98059 (MEK inhibitor) was obtained
from Omnilabo International (Breda, The Netherlands). The inhibitors
were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and added to the cultures
at concentrations indicated and refreshed daily.
In vitro proliferation and neutrophilic differentiation of
32D/G-CSF-R cells
The 32D/G-CSF-R cell line19 was cultured in RPMI
1640 medium (Life Technologies, Breda, The Netherlands) supplemented
with penicillin (100 IU/mL), streptomycin (100 ng/mL), 10% fetal calf serum (FCS), and murine IL-3 (10 ng/mL) or human G-CSF (100 ng/mL). Cell counting was performed using a CASY1/TTC cell counter
(Schärfe System, Reutlingen, Germany) and the cell
density was readjusted to 2 × 105 cells/mL daily.
Morphologic analysis was determined by microscopy on
May-Grünwald-Giemsa-stained cytospins (Shandon Holland,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands).
Cb2-EGFP expression construct and infection of
32D/G-CSF-R cells
The primers 5'-CAAAGCCCATCCATGGAG-3' and
5'-AAGGATCCGTGGTTTTCACATCAG-3' were used to amplify the coding region
of Cb2, mutate the TAG stop codon, and introduce a
BamHI restriction site at the 3' end. The polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) product was cloned in TA vector and subcloned as an
EcoRI/BamHI fragment into pEGFP-N1. Cb2-EGFP fusion construct was obtained by
Eco47III/NotI digestion of this latter construct
and cloned as a blunt fragment into the HpaI site of pLNCX
(Clontech, Palo Alto, CA). The Cb2-EGFP fusion construct was
verified by nucleotide sequencing. The expression constructs were
transfected into type E Phoenix cells (gift from G. Nolan, Stanford,
CA) and the viral supernatants were used for infection of 32D/G-CSF-R
cells. Single clones were obtained using limiting dilution in 96-well
microtiter trays (Becton Dickinson, Mountain View, CA) and infected
clones were selected on 0.8 mg/mL G418 (Gibco, Breda, The Netherlands).
To determine Cb2-EGFP mRNA expression, Northern blot
analysis was performed.2 Blots were hybridized using a
NotI/EcoRI enhanced green fluorescence protein (EGFP) cDNA probe of 760 bp. Cb2-EGFP fusion protein expression was
analyzed by Leica DMRXA microscopy (Leica Microsystems, Rijswijk, The
Netherlands) and flow cytometric analysis of EGFP fluorescence (Figure
1).

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 1.
Cb2-EGFP and EGFP expression in 32D/G-CSF-R cells.
Flow cytometric analysis of a 32D/G-CSF-R clone overexpressing
Cb2-EGFP and a 32D/G-CSF-R control clone overexpressing EGFP. Upper
right inserts show cell fluorescence distribution in the transfected
cells by microscopy. Original magnification of insets
× 63.
|
|
Flow cytometric analysis
32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP and 32D/G-CSF-R/EGFP clones were analyzed
by flow cytometric analysis (FACScan flow cytometer, Becton Dickinson).
Cells (1 × 106) were washed twice with phosphate
buffered saline (PBS) and resuspended in 500 µL Hanks balanced salt
solution (HBSS) containing 0.5% bovine serum albumin (BSA). Dead cells
were excluded from the analysis by addition of 7-AAD
(7-aminoactinomycin D; Eugene, Leiden, The Netherlands). EGFP
fluorescence was determined and the amount of protein was related to
the peak channel (Figure 1).
Migration assay
Migration assays were performed using 5-µm pore size and
6.5-mm diameter transwells (Corning Costar, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) as previously described.9 In brief, cells were washed
twice with HBSS medium, resuspended in 100 µL of migration medium
(Iscoves modified Dulbecco medium [IMDM] plus 0.5% BSA) and placed
in the upper chamber of the transwells. In the lower chamber, 600 µL migration medium with or without 300 nM 2-AG was placed. After 4 hours
of incubation at 37°C and 5% CO2, the upper chamber was removed and the numbers of migrated cells were determined using a
CASY1/TTC cell counter (Schärfe System). Cb1- and Cb2-specific antagonists (100 nM) were added to the upper chamber when tested.
Tritiated thymidine (3H-TdR) incorporation
assay
DNA synthesis was determined by tritiated thymidine
(3H-TdR) incorporation as described before.22
Briefly, 1 × 104 cells were incubated in 100 µL RPMI
1640 medium supplemented with 10% FCS, murine IL-3 (10 ng/mL) or human
G-CSF (100 ng/mL), and in the presence or absence of 2-AG (300 nM),
Cb1- or Cb2-specific antagonist (100 nM). A quantity of 0.25 µCi
(0.00925 MBq) 3H-TdR (Amersham International,
Amersham, United Kingdom) was added to each well 4 hours before cell
harvesting. Cells were harvested on nitrocellulose using a filtermate
196 harvester (Packard Instruments, Meriden, CT) and
3H-TdR incorporation was measured by Topcount liquid
scintillation counter (Packard Instruments).
 |
Results |
32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP cells migrate in response to the natural
Cb2 ligand 2-AG
32D/G-CSF-R cells were infected with retrovirus carrying
Cb2-EGFP or EGFP constructs. Following G418
selection, 8 Cb2-EGFP- and 4 EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R clones were
obtained. Expression of Cb2-EGFP or EGFP RNA in
those 32D/G-CSF-R-transfected cells was demonstrated by Northern blot
analysis (data not shown). Cb2-EGFP and EGFP protein expression was
assessed by means of fluorescence microscopy and flow cytometric
analysis. Figure 1 shows 2 representative clones. Although high levels
of EGFP were present in both clone types, membrane fluorescence was
only observed on Cb2-EGFP-expressing cells (Figure 1, inserts).
To investigate whether the Cb2-EGFP fusion protein had retained the
normal Cb2 function, migration assays were performed. Figure
2A shows that the 8 32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP
clones migrate with high efficiency following 2-AG exposure, whereas
the 4 EGFP control clones did not migrate in response to 2-AG. The
migration levels of the Cb2-EGFP-expressing clones are comparable to
those observed previously using Cb2-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R
cells.9 Moreover, 2-AG-induced migration could be
completely blocked by the addition of Cb2-specific antagonist SR144528
to the upper chamber in a transwell assay, whereas the Cb1-specific
antagonist SR141716 had no effect (Figure 2B). These experiments
indicate that EGFP fused to the C-terminus of Cb2 does not interfere
with the normal function of the peripheral cannabinoid receptor.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 2.
In vitro migration of Cb2-EGFP-expressing cells
following 2-AG stimulation.
(A) Cb2-EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R cells (clones 1-8) and EGFP
control 32D/G-CSF-R cells (clones 9-12) were exposed to 300 nM 2-AG (+)
or nothing ( ) in a transwell assay. The y-axis shows percentage of
migration from an input of 2 × 105 cells. (B) Effect of
the Cb1-specific antagonist SR141716 (C1) or Cb2-specific antagonist
SR155528 (C2) on 2-AG-induced migration of 3 Cb2-EGFP-expressing
clones (nos. 2, 5, and 7) and 2 EGFP control clones (nos. 10 and 12).
The y-axis shows percentage of migration from an input of
2 × 105 cells.
|
|
Overexpression of Cb2-EGFP in 32D/G-CSF-R cells blocks
G-CSF-induced neutrophilic differentiation
To study whether overexpression of the Cb2 receptor in
32D/G-CSF-R cells affects neutrophilic development, 8 Cb2-EGFP-expressing clones and 4 EGFP control clones were cultured in
the presence of G-CSF. Morphologic analysis showed a complete block of
neutrophilic differentiation of 32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP clones cultured
with G-CSF (Figure 3A). Differential
countings on day 9 of culture revealed that the majority of these cells
presented a blastlike morphology (Figure 3B). In contrast,
EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R control cells fully matured toward
neutrophilic granulocytes in response to G-CSF (Figure 3A-B). Flow
cytometric analysis revealed high Cb2-EGFP or EGFP fluorescence during
the 9 days of culture in the presence of G-CSF (data not
shown).

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 3.
G-CSF-induced differentiation response of Cb2-EGFP- and
EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R clones.
(A) There were 8 Cb2-EGFP-expressing clones and 4 EGFP control clones
cultured for 9 days in the presence of G-CSF (see "Materials and
methods"). The y-axis shows the percentage of neutrophils and the
x-axis shows the days of culture. (B) Differential countings of 4 Cb2-EGFP-expressing clones and 4 EGFP control clones at day 9 of G-CSF
culture. White represents blast cells, black represents intermediately
matured granulocytic forms, and gray indicates terminally
differentiated neutrophilic granulocytes.
|
|
Strikingly, the maturation arrest of 32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP cells already
occurred without the addition of Cb2 ligand. Inclusion of 2-AG to the
G-CSF-supplemented cultures had no additional effect on granulocytic
differentiation (data not shown).
Cb2-specific antagonist reestablishes G-CSF-induced
neutrophilic differentiation of Cb2-EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R
clones
We next studied whether interfering with the Cb2 receptor using
the cannabinoid antagonists would restore the neutrophilic differentiation of Cb2-EGFP-expressing clones. The Cb2-specific antagonist SR144528 was added at different concentrations to
G-CSF-supplemented cultures in 2 different Cb2-EGFP clones. One
representative experiment is shown in Figure
4A, demonstrating that 1 nM of the
Cb2-specific antagonist was already capable of partially restoring
differentiation of Cb2-EGFP-overexpressing cells, whereas higher
concentrations resulted in a complete recovery of neutrophilic
differentiation of these cells.

View larger version (48K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 4.
Effect of the Cb2-specific antagonist SR144528 on
G-CSF-induced differentiation.
(A) Cb2-specific antagonist titration experiment when added to the
G-CSF cultures in differentiation assays. Countings were carried out at
day 9 of culture. (B) Effect of Cb1-specific (C1) and Cb2-specific (C2)
antagonist (100 nM) on 2 Cb2-EGFP and 2 EGFP clones cultured for 9 days
in the presence of G-CSF (G). White represents blast cells, black
represents intermediate forms, and gray indicates
neutrophils.
|
|
All 8 32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP clones, of which 2 are shown in Figure
4B and Figure 5, revealed a complete
recovery of neutrophilic differentiation when cultured with G-CSF and
100 nM of Cb2-specific antagonist SR144528. In contrast, the
Cb1-specific antagonist SR141716 (100 nM) did not restore granulocytic
maturation of 32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP cells (Figures 4B, 5). Neither Cb1-
nor Cb2-specific antagonists exerted differentiation-inducing effects
on EGFP-expressing control clones (Figures 4B, 5).

View larger version (50K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 5.
Cell morphology of 32D/G-CSF-R cells cultured in different conditions.
Morphologic analysis of 2 Cb2-EGFP-expressing clones and 2 EGFP
control clones cultured for 9 days in the presence of G-CSF, G-CSF plus
Cb1-specific antagonist, or G-CSF plus Cb2-specific antagonist.
Original magnifications × 63.
|
|
The G-CSF-induced proliferative response of
Cb2-EGFP- expressing 32D/G-CSF-R cells is slightly altered
Since Cb2-EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R clones are blocked in
neutrophilic differentiation, we wondered whether the blasts that accumulate when cultured with G-CSF still had proliferative capacity. Although the 8 Cb2-EGFP-expressing and the 4 EGFP-expressing
32D/G-CSF-R clones show a similar G-CSF proliferative curve, the data
suggest that Cb2-EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R clones stop growing at a later time point than control clones (Figure
6A). Indeed, 3H-TdR
incorporation experiments carried out with cells harvested at day 7 of
G-CSF culture showed that Cb2-EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R clones were
still proliferating, whereas EGFP-expressing clones were not (Figure
6B). Moreover, Cb2-EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R cells cultured with
G-CSF plus the Cb2-specific antagonist SR1445283 harvested at day 7 behaved like EGFP-transfected control cells; that is, they did not
incorporate 3H-TdR. The same cells cultured in the presence
of the Cb1-specific antagonist SR141716 did not lose their
proliferative response (data not shown). Cells from
Cb2-EGFP-expressing or control clones harvested at day 8 or 9 of
culture in the presence of G-CSF did not show any 3H-TdR
incorporation (data not shown).

View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 6.
G-CSF and IL-3 proliferative response of Cb2-EGFP- and EGFP-expressing
32D/G-CSF-R clones.
(A) Different proliferation curves of 8 Cb2-EGFP-expressing clones and
4 EGFP control clones stimulated with G-CSF. The y-axis indicates the
number of cells × 105/mL. (B) [3H]-TdR
incorporation of Cb2-EGFP-expressing cells or EGFP control cells at
day 7 of culture in G-CSF (G) with or without the Cb2-specific
antagonist (C2). The y-axis represents [3H]-TdR
incorporation in counts per minute. (C) Proliferation curves of 8 Cb2-EGFP- and 4 EGFP-expressing clones stimulated with IL-3 during 9 days of culture. The y-axis indicates the number of
cells × 105/mL.
|
|
No significant differences were found in the IL-3 response of
Cb2-EGFP-expressing clones versus EGFP-expressing clones (Figure 6C).
No effect of 2-AG or of the antagonists was observed on the IL-3-induced proliferative response of Cb2-EGFP- or EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R clones (data not shown).
A potent Cb2 agonist is present in the culture medium
The 2-AG, a potent Cb2 ligand, is usually required to induce
migration of Cb2-expressing cells (Figure 2 and Alberich Jorda et
al9). However, the addition of 2-AG was not required in the G-CSF-containing cultures to block G-CSF-induced neutrophilic differentiation. We hypothesized that a ligand activating the Cb2
receptor had been present in the cultures. This potent agonist could
either have been present in the serum added to the cultures or
endogenously produced by the cells (autocrine stimulation). To test
whether the serum contained a Cb2-specific agonist, we assessed the
effect of the culture medium on migration of 32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP cells. Cb2-EGFP-expressing cells showed a significant migration when
RPMI plus 10% FCS was added to the lower chamber in a transwell assay
(Figure 7). Moreover, this migration
could be completely blocked by addition of Cb2-specific antagonist
SR1445283 to the upper well, but not by addition of the Cb1-specific
antagonist SR141716 (Figure 7).

View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 7.
Effect of FCS on migration of Cb2-EGFP-expressing
32D/G-CSF-R cells.
32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP cells were exposed to RPMI medium containing or
not containing serum during a transwell assay. A quantity of 100 nM of
Cb1- or Cb2-specific antagonist was placed in the upper well. The
y-axis indicates the percentage of migration from an input of
2 × 105 cells.
|
|
Transwell experiments using conditioned medium obtained from
serum-free cultures of the different 32D/G-CSF-R clones showed no
migration of Cb2-EGFP-expressing cells (data not shown). These data
indicate that the block of neutrophilic differentiation of 32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP cells was caused by a potent Cb2 agonist, which
was present in the serum used for these cultures.
Inhibitors of the MEK/ERK and PI3-kinase pathways restore
neutrophilic differentiation of Cb2-EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R
cells
To determine which signal transduction pathway(s) may be involved
in the Cb2 receptor-mediated block of neutrophilic differentiation we
investigated the effect of distinct small molecules capable of
interfering with specific signaling routes. Interestingly, addition of
the MEK inhibitors, 10 µM U0126, or 25 µM PD98059, fully restore
the G-CSF-induced neutrophilic differentiation of Cb2-EGFP-expressing
32D/G-CSF-R cells (Figure 8).

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 8.
Effect of signal transduction pathway inhibitors on the G-CSF
differentiation response of 32D/G-CSF cells.
(A) Cb2-EGFP-expressing cells and EGFP control cells were cultured for
9 days in the presence of G-CSF plus U0126 (U) or PD98059
(PD). At the y-axis the percentage of neutrophils is shown,
and at the x-axis the day of culture is indicated. (B) Morphologic
analysis of a Cb2-EGFP-expressing clone and an EGFP control clone
cultured in the presence of G-CSF plus PD98059, U0126, LY-294002, or
dbcAMP. Pictures were taken at day 8 of culture except for incubations
with U0126 (day 6). Original magnifications × 63.
|
|
Furthermore, the PI3-kinase inhibitor LY-294002 (5 µM) was
capable of partially recovering maturation of these cells when cultured
with G-CSF (Figure 8B). On the other hand, SB203580 (5 µM), an
inhibitor of p38/MAPK, had no promoting effect on neutrophilic differentiation (data not shown). We also investigated whether Cb2
interferes with differentiation via a protein kinase A
(PKA)-dependent signaling mechanism. Addition of dbcAMP (100 µM) to
the G-CSF cultures did not influence maturation of 32D/G-CSF-R/Cb2-EGFP clones (Figure 8B). The data suggest that the block of neutrophilic differentiation in myeloid precursor cells caused by the Cb2 receptor may involve activation of both the MEK/ERK and PI3-K pathways.
 |
Discussion |
We previously described that the gene encoding for the peripheral
cannabinoid receptor Cb2 is located in a common virus integration site
(Evi11) in murine myeloid leukemia, indicating that aberrant expression of this GPCR may be a critical event in leukemia
development.1,2 However, by which mechanism this GPCR may
be involved in leukemic transformation has remained elusive. The
objective of the present study was to determine the effect of Cb2
overexpression in myeloid precursor cells. We demonstrate here that
overexpression of Cb2-EGFP completely suppresses G-CSF-induced
neutrophilic differentiation of 32D/G-CSF-R cells. The addition of the
Cb2-specific antagonist fully recovered neutrophilic differentiation of
these cells, indicating that the block of differentiation is a Cb2
receptor-specific effect. The data demonstrate that stimulation of Cb2
receptors when overexpressed on myeloid precursors turns on signals
that interfere with normal neutrophilic differentiation.
A major characteristic of myeloid leukemia is a differentiation
arrest of the granulocytic lineage.10 G-CSF regulates
proliferation, survival, and differentiation of myeloid progenitor
cells.23,24 Multiple gene products or their mutants have
been implicated in impairment of G-CSF-regulated neutrophilic
development. Alterations in the G-CSF-R, signaling molecules (eg, MEK,
STAT1/3, SHP-2, Grb2, shc), or transcription factors (eg, Evi1,
C/EBP , Hoxa9, Hoxb8, Meis) have been reported to alter
neutrophilic differentiation.19,21,25-31 Here, we describe
the first example of a GPCR that interferes with G-CSF-induced
neutrophilic differentiation. Several GPCRs have been implicated in
transformation when overexpressed in the NIH 3T3 fibroblasts model, for
example, the MAS-oncogene,32 thrombin
receptor,33 and serotonin 1c receptors.34
Introduction of Cb2 cDNA into NIH 3T3 cells did not result
in oncogenic transformation (R.D. et al; unpublished observation, May
1997), suggesting another mechanism of transformation by this
GPCR. Overexpression of the other oncogenic GPCRs in 32D/G-CSF-R cells
may reveal whether the Cb2 receptor indeed uniquely mediates a block of
neutrophilic maturation or whether a more general GPCR-related process
causes tranformation of myeloid precursor cells.
G proteins consist of 3 heterologous subunits ( , , and
) which are stably associated to guanosine diphosphate
(GDP) only during the inactive state. Upon ligand activation of the
receptor, GDP is exchanged for guanosine triphosphate (GTP)
and the trimer dissociates into a G -GTP subunit and a
G dimer, both capable of activating intracellular
signaling pathways.35-37 The Cb2 receptor belongs to the
family of GPCRs that couple to G i/o 
proteins. Following receptor activation, the G i/o
subunit inhibits adenylyl cyclase (AC) activity resulting in a
decreased level of intracellular cAMP.38-40 Interference
of this particular intracellular process by addition of dibutyryl
cyclic AMP to the G-CSF cultures did not restore granulocytic
differentiation of Cb2-EGFP-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R cells. Thus,
down-regulation of cAMP levels following Cb2 activation appears not
responsible for the block of neutrophilic differentiation and
suggests involvement of another signaling pathway. The G
dimer has been shown to mediate mitogenic-mediated protein kinase
(MAPK) activation,41-44 thereby influencing cell proliferation and differentiation. We observed restoration of neutrophilic development by addition of U0126 or PD98059 inhibitors to
the G-CSF cultures, suggesting that overactivation of the MEK/ERK pathway following Cb2 stimulation is a major cause of the block of
granulocytic differentiation. Furthermore, at day 7 of culture in the
presence of G-CSF, Cb2-EGFP-expressing cells still incorporated tritiated thymidine, whereas control cells did not. These observations are in agreement with previous studies showing that activation of
MEK/ERK is a critical event in G-CSF-induced proliferation and is not
required for differentiation.26,45
The MEK/ERK pathway has been implicated in signaling by multiple GPCRs,
including SDF-1,46 somatostatin,47 and opioid receptors.48 Expression of each of these receptors has
been demonstrated on hematopoietic precursor cells,49-51
but under these physiologic conditions interference with neutrophilic
differentiation has not been reported. GPCR overexpression and
subsequent uncontrolled MEK/ERK activation may be required for myeloid
transformation. Multiple GPCR transfectants of 32D/G-CSF-R should be
generated to answer the question of whether sustained MEK/ERK
activation by GPCR stimulation is sufficient to cause a block of
neutrophilic differentiation.
Several GPCRs can activate MAPK by signaling via
PI3-K.52-54 In the presence of LY-294002, granulocytic
development in response to G-CSF is partially recovered as well,
suggesting the involvement of PI3-K in the block of neutrophilic
differentiation evoked by activation of the peripheral cannabinoid
receptor. PI3-K has been related with mitogenic signaling
through a variety of growth factors,55 including
G-CSF.56 Activation of PI3-K via G-CSF-R has been shown to
correlate with enhanced proliferation, suggesting that activation of
PI3-K by the Cb2 receptor will keep the Cb2-EGFP-expressing cells with
a higher growth potential. This would be in agreement with our findings
presented in Figure 6. It is possible that activation of multiple
signaling pathways, including PI3-K and MEK/ERK, are required to
interfere with G-CSF-induced neutrophilic differentiation. Because
PI3-K may be involved in cell survival,57,58 we tested whether Cb2-expressing 32D/G-CSF-R cells, cultured in the presence of
the endocannabinoid 2-AG but in the absence of cytokines, showed altered survival or proliferation. Although PI3-K signaling may be
involved in the Cb2-induced block of neutrophilic differentiation, we
did not observe any effect of Cb2 receptor activation on survival or
proliferation under the conditions tested.
Several cannabinoid ligands of different origins have been proposed as
the true ligands for the peripheral cannabinoid
receptor.59-62 We recently compared the capability of
these different ligands to induce migration of Cb2-expressing cells.
Using transwell assays we demonstrated that 2-AG is the most potent
inducer of migration.9 Since 2-AG or other cannabinoid
ligands were not added to the cultures presented here, we hypothesized
that a Cb2 ligand was present in the serum containing medium or
produced by the cells themselves. We demonstrate in Figure 7 that
significant levels of Cb2 ligands were present in the serum. It is
unclear whether culture medium contains 2-AG or another
yet-to-be-identified stimulus for Cb2. The fact that specific Cb2
agonist(s) are present in the serum used in our studies suggests that
Cb2 ligands may be present in vivo in sufficient quantities. This
finding may allow studies to investigate the effect of Cb2
overexpression in bone marrow progenitor cells in vivo. Introduction of
the Cb2 gene into primitive progenitor cells followed by
transplantation into sublethally irradiated mice should reveal whether
high Cb2 expression causes a myeloproliferative disorder or myeloid leukemia.
Our observations raise the question of whether the human CB2 receptor
or other GPCRs may be abnormally expressed in certain cases of human
AML. High-throughput AML patient screens using cDNA array technology
are currently in progress, which may identify such cases. Exposure of
those leukemia samples to GPCR antagonists, specific MEK/ERK
inhibitors, or combinations thereoff may unravel the importance of
those receptors and downstream signaling routes in myeloid
differentiation abnormalities and possibly open new ways for treatment
of AML.
 |
Acknowledgments |
We thank Prof Dr I. P. Touw (Erasmus University Rotterdam) for
donation of the 32D/G-CSF-R cell line. We thank Karola van Rooyen for
preparation of the figures and Dr P. Casellas (Sanofi Recherche,
Montpellier, France) for donation of the Cb1- and Cb2-specific antagonists, SR141716 and SR144528. We thank C. M. Dicke for
technical assistance.
 |
Footnotes |
Submitted July 8, 2002; accepted September 30, 2002.
Prepublished
online as Blood First Edition Paper, October 24, 2002;
DOI 10.1182/blood-2002-07-2034.
Supported by the Dutch Cancer Foundation Koningin Wilhelmina
Fonds, The Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research NWO, and
the Royal Dutch Academy of Sciences KNAW.
The publication costs of this
article were defrayed in part by
page charge payment. Therefore,
and solely to indicate this fact,
this article is hereby marked
"advertisement"
in accordance with 18 U.S.C.
section 1734.
Reprints: Ruud Delwel, Institute for Hematology,
Erasmus University Rotterdam, Dr Molewaterplein 50, 3015GE Rotterdam,
The Netherlands; e-mail: delwel{at}hema.fgg.eur.nl.
 |
References |
1.
Valk PJ, Delwel R.
The peripheral cannabinoid receptor, Cb2, in retrovirally-induced leukemic transformation and normal hematopoiesis.
Leuk Lymphoma.
1998;32:29-43[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
2.
Valk PJ, Hol S, Vankan Y, et al.
The genes encoding the peripheral cannabinoid receptor and alpha-L-fucosidase are located near a newly identified common virus integration site, Evi11.
J Virol.
1997;71:6796-6804[Abstract].
3.
Munro S, Thomas KL, Abu-Shaar M.
Molecular characterization of a peripheral receptor for cannabinoids.
Nature.
1993;365:61-65[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
4.
Matsuda LA, Lolait SJ, Brownstein MJ, Young AC, Bonner TI.
Structure of a cannabinoid receptor and functional expression of the cloned cDNA.
Nature.
1990;346:561-564[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
5.
Bouaboula M, Rinaldi M, Carayon P, et al.
Cannabinoid-receptor expression in human leukocytes.
Eur J Biochem.
1993;214:173-180[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
6.
Galiegue S, Mary S, Marchand J, et al.
Expression of central and peripheral cannabinoid receptors in human immune tissues and leukocyte subpopulations.
Eur J Biochem.
1995;232:54-61[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
7.
Lynn AB, Herkenham M.
Localization of cannabinoid receptors and nonsaturable high-density cannabinoid binding sites in peripheral tissues of the rat: implications for receptor-mediated immune modulation by cannabinoids.
J Pharmacol Exp Ther.
1994;268:1612-1623[Abstract/Free Full Text].
8.
Carayon P, Marchand J, Dussossoy D, et al.
Modulation and functional involvement of CB2 peripheral cannabinoid receptors during B-cell differentiation.
Blood.
1998;92:3605-3615[Abstract/Free Full Text].
9.
Alberich Jorda M, Verbakel SE, Valk PJ, et al.
Hematopoietic cells expressing the peripheral cannabinoid receptor migrate in response to the endocannabinoid 2-arachidonoylglycerol.
Blood.
2002;99:2786-2793[Abstract/Free Full Text].
10.
Lowenberg B, Downing JR, Burnett A.
Acute myeloid leukemia.
N Engl J Med.
1999;341:1051-1062[Free Full Text].
11.
Nichols J, Nimer SD.
Transcription factors, translocations, and leukemia.
Blood.
1992;80:2953-2963[Abstract/Free Full Text].
12.
Rabbitts TH.
Chromosomal translocations in human cancer.
Nature.
1994;372:143-149[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
13.
Look AT.
Oncogenic transcription factors in the human acute leukemias.
Science.
1997;278:1059-1064[Abstract/Free Full Text].
14.
Ihle JN, Morishita K, Matsugi T, Bartholomew C.
Insertional mutagenesis and transformation of hematopoietic stem cells.
Prog Clin Biol Res.
1990;352:329-337[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
15.
Jonkers J, Berns A.
Retroviral insertional mutagenesis as a strategy to identify cancer genes.
Biochim Biophys Acta.
1996;1287:29-57[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
16.
Li J, Shen H, Himmel KL, et al.
Leukaemia disease genes: large-scale cloning and pathway predictions.
Nat Genet.
1999;23:348-353[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
17.
Valk PJ, Vankan Y, Joosten M, et al.
Retroviral insertions in Evi12, a novel common virus integration site upstream of Tra1/Grp94, frequently coincide with insertions in the gene encoding the peripheral cannabinoid receptor Cnr2.
J Virol.
1999;73:3595-3602[Abstract/Free Full Text].
18.
Joosten M, Valk PJ, Jorda MA, et al.
Leukemic predisposition of pSca-1/Cb2 transgenic mice.
Exp Hematol.
2002;30:142-149[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
19.
Dong F, van Buitenen C, Pouwels K, Hoefsloot LH, Lowenberg B, Touw IP.
Distinct cytoplasmic regions of the human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor receptor involved in induction of proliferation and maturation.
Mol Cell Biol.
1993;13:7774-7781[Abstract/Free Full Text].
20.
de Koning JP, Soede-Bobok AA, Schelen AM, et al.
Proliferation signaling and activation of Shc, p21Ras, and Myc via tyrosine 764 of human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor receptor.
Blood.
1998;91:1924-1933[Abstract/Free Full Text].
21.
Ward AC, Smith L, de Koning JP, van Aesch Y, Touw IP.
Multiple signals mediate proliferation, differentiation, and survival from the granulocyte colony-stimulating factor receptor in myeloid 32D cells.
J Biol Chem.
1999;274:14956-14962[Abstract/Free Full Text].
22.
Salem M, Delwel R, Touw I, Mahmoud L, Lowenberg B.
Human AML colony growth in serum-free culture.
Leuk Res.
1988;12:157-165[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
23.
Nicola NA.
Hemopoietic cell growth factors and their receptors.
Annu Rev Biochem.
1989;58:45-77[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
24.
Demetri GD, Griffin JD.
Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and its receptor.
Blood.
1991;78:2791-2808[Free Full Text].
25.
Fukunaga R, Ishizaka-Ikeda E, Nagata S.
Growth and differentiation signals mediated by different regions in the cytoplasmic domain of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor receptor.
Cell.
1993;74:1079-1087[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
26.
Baumann MA, Paul CC, Lemley-Gillespie S, Oyster M, Gomez-Cambronero J.
Modulation of MEK activity during G-CSF signaling alters proliferative versus differentiative balancing.
Am J Hematol.
2001;68:99-105[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
27.
Spiekermann K, Biethahn S, Wilde S, Hiddemann W, Alves F.
Constitutive activation of STAT transcription factors in acute myelogenous leukemia.
Eur J Haematol.
2001;67:63-71[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
28.
Wang W, Wang X, Ward AC, Touw IP, Friedman AD.
C/EBPalpha and G-CSF receptor signals cooperate to induce the myeloperoxidase and neutrophil elastase genes.
Leukemia.
2001;15:779-786[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
29.
Fujino T, Yamazaki Y, Largaespada DA, et al.
Inhibition of myeloid differentiation by Hoxa9, Hoxb8, and Meis homeobox genes.
Exp Hematol.
2001;29:856-863[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
30.
Calvo KR, Knoepfler PS, Sykes DB, Pasillas MP, Kamps MP.
Meis1a suppresses differentiation by G-CSF and promotes proliferation by SCF: potential mechanisms of cooperativity with Hoxa9 in myeloid leukemia.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.
2001;98:13120-13125[Abstract/Free Full Text].
31.
Morishita K, Parganas E, Matsugi T, Ihle JN.
Expression of the Evi-1 zinc finger gene in 32Dc13 myeloid cells blocks granulocytic differentiation in response to granulocyte colony-stimulating factor.
Mol Cell Biol.
1992;12:183-189[Abstract/Free Full Text].
32.
Young D, Waitches G, Birchmeier C, Fasano O, Wigler M.
Isolation and characterization of a new cellular oncogene encoding a protein with multiple potential transmembrane domains.
Cell.
1986;45:711-719[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
33.
Whitehead I, Kirk H, Kay R.
Expression cloning of oncogenes by retroviral transfer of cDNA libraries.
Mol Cell Biol.
1995;15:704-710[Abstract].
34.
Julius D, Livelli TJ, Jessell TM, Axel R.
Ectopic expression of the serotonin 1c receptor and the triggering of malignant transformation.
Science.
1989;244:1057-1062[Abstract/Free Full Text].
35.
Sondek J, Lambright DG, Noel JP, Hamm HE, Sigler PB.
GTPase mechanism of G proteins from the 1.7-A crystal structure of transducin alpha-GDP-AIF-4.
Nature.
1994;372:276-279[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
36.
Sondek J, Bohm A, Lambright DG, Hamm HE, Sigler PB.
Crystal structure of a G-protein beta gamma dimer at 2.1A resolution.
Nature.
1996;379:369-374[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
37.
Lambright DG, Noel JP, Hamm HE, Sigler PB.
Structural determinants for activation of the alpha-subunit of a heterotrimeric G protein.
Nature.
1994;369:621-628[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
38.
Howlett AC.
Cannabinoid inhibition of adenylate cyclase. Biochemistry of the response in neuroblastoma cell membranes.
Mol Pharmacol.
1985;27:429-436[Abstract].
39.
Felder CC, Joyce KE, Briley EM, et al.
Comparison of the pharmacology and signal transduction of the human cannabinoid CB1 and CB2 receptors.
Mol Pharmacol.
1995;48:443-450[Abstract].
40.
van Biesen T, Luttrell LM, Hawes BE, Lefkowitz RJ.
Mitogenic signaling via G protein-coupled receptors.
Endocr Rev.
1996;17:698-714[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
41.
Crespo P, Xu N, Simonds WF, Gutkind JS.
Ras-dependent activation of MAP kinase pathway mediated by G-protein beta gamma subunits.
Nature.
1994;369:418-420[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
42.
van Biesen T, Hawes BE, Luttrell DK, et al.
Receptor-tyrosine-kinase- and G beta gamma-mediated MAP kinase activation by a common signalling pathway.
Nature.
1995;376:781-784[CrossRef][Medline]
|