|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepublished online as a Blood First Edition Paper on September 5, 2002; DOI 10.1182/blood-2002-04-1278.
HEMATOPOIESIS
From the Department of Pathology, University of
Virginia Health Sciences Center, Charlottesville; Department of
Pathology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD; and
Department of Orthopedics, Case Western Reserve University and
University Hospitals Research Institute, Cleveland, OH.
Coculture with stromal cells tends to maintain normal hematopoietic
progenitors and their leukemic counterparts in an undifferentiated, proliferative state. An example of this effect is seen with
megakaryocytic differentiation, wherein stromal contact renders
many cell types refractory to potent induction stimuli. This inhibitory
effect of stroma on megakaryocytic differentiation correlates with a blockade within hematopoietic cells of protein kinase C- Within the bone marrow microenvironment, stromal
cells provide critical extrinsic cues to hematopoietic progenitor
cells, influencing such fundamental processes as survival,
proliferation, and differentiation. The influence of stromal cells on
normal and neoplastic hematopoiesis has been reflected by several in vitro culture systems, in which stromal contact supports (a)
long-term culture of multipotent progenitors,1
(b) maintenance of normal B-cell progenitors,2
and (c) leukemic cell growth and survival.3 The
mechanisms through which stromal cells influence hematopoiesis include
paracrine secretion of soluble factors, production of extracellular
matrix, and direct receptor-counterreceptor engagements.4 An important component of the stromal influence in these culture systems, and perhaps also in vivo, lies in the ability to block hematopoietic differentiation.5
An inhibitory effect of stromal cells on in vitro megakaryopoiesis
occurs both with primary human CD34+ cells and
erythroleukemic cell line model systems.6,7 The stromal
inhibition of megakaryocyte production from CD34+ cells
clearly requires direct cell-cell contact.8 This
inhibitory effect may partly account for the impaired megakaryocytic
engraftment frequently seen after bone marrow transplantation. For
example, whereas CD34+ cells alone in vitro undergo
efficient megakaryocytic differentiation in response to thrombopoietin
(TPO), CD34+ cells infused into an irradiated recipient
show minimal evidence of megakaryocytic induction in response to
pharmacologic TPO doses.9
Stromal inhibition of hematopoietic differentiation most likely occurs
due to alterations in signal transduction and transcriptional regulatory pathways within progenitor cells. In the case of
megakaryocytic differentiation induction, stromal contact can block
both up-regulation of protein kinase C- A critical aspect of ERK/MAPK signaling in promoting megakaryocytic
differentiation is sustained activation.11,13,16
Interruption of sustained ERK/MAPK activation, even after 24 hours,
completely aborts megakaryocytic lineage commitment.11 In
2 different model systems, the differentiation-promoting component of
TPO receptor signaling correlates with prolonged activation of the
ERK/MAPK pathway.13,16 As with nerve growth factor
(NGF)-induced neuronal differentiation, the sustained phase of
TPO-induced ERK/MAPK activation occurs via the Ras-like guanosine
triphosphatase (GTPase) Rap1.17
In the current study, experiments addressed both the significance and
the mechanism of stromal inhibition of sustained ERK/MAPK activation.
Using an epistasis approach in the K562 system, it was found that the
ERK/MAPK pathway is indeed the relevant target of stromal inhibition of
megakaryocytic differentiation. Specifically, stromal contact caused a
decay in late-phase ERK/MAPK signaling through delayed down-regulation
of Rap1 activation, an effect most likely achieved through inhibition
of guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) activity. Similarly in HEL
cells, stromal inhibition of megakaryocytic differentiation correlated
with inhibition of Rap1 activation. Coimmunoprecipitation studies
showed that stromal contact caused alterations in a protein complex
associated with c-Cbl, a scaffolding factor involved in Rap1
activation.18 Therefore, Rap1 may represent a critical
control point in the stromal inhibition of megakaryocytic differentiation.
Cell culture and transfection
Transfections of K562 cells were carried out using the X-tremeGENE Q2
Transfection Reagent as recommended by the manufacturer (Roche). For
transient transfections, cells were subjected to indicated treatments
about 18 hours after initiating transfection. For stable transfection,
cells were subjected to 1 mg/mL G418 selection followed by limiting
dilution cloning, with selection of stably YFP+ clones
using an inverted epifluorescent/phase contrast microscope.
Plasmids
Immunoblot assays For whole cell lysates, equivalent numbers of cells for each sample were washed with cold phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and lysed in 100 µL 1 × sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) loading buffer per 106 cells. Samples were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred to nitrocellulose membranes. Membranes were preblocked and probed with primary antibodies per the manufacturer's instructions, followed by the appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated secondary antibody (Pierce, Rockford, IL). Signal detection used enhanced chemiluminescence. Rabbit polyclonal anti-gpIIb was a generous gift from Dr Dan Rosson (Lankenau Medical Research Center, Wynnewood, PA).21 Rabbit polyclonal antiphospho-ERK was purchased from Promega (Madison, WI). Rabbit polyclonal antiphospho-Akt (Ser473) was purchased from Cell Signaling Technology (Beverly, MA). Rabbit polyclonal anti-Rap1a was purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology (Santa Cruz, CA). Mouse monoclonal anti-Ras (clone RAS10) was purchased from Upstate Biotechnology (Lake Placid, NY). Mouse monoclonal antitubulin was purchased from Sigma. Mouse monoclonal anti-Crk was purchased from BD Transduction Laboratories (San Diego, CA). Mouse monoclonal antiphosphotyrosine antibodies 4G10 and ptyr-100 were purchased, respectively, from Upstate Biotechnology and Cell Signaling Technology. Rabbit anti-C3G and anti-FRS2 were purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology. Quantitative scanning densitometry with normalization for lane loading (tubulin signal) was performed using a Molecular Dynamics (Piscataway, NJ) Personal Densitometer with ImageQuant 5.0 software.Rap1 and Ras activation assays GTP-bound forms of Rap1 and Ras were detected as described by Tsyganova et al with minor modifications.23 In brief, 3 × 106 cells were resuspended in 300 µL ice-cold radioimmunoprecipitation assay (RIPA) buffer (50 mM Tris [tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane] HCl, pH 8.0; 150 mM NaCl; 0.5% sodium deoxycholate; 1% Nonidet P-40 [NP-40]; 0.1% SDS; 10 mM NaF; 2 mM Na3VO4) with protease inhibitors (1 tablet per 10 mL BMB-complete, EDTA [ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid]-free; Boehringer-Mannheim Biochemicals, Mannheim, Germany). Cellular extracts were incubated with glutathione agarose beads preloaded with bacterially expressed GST-RalGDS(RBD) for 1 hour at 4°C. After thorough washing, beads were subjected to elution by boiling 5 minutes in 1 × SDS-PAGE loading buffer. Eluates were then subjected to immunoblotting with antibodies to Rap1 and Ras.Phalloidin staining of actin cytoskeleton K562-EYFP-Rap1 stable transfectants cultured on sterile glass coverslips 48 hours with or without 25 nM TPA were washed with ice-cold PBS and fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde/PBS for 20 minutes at room temperature. Cells were then permeabilized with 0.2% Triton X-100 in PBS with 20% normal goat serum (NGS) for 30 minutes at room temperature followed by blocking with 20% NGS/PBS another 30 minutes at room temperature. Cells were stained with rhodamine-phalloidin (Molecular Probes, Eugene, OR) at a 1:500 dilution in 5% NGS/PBS for 1 hour at room temperature. After washing and mounting, dual-color confocal laser scanning microscopy of cells was carried out on a Zeiss LSM 5 Pascal (Jena, Germany) with Zeiss LSM analysis software.Coimmunoprecipitation A total of 1 × 107 cells were washed and resuspended in 500 µL ice-cold extraction buffer (50 mM Tris HCl, pH 7.6; 150 mM NaCl; 1.0% NP-40; 1 mM EDTA; 1 mM NaVO4; 1 mM NaF) with protease inhibitors (1 tablet per 10 mL BMB-complete, EDTA-free; Roche). After a 20-minute incubation on ice with intermittent tapping, debris was pelleted at 10 000 rpm, 10 minutes at 4°C. Supernatants were adjusted to 10% glycerol and stored at 20°C. For c-Cbl immunoprecipitation, 4 µg rabbit anti-c-Cbl
(sc-170; Santa Cruz Biotechnology) was added to 500 µL of thawed,
clarified extracts followed by incubation on a rocker 3 hours at 4°C.
Immune complexes captured on protein G beads (Ultralink, Pierce) were
subjected to washing followed by elution in Laemmli sample buffer.
Flow cytometry Staining of cells for surface CD41a and glycophorin A (GPA) used the phycoerythrin (PE)-conjugated antibodies HIP8-PE and GA-R 2-PE, respectively (PharMingen, San Diego, CA). Phycoerythrin-conjugated isotype-matched antibody controls were used to establish thresholds for specific staining. Flow cytometric analyses were conducted on either a FACSCalibur (Figures 1, 3, and 6) or FACScan (Figure 7) system using CellQuest software (Becton Dickinson, San Jose, CA).
Stromal blockade of megakaryopoiesis in primary cultures We have previously demonstrated with cell lines that stromal contact potently blocks megakaryocytic differentiation induction.7 To confirm these results with primary human cells, purified adult CD34+ cells were cultured under conditions that strongly promote megakaryocytic differentiation, in the absence or presence of primary human bone marrow stromal cells. We analyzed the earliest stages of megakaryocytic differentiation (day 7 of cultures) in an attempt to focus on lineage commitment as opposed to subsequent lineage expansion. As shown in Figure 1, control CD34+ cells grown alone in myeloid expansion medium (containing IL-3 and SCF) showed minimal evidence of megakaryocytic differentiation, consisting predominantly of CD41 cells with blastic or granulocytic
morphology. CD34+ cells grown alone in megakaryocytic
medium (containing TPO, SCF, and IDB) displayed significant
megakaryocytic differentiation at 7 days, with about 30% of cells
expressing bright CD41a (glycoprotein IIb-IIIa complex) and frequent
cells displaying characteristic megakaryocytic morphology on Wright
stain. In contrast, CD34+ cells cocultured with bone marrow
stroma in megakaryocytic medium manifested a clear decrease in
megakaryocytic differentiation, with only about 15% of cells
expressing bright CD41a on flow cytometry and only rare cells
displaying megakaryocytic morphology. The final yield of cells in
megakaryocytic medium did not differ according to the absence or
presence of stroma (3.8 × 106 cells in the absence of
stroma and 4.2 × 106 cells in the presence of stroma).
Therefore, both relative and absolute numbers of megakaryocytes were
diminished with stromal coculture. These results confirm previous
observations that stromal inhibiton of megakaryocytic differentiation
may occur with primary hematopoietic progenitors as well as with cell
lines.6
Enforced Raf-1 activation overrides stromal inhibition We have previously shown that stromal inhibition of megakaryocytic differentiation correlates with blockade of ERK/MAPK activation.7 To determine the significance of this observation, we tested the effects of stromal contact on K562 RafER.5
cells, which contain an estradiol-responsive mutant of the kinase
Raf-1. As illustrated in Figure 2, K562
parental cells lacked responsiveness to estradiol as assessed by ERK
phosphorylation and up-regulation of glycoprotein IIb (gpIIb).
Treatment of the parental cells with TPA, as expected, caused
up-regulation of gpIIb and ERK phosphorylation, both of which were
completely inhibited by stromal contact. K562RafER.5 cells, on the
other hand, responded to estradiol treatment with potent activation of
ERK phosphorylation accompanied by up-regulation of gpIIb. Notably,
stromal contact failed to inhibit either ERK phosphorylation or gpIIb
up-regulation in estradiol-treated K562RafER.5 cells. In contrast,
TPA-induced gpIIb up-regulation in K562RafER.5 cells was completely
blocked by stromal contact, indicating that these cells retained the
ability to respond to stromal inhibition. Interestingly, scanning
densitometry with tubulin normalization showed that estradiol treatment
of K562RafER.5 cells consistently activated ERK phosphorylation to a
greater degree (without stroma: 24-fold; with stroma: 17-fold) than did
TPA treatment (without stroma: 4.5-fold; with stroma:
1.5-fold). A possible explanation is that the RafER mutant
protein in the absence of estradiol might partially block the action
of TPA.
Another parameter associated with megakaryocytic differentiation
consists of down-regulation of glycophorin A (GPA), an erythroid marker.10 To confirm the results obtained with gpIIb
up-regulation in Figure 2, K562
Stromal contact blocks late-phase but not early-phase ERK/MAPK activation Analysis of the kinetics of stromal inhibition of ERK/MAPK activation indicated a selective effect on later stages (Figure 4). In particular, stromal contact had no inhibitory effect on the level of ERK/MAPK phosphorylation at 12 hours of treatment. In fact, scanning densitometry indicated an about 2-fold enhancement of ERK activation in stromal cocultures at 12 hours as compared with nonstromal cultures. However, by 24 hours, stromal contact correlated with an about 15-fold decline in ERK/MAPK phosphorylation, and by 48 hours there was almost a complete loss of ERK/MAPK phosphorylation associated with stromal coculture. In the absence of stromal contact, ERK/MAPK phosphorylation declined by about 2-fold from 12 to 24 hours with no further decline at 48 hours. Thus, stromal contact permitted early activation of ERK/MAPK but prevented the sustained activation known to be critical for megakaryocytic differentiation.11,13,16
Stromal contact selectively blocks late-phase Rap1 signaling The recent implication of Rap1 in sustained ERK/MAPK activation17,25 prompted us to examine its involvement in stromal inhibition of megakaryocytic differentiation. To this end, the kinetic profiles of Rap1 and Ras activation were determined in TPA-induced K562 cells in the absence or presence of stromal contact (Figure 5). Notably, the Rap1 activation observed at earlier time points (ie, 6 hours and 12 hours) showed no inhibition by stromal contact. However, at the later time points of 24 and 48 hours of induction, there was clear indication of stromal inhibition of Rap1 activation, as confirmed by scanning densitometry (Figure 5B). This kinetic profile paralleled that observed with ERK/MAPK phosphorylation, with stromal inhibition manifesting at 24 hours but not at 12 hours (Figure 4). Ras activation, in contrast, showed essentially no change as a consequence of TPA induction and no evidence of inhibition by stromal contact. Furthermore, phospho-Akt levels remained essentially unchanged as a result of stromal contact. These results suggested that stromal inhibitory effects were specific for Rap1 signaling via the ERK/MAPK pathway.
To extend these observations to a different model system, the effects
of stromal contact were examined on the megakaryocytic induction of HEL
cells. As shown in Figure 6A, stromal
contact blocked the morphologic changes (flow cytometric forward and
side light scatter) associated with megakaryocytic induction. As has been observed for CD34+ cells,6 transwell
separation of stroma and HEL cells eliminated the inhibition,
reinforcing the importance of direct stromal contact. Stromal contact
also blocked the down-regulation of GPA observed in HEL cells
undergoing megakaryocytic differentiation (Figure 6B). Importantly, as
with K562 cells, Rap1 activation in induced HEL cells showed complete
inhibition occurring as a consequence of stromal contact (Figure 6C).
Ras activation was unevaluable in the HEL cells due to undetectable
protein levels.
Stromal inhibition of the Rap1 V12 mutant Inactivation of Rap1 may occur through 2 different mechanisms: (a) up-regulation of a Rap1 GTPase-activating protein (Rap-GAP) or (b) inhibition of the function of guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs). To distinguish between these 2 mechanisms, K562 cells were transfected with expression vectors for YFP fusion proteins of wild-type Rap1 and the Rap1 V12 mutant. The V12 mutant of Rap1 is insensitive to Rap-GAP activity26 and therefore should override any stromal inhibition due to up-regulation of Rap-GAP proteins. Two-color flow cytometric analysis monitored down-regulation GPA in YFP+ cells, thus providing a readout of the degree of megakaryocytic differentiation as a function of the level of fusion protein expression. As shown in Figure 7A, cells expressing high levels of either YFP-Rap1 wild type or YFP-Rap1 V12 showed minimal spontaneous GPA down-regulation. With TPA treatment, both transfectants showed similar GPA down-regulation, with direct correlation between the degrees of YFP fusion expression and the extent of GPA down-regulation. Notably, stromal contact blocked down-regulation of GPA in both YFP-Rap1 wild-type and YFP-Rap1 V12 transfectants regardless of the degree of YFP fusion protein expression.
To confirm these findings at a biochemical level, cells stably expressing either YFP-Rap1 wild type or YFP-Rap1 V12 were analyzed for Rap1 activation (Figure 7B). The activation status of the YFP fusion could be distinguished from that of the endogenous Rap1 protein by their difference in migration on SDS-PAGE (about 46 kDa vs 21 kDa, respectively). As shown in Figure 7B, YFP-Rap1 wild type mirrored endogenous Rap1 in its activation by TPA and inhibition by stromal contact. Interestingly, cells expressing YFP-Rap1 V12 markedly down-regulated endogenous Rap1 activation, due to an unconfirmed mechanism possibly involving GAP up-regulation.27 Nevertheless, the YFP-Rap1 V12 fusion itself manifested activation in response to TPA and retained sensitivity to stromal inhibition of activation. Therefore, at both phenotypic and biochemical levels of analysis, stromal contact maintained the ability to block activation of the V12 mutant of Rap1. To confirm that the Rap1 V12 mutant displayed constitutive biologic activity in vivo, we examined the status of the actin cytoskeleton in cells stably expressing wild-type or V12 Rap1 fused to YFP. Recent data have suggested a role for Rap1 in remodeling of the actin cytoskeleton.28 As shown in Figure 8A-B, K562 cells expressing YFP-Rap1 wild type (wt) (green) possessed well-defined cortical actin filaments (red), which underwent elimination during 48 hours of TPA treatment. Notably, cells expressing YFP-Rap1 V12 showed loss of cortical actin both in the untreated and TPA treated states (Figure 8C-D). Therefore, YFP-Rap1 V12 did manifest constitutive in vivo signaling, resulting in remodeling of the cellular actin cytoskeleton. Stromal effects on signaling complexes upstream of Rap1 The ability of stromal contact to block the activation of a Rap1 V12 mutant (Figure 7) suggested a mechanism targeting upstream activators of Rap1. At least 9 different Rap1 GEFs, capable of direct Rap1 activation in response to a variety of signals, have been characterized.29 The best-characterized Rap1 GEF, C3G, functions in a complex with the Crk small adaptor molecule.18 We were unable to identify C3G or Crk associated with Rap1-FLAG in large-scale immunoprecipitations performed on stably transfected K562 cells with or without TPA and with or without stroma (not shown); these results raised the possibility that one of the many alternative GEF complexes might regulate Rap1 activation in our system. In an attempt to identify relevant factors, we examined tyrosine-phosphorylated proteins associated with the scaffolding factor c-Cbl. The rationale for this approach was that c-Cbl is known to function as a scaffolding factor for Rap1 activation complexes18 and that components of Rap1 activation complexes often undergo inducible tyrosine phosphorylation.30 In the results shown in Figure 9, an about 100 kDa tyrosine-phosphorylated protein, pY-p100, was found to associate with c-Cbl upon TPA treatment of K562 cells. Significantly, in the presence of stromal contact, pY-p100 failed to associate with c-Cbl upon TPA treatment. The levels of tyrosine-phosphorylated and total c-Cbl were not significantly affected by any of the treatments. Crk also showed TPA-inducible association with c-Cbl, but stromal contact enhanced the association of Crk with c-Cbl, possibly providing an explanation for the initial activation of Rap1 caused by stromal contact (Figure 5). In summary, stromal contact prevented the TPA-induced recruitment to c-Cbl of pY-p100, a tyrosine-phosphorylated approximate 100 kDa protein, but enhanced the recruitment of Crk.
Stromal inhibition of cellular differentiation most likely
provides a homeostatic mechanism for maintenance of hematopoietic progenitor cell pools, which might otherwise undergo rapid depletion at
the expense of differentiation. At the other extreme, however, stromal
cells may contribute to defective marrow function through interference
with normal differentiation, both in the case of leukemic cell
expansion as well as with defective megakaryocytic engraftment after
bone marrow transplantation. The finding that purified
CD34+ cells show superior megakaryopoiesis ex vivo than
when injected into myeloablated hosts9 suggests that the
bone marrow microenvironment under some circumstances The current data demonstrate that stromal contact may block megakaryocytic differentiation through interference with sustained ERK/MAPK activation. Several previous studies using a variety of experimental systems have reinforced the central role of sustained ERK/MAPK activation in the programming of megakaryocytic lineage commitment.11,13,16 More recent experiments have implicated Rap1, rather than Ras proteins, as the upstream driver of sustained, late-phase ERK activation, both in neuronal and in megakaryocytic differentiation.17,25 In support of these findings, our results showed that activation of Rap1, but not Ras, is targeted for inhibition by stromal contact. Furthermore, the kinetics of stromal inhibition of Rap1 activation closely paralleled the kinetics of stromal inhibition of ERK/MAPK activation (Figures 4-5). Therefore, Rap1 most likely represents a critical target in the stromal inhibition of megakaryocytic differentiation. One major caveat is that the current results were obtained with leukemic cell lines induced with a pharmacologic agent (phorbol ester) to undergo incomplete megakaryocytic differentiation. Further verification of the importance of Rap1 in regulation of megakaryopoiesis will rely on additional model systems including primary human hematopoietic progenitor cell cultures, human and murine embryonic stem cell hematopoiesis, and genetically manipulated mice. The mechanism of stromal inhibition of Rap1 activation appears to involve destabilization of an upstream activation complex. Such a mechanism is suggested both by the susceptiblity of the Rap1 V12 mutant to stromal inhibition (Figure 7) and by the delayed kinetics of Rap1 inactivation (Figure 5). Stromal contact initially appears to be associated with transient Rap1 activation (Figure 5), possibly related to Crk recruitment to c-Cbl complexes (Figure 9); previous work has correlated Crk recruitment to Cbl with activation of Rap1a by forskolin.18 However, stromal contact caused eventual decay in TPA-induced Rap1 activation between 12 hours and 24 hours of treatment. The concept of stable versus unstable Rap1 upstream activation complexes has found support in previous experiments in the PC12 system of neuronal differentiation, in which treatment of cells with EGF led to labile signaling complexes composed of EGF-R, Crk, and C3G.31 Our data show that stromal contact altered the composition of a c-Cbl-associated complex, preventing TPA-induced recruitment of a 100 kDa tyrosine-phosphorylated protein, pY-p100, and enhancing recruitment of Crk (Figure 9). Because c-Cbl serves as a critical scaffolding factor for Rap1 upstream activation complexes,18 it is reasonable to postulate that the stromally induced alterations in the c-Cbl complex may be associated with loss of capacity for stable Rap1 activation. However, the precise significance of pY-p100 and Crk recruitment to Cbl remains to be determined. The identity of pY-p100 and its function (direct Rap1 GEF versus regulator of Rap1 GEF activity) are currently under investigation. Cell membrane molecules obviously must participate in transmitting the stromal signal to the hematopoietic target cells. A candidate interaction consists of ephrin (Eph) ligand binding to Eph receptor tyrosine kinases, signaling from which can inhibit the Ras/MAPK pathway.32,33 Arguing against a role for Eph receptors in stromal inhibition of megakaryocyte differentiation are (a) their rapid kinetics of ERK/MAPK inhibition, (b) their ability to inhibit Ras, and (c) their inability to inhibit V12 mutants.32,33 Aside from the Eph kinases, a broad array of other tyrosine kinases and phosphatases regulate megakaryocytic development and might participate in the stromal inhibitory mechanism.34 Another appealing candidate consists of the Sprouty (Spry) signaling pathway, which can potently inhibit ERK/MAPK activation and thereby block neuronal differentiation of PC12 cells.35 However, in contrast to the stromal mechanism, both Spry1 and Spry2 can prevent early-phase ERK/MAPK activation and are able to inhibit Ras activation.35 Nevertheless, Spry function may be influenced by cellular context and by the array of Spry isoforms being expressed. Future experiments will address potential upstream factors, such as Spry proteins, mediating stromal inhibition of Rap1 activation.
We thank Drs Dan Rosson and Takashi Tsuji for generous provision of cell lines, Dr Judy Meinkoth for helpful advice and reagents in the analysis of Rap1 activation, Dr Johannes Bos and Miranda van Triest for kindly providing Rap1 mammalian expression vectors, and Drs Joe Sung and Shu Man Fu for invaluable assistance with and access to the FACScan. We also thank Dr Donna Webb for advice and reagents for actin staining and the laboratory of Dr Kodi Ravichandran for advice and reagents for c-Cbl immunoprecipitation.
Submitted February 12, 2002; accepted September 17, 2002.
Prepublished online as Blood First Edition Paper, September 5, 2002; DOI 10.1182/blood-2002-04-1278.
Supported by grants RO1 CA93735 of the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health (A.N.G.), K08 HL04017 of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health (F.K.R.), and the Eugene and Mary B. Meyer Center for Advanced Transfusion Practices and Blood Research (F.K.R.).
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: Adam Goldfarb, Department of Pathology, University of Virginia, PO Box 800904, Charlottesville, VA 22908; e-mail: ang3x{at}virginia.edu.
1. Dexter TM, Allen TD, Lajtha LG. Conditions controlling the proliferation of hematopoietic stem cells in vitro. J Cell Physiol. 1977;91:335-344[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
2.
Whitlock CA, Witte ON.
Long-term culture of B lymphocytes and their precursors from murine bone marrow.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.
1982;79:3608-3612
3.
Mudry RE, Fortney JE, York T, Hall BM, Gibson LF.
Stromal cells regulate survival of B-lineage leukemic cells during chemotherapy.
Blood.
2000;96:1926-1932 4. Torok-Storb B, Iwata M, Graf L, Gianotti J, Horton H, Byrne MC. Dissecting the marrow microenvironment. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1999;872:164-175[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 5. Li L, Milner LA, Deng Y, et al. The human homolog of rat Jagged1 expressed by marrow stroma inhibits 32D cells through interaction with Notch1. Immunity. 1998;8:43-55[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 6. Zweegman S, Veenhof MA, Debili N, Schuurhuis GJ, Huijgens PC, Drager AM. Megakaryocytic differentiation of human progenitor cells is negatively influenced by direct contact with stroma. Leukemia. 1999;13:935-943[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
7.
Goldfarb AN, Delehanty LL, Wang D, Racke FK, Hussaini IM.
Stromal inhibition of megakaryocytic differentiation correlates with blockade of signaling by protein kinase C- 8. Zweegman S, Veenhof MA, Huijgens PC, Schuurhuis G, Drager AM. Regulation of megakaryocytopoiesis in an in vitro stromal model. Preferential adhesion of megakaryocyte progenitors and subsequent inhibition of maturation. Exp Hematol. 2000;28:401-410[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 9. Neelis KJ, Dubbelman YD, Wognum AW, et al. Lack of efficacy of thrombopoietin and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor after high dose total-body irradiation and autologous stem cell or bone marrow transplantation in rhesus monkeys. Exp Hematol. 1997;25:1094-1103[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
10.
Racke FK, Wang D, Zaidi Z, et al.
A potential role for protein kinase C-
11.
Racke FR, Lewandowska K, Goueli S, Goldfarb AN.
Sustained activation of the extracellular signal-regulated kinase/mitogen-activated protein kinase is required for megakaryocytic differentiation of K562 cells.
J Biol Chem.
1997;272:23366-23370 12. Whalen AM, Galasinski SC, Shapiro PS, Nahreini TS, Ahn NG. Megakaryocytic differentiation induced by constitutive activation of mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase. Mol Cell Biol. 1997;17:1947-1958[Abstract]. 13. Rouyez M-C, Boucheron C, Gisselbrecht S, Dusanter-Fourt I, Porteu F. Control of thrombopoietin-induced megakaryocytic differentiation by the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. Mol Cell Biol. 1997;17:4991-5000[Abstract].
14.
Fichelson S, Freyssinier J-M, Picard F, et al.
Megakaryocyte growth and development factor-induced proliferation and differentiation are regulated by the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway in primitive cord blood hematopoietic progenitors.
Blood.
1999;94:1601-1613
15.
Melemed AS, Ryder JW, Vik TA.
Activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway is involved in and sufficient for megakaryocytic differentiation of CMK cells.
Blood.
1997;90:3462-3470
16.
Matsumura I, Nakajima K, Wakao H, et al.
Involvement of prolonged Ras activation in thrombopoietin-induced megakaryocytic differentiation of a human factor-dependent hematopoietic cell line.
Mol Cell Biol.
1998;18:4282-4290
17.
Garcia J, de Gunzburg J, Eychene A, Gisselbrecht S, Porteu F.
Thrombopoietin-mediated sustained activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase in UT7-Mpl cells requires both Ras-Raf-1- and Rap1-B-Raf-dependent pathways.
Mol Cell Biol.
2001;21:2659-2670 18. Schmitt JM, Stork PJS. PKA phosphorylation of Src mediates cAMP's inhibition of cell growth via Rap1. Mol Cell. 2002;9:85-94[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 19. Tsuji T, Ogasawara H, Aoki Y, Tsurumaki Y, Kodama H. Characterization of murine stromal cell clones established from bone marrow and spleen. Leukemia. 1996;10:803-812[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
20.
Tsuji T, Waga I, Tezuka K, Kamada M, Yatsunami K, Kodama H.
Integrin 21. Rosson D, O'Brien TG. AP-1 activity affects the levels of induced erythroid and megakaryocytic differentiation of K562 cells. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1998;352:298-305[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
22.
Yoo JU, Barthel TS, Nishimura K, et al.
The chondrogenic potential of human bone-marrow-derived mesenchymal progenitor cells.
J Bone Joint Surg Am.
1998;80:1745-1757
23.
Tsygankova OM, Saavedra A, Rebhun JF, Quilliam LA, Meinkoth JL.
Coordinated regulation of Rap1 and thyroid differentiation by cyclic AMP and protein kinase A.
Mol Cell Biol.
2001;21:1921-1929 24. Zwartkruis FJT, Wolthuis RMF, Nabben NMJM, Franke B, Bos JL. Extracellular signal-regulated activation of Rap1 fails to interfere in Ras effector signalling. EMBO J. 1998;17:5905-5912[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 25. York RD, Yao H, Dillon T, et al. Rap1 mediates sustained MAP kinase activation induced by nerve growth factor. Nature. 1998;392:622-626[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 26. Cook SJ, Rubinfeld B, Albert I, McCormick F. Rap V12 antagonizes Ras-dependent activation of ERK1 and ERK2 by LPA and EGF in Rat-1 fibroblasts. EMBO J. 1993;12:3475-3485[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 27. Gutmann DH, Giordano MJ, Mahadeo DK, Lau N, Silbergeld D, Guha A. Increased neurofibromatosis 1 gene expression in astrocytic tumors: positive regulation by p21-ras. Oncogene. 1996;12:2121-2127[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
28.
Bertoni A, Tadokoro S, Eto K, et al.
Relationships between Rap1b, affinity modulation of integrin
29.
Rebhun JF, Castro AF, Quilliam LA.
Identification of guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs) for the Rap1 GTPase.
J Biol Chem.
2000;275:34901-34908
30.
Ichiba T, Hashimoto Y, Nakaya M, et al.
Activation of the C3G guanine nucleotide exchange factor for Rap1 by phosphorylation of tyrosine 504.
J Biol Chem.
1999;274:14376-14381
31.
Kao S-C, Jaiswal RK, Kolch W, Landreth GE.
Identification of the mechanisms regulating the differential activation of the MAPK cascade by epidermal growth factor and nerve growth factor in PC12 cells.
J Biol Chem.
2001;276:18169-18177 32. Miao H, Wei B-R, Peehl DM, et al. Activation of EphA receptor tyrosine kinase inhibits the Ras/MAPK pathway. Nat Cell Biol. 2001;3:527-530[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
33.
Elowe S, Holland SJ, Kulkarni S, Pawson T.
Downregulation of the Ras-mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway by the EphB2 receptor tyrosine kinase is required for ephrin-induced neurite retraction.
Mol Cell Biol.
2001;21:7429-7441 34. Avraham H, Price DJ. Regulation of megakaryocytopoiesis and platelet production by tyrosine kinases and tyrosine phosphatases. Methods. 1999;17:250-264[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
35.
Gross I, Bassit B, Benezra M, Licht JD.
Mammalian sprouty proteins inhibit cell growth and differentiation by preventing Ras activation.
J Biol Chem.
2001;276:46460-46468
© 2003 by The American Society of Hematology.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|
  M. Uchida, A. Enomoto, T. Fukuda, K. Kurokawa, K. Maeda, Y. Kodama, N. Asai, T. Hasegawa, Y. Shimono, M. Jijiwa, et al. Dok-4 regulates GDNF-dependent neurite outgrowth through downstream activation of Rap1 and mitogen-activated protein kinase J. Cell Sci., August 1, 2006; 119(15): 3067 - 3077. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. J. S. Stork and T. J. Dillon Multiple roles of Rap1 in hematopoietic cells: complementary versus antagonistic functions Blood, November 1, 2005; 106(9): 2952 - 2961. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. J. S. Stork Unraveling the mysteries of B-Raf: the clot thickens! Blood, August 1, 2005; 106(3): 775 - 776. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. E. Elagib, M. Xiao, I. M. Hussaini, L. L. Delehanty, L. A. Palmer, F. K. Racke, M. J. Birrer, G. Shanmugasundaram, M. A. McDevitt, and A. N. Goldfarb Jun Blockade of Erythropoiesis: Role for Repression of GATA-1 by HERP2 Mol. Cell. Biol., September 1, 2004; 24(17): 7779 - 7794. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
| Copyright © 2003 by American Society of Hematology Online ISSN: 1528-0020 | |||||||||
Top
Abstract
Introduction
(PKC-
for example,
vast stromal cell excess
2 (CD18)-mediated cell proliferation of HEL cells on a hematopoietic-supportive bone marrow stromal cell line, HESS-5 cells.
Blood.
1998;91:1263-1271
IIb