|
|
Previous Article | Table of Contents | Next Article 
Blood, Vol. 95 No. 1 (January 1), 2000:
pp. 189-197
HEMOSTASIS, THROMBOSIS, AND VASCULAR BIOLOGY
Hypoxia response element of the human vascular endothelial
growth factor gene mediates transcriptional regulation by nitric
oxide: control of hypoxia-inducible factor-1 activity by nitric
oxide
Hideo Kimura,
Alessandro Weisz,
Yukiko Kurashima,
Kouichi Hashimoto,
Tsutomu Ogura,
Fulvio D'Acquisto,
Raffaelo Addeo,
Masatoshi Makuuchi, and
Hiroyasu Esumi
From the Investigative Treatment Division, National Cancer Center
Research Institute East, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan; the Institute of
General Pathology and Oncology, Second University of Naples, Naples,
Italy; the Department of Experimental Pharmacology, University of
Naples, Federico II, Naples, Italy; and the Second Department of
Surgery, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
 |
Abstract |
Nitric oxide (NO) regulates production of vascular endothelial
growth factor (VEGF) by normal and transformed cells. We demonstrate that NO donors may up-regulate the activity of the human VEGF promoter
in normoxic human glioblastoma and hepatoma cells independent of a
cyclic guanosine monophosphate-mediated pathway. Deletion and mutation
analysis of the VEGF promoter indicates that the NO-responsive
cis-elements are the hypoxia-inducible factor-1 (HIF-1) binding
site and an adjacent ancillary sequence that is located immediately
downstream within the hypoxia-response element (HRE). This work
demonstrates that the HRE of this promoter is the primary target of NO.
In addition, VEGF gene regulation by NO, as well as by hypoxia, is
potentiated by the AP-1 element of the gene. Our study also reveals
that NO and hypoxia induce an increase in HIF-1 binding activity and
HIF-1 protein levels, both in the nucleus and the whole cell. These
results suggest that there are common features of the NO and hypoxic
pathways of VEGF induction, while in part, NO mediates gene
transcription by a mechanism distinct from hypoxia. This is
demonstrated by a difference in sensitivity to guanylate cyclase
inhibitors and a different pattern of HIF-1 binding. These results show
that there is a primary role for NO in the control of VEGF synthesis and in cell adaptations to hypoxia. (Blood. 2000;95:189-197)
© 2000 by The American Society of Hematology.
 |
Introduction |
Angiogenesis, the sprouting of new capillaries from
preexisting blood vessels, is a multistep process that involves
migration and proliferation of endothelial cells, remodeling of the
extracellular matrix, and functional maturation of the newly assembled
vessels.1,2 Physiologically, angiogenesis is a tightly
regulated process, resulting from the balance of angiogenic and
angiostatic stimuli. These stimuli are regulated temporally and
spatially, as for example during early embryonic development,
organogenesis, and wound healing. At other times, angiogenesis is
completely inhibited.3 Unregulated angiogenesis is the
cause of severe tissue dysfunction, and has been directly implicated in
the pathogenesis of various diseases including retinopathies,
psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, and other chronic inflammatory
diseases.4 Moreover, angiogenesis is essential for solid
tumor outgrowth.5
The endothelial cell-specific vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)
exerts a pivotal role in normal and pathological
angiogenesis.6 Its production by stromal or epithelial
cells is sufficient to trigger angiogenesis, and inactivation of the
corresponding gene results in abnormal blood vessel development and
embryonic lethality in mice.7 Indeed, synthesis of VEGF,
followed by its secretion into the extracellular environment, is 1 of
the primary steps in the angiogenic cascade and controls the onset,
extent, and duration of this process. A number of angiogenic stimuli
have been found to induce VEGF expression including several growth factors and cytokines, hormones, phorbol esters, oncogenes, nitric oxide (NO), and hypoxia.8 VEGF gene expression in hypoxic
cells is characterized by its transcriptional
activation,9-12 primarily through the hypoxia-response
element (HRE) that includes cis-acting DNA elements recognized by
multiple transactivators.9,12-14
Hypoxia-inducible factor-1 (HIF-1) is the best-characterized regulator
of the VEGF gene transcription. In its active form, it is a dimer
composed of 2 distinct subunits, both of which belong to the basic
helix-loop-helix-per-arnt-sim (bHLH-PAS) protein family: HIF-1 and HIF-1 , the aryl
hydrocarbon receptor nuclear translocator (ARNT).15 Under
hypoxic conditions, active HIF-1 complexes accumulate in the cell
nucleus. They bind to the target DNA sequence (HIF-1 binding site)
within the HRE and enhance the hypoxia-inducible gene transcription
rate.15
Nitric oxide is an intracellular and intercellular signaling molecule,
generated in eukaryotic cells from L-arginine by a reaction catalyzed
by NO synthases.16 A wide range of biological effects are
attributed to this molecule.17 Some effects are linked to
its intracellular second messenger nature, while others result from its
paracrine actions, mediated by activation of the guanylate
cyclase/3',5'-cyclic guanosine monophosphate (GC/cGMP) pathway.18,19 Indeed, although NO is highly reactive
and believed to be quite unstable in vivo, once produced in sufficient
amounts it can travel significant distances in the tissue to reach
multiple cellular targets.20
There is a considerable body of evidence that NO downregulates the
expression of VEGF gene.21-25 In spite of these
observations, production of angiogenic activity by human monocytes has
been found to depend on NO,26 and NO-generating compounds
have been shown to stimulate the VEGF gene transcription in human
glioblastoma and hepatoma cells in culture.27 Furthermore,
a strong positive correlation between NO synthase (NOS) activity, cGMP
levels, and tumor angiogenesis has been recently described in head and
neck28 and gynecological cancers.29,30 We have
investigated the mechanism of NO-mediated regulation of the human VEGF
gene in human glioblastoma and hepatoma cells. Our results show that
the VEGF gene transcription is activated by NO as well as by hypoxia
via the HIF-1 binding site and an adjacent "ancillary" sequence
within the HRE of this gene. This response to NO is mediated, at least
in part, by activation of the HIF-1 complex independent of the GC/cGMP pathway.
 |
Materials and methods |
Transient expression assays
The sequence phVEGF1 (provided by Dr A. Minchenko31)
contains the promoter and 5'-flanking sequence of the human VEGF
gene between positions -2279 and +54, cloned into
the pGL2-basic vector (Promega). A series of deletion mutants was
prepared by restriction endonuclease digestion and religation. The
sequence pT81luc0 (L Cicatiello and A Weisz, unpublished data),
modified from pT81luc (provided by Dr S.K. Nordeen32)
contains the Herpes Simplex virus thymidine kinase (HSV-TK) gene
promoter, upstream of the luciferase coding sequence. pHREL, pHRE, and
related mutants of pHRE (pHREm1 to 3) were prepared by amplifying a
specific segment of the 5'-flanking region of the human VEGF gene
with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and cloning it in a single copy,
upstream of the HSV-TK promoter of pT81luc0. The pHRA and pHRB
sequences were prepared by ligating commercially synthesized
oligonucleotides to pT81luc0. The pSV-nlslacZ sequence (SV40-driven
promoter) was used as a control for monitoring transfection efficiency;
it contains lacZ coding sequences. Constructs (5 µg of the reporter
plasmid and 1 µg of pSV-nlslacZ) were transfected into human
glioblastoma A-172 or hepatoma Hep3B cells (Japanese
Collection of Research Bioresources, Tokyo, Japan)
at 20%-30% confluence in a 10-cm tissue culture plate, with 20 µL
of lipofectin (Life Technologies, Rockville, MD).
After incubation at 37°C for 15 hours, the DNA-containing medium
was replaced with normal culture medium. The cells were then incubated
at 37°C before harvesting under normoxic conditions (21%
O2) or following exposure to either hypoxic conditions (1% O2); the NO donors, S-nitroso-N-acetyl-D, L-penicillamine
(SNAP), 3-(hydroxy-1-(1-methylethyl)-2-nitrosohydrazino)-1-propanamine (NOC5); or sodium nitroprusside (SNP). SNAP was dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), and NOC5 and SNP were dissolved in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) immediately before use. An aliquot of SNAP was added 12 hours before harvest. However, because the half-life of NOC5 (25 minutes) is much shorter than that of SNAP (8 hours), the first
half-dose of NOC5 was added at 12 hours, and the remaining dose was
added 6 hours before cell harvest in A-172 cells. Harvested cells were
dissolved in 200 µL of 0.25 mol/L Tris-Cl, pH 7.5. Cell lysis was
performed by 4 freeze-thaw cycles.
Luciferase activity was determined by mixing 100 µL of cell extract
with 225 µL of luciferin reagent. The luciferin reagent was prepared
by mixing 75 µL of luciferin stock solution (0.5 mmol/L D-luciferin
[SIGMA, St Louis, MO], 25 mmol/L glycylglycine [ph 7.8]) and 150 µL of luciferase assay buffer (25 mmol/L glycylglycine [ph 7.8], 15 mmol/L KPO4, 15 mmol/L MgSO4, 4 mmol/L EGTA, 2 mmol/L ATP, and 1 mmol/L dithio treitol [DTT]). Luminescence was
measured for 20 seconds in a luminometer (Luminescencer-JNR; ATTO,
Tokyo, Japan), and results were expressed as relative light units. We measured -galactosidase activity by using 50 µL of cell extract and a 690-µL mixture of 25.4 mmol/L Tris- Cl (pH
7.5); 1.4 mmol/L MgCl2; 58 mmol/L NaPO4 (pH
7.5); 1.4% -mercaptoethanol; and 1.1 mg/mL
o-nitrophenyl- -D-galactopyranoside (SIGMA). Incubation was
completed at 37°C for 0.5-1 hour. To determine the
A420, we stopped the reaction by adding 50µL of 1 mol/L Na2CO3. The relative luc activity (mean ± standard error of the mean) was defined as luciferase activity
standardized by -galactosidase activity. Fold induction was defined
as the ratio of the relative luc activity of stimulated cells to that
of unstimulated controls.
Preparation of nuclear and whole-cell extracts
Cells at 60%-70% confluence were incubated at
37°C before harvest, given the following: under normoxic (21%
O2) or hypoxic (1% O2) conditions (8 hours for
A-172 cells and 12 hours for Hep3B cells), or with DMSO (0.1%) or SNAP
(0.5 mmol/L in 0.1% DMSO) under normoxic conditions (3 hours for A-172
cells and 8 hours for Hep3B cells). The cells were scraped free and
centrifuged at 270g for 10 minutes at 4°C. Nuclear extracts were
prepared with buffers A and C, as previously described,33
except that dialysis procedures were omitted. The pellet was
resuspended in buffer A and incubated on ice for 10 minutes before
being homogenized by pipetting 5-8 times with a syringe. The nuclei
were pelleted by centrifugation at 12 000g for 2 minutes at 4°C.
They were then resuspended in ice-cold buffer C and mixed by rotation
for 30 minutes at 4°C. After centrifugation at 16 000g for 10 minutes at 4°C, the supernatant was stored at -70°C, pending
electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) and Western blot analysis.
Whole-cell extracts were prepared as previously
described.34 In brief, the cells were
harvested in 10 buffer (40 mmol/L Tris-Cl [pH 7.9], 10 mmol/L EDTA
[pH 8.0], and 150 mmol/L NaCl). The cell pellet was resuspended in
whole-cell extract buffer (10 mmol/L Hepes [pH 7.9]; 400 mmol/L NaCl;
0.1 mmol/L EDTA; 5% [vol/vol] glycerol; 1 mmol/L DTT; and 1 mmol/L
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride). It was then centrifuged at 16 000g for
30 minutes at 4°C. The supernatant was stored at -70°C until
required. Protein concentration was determined by assay (Bio-Rad
Protein assay; Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA).
Electrophoretic mobility shift assay
Nuclear extracts (5 µg) from the control or stimulated cells were
incubated with 3 × 104 cpm of a
32P-labeled double-stranded oligonucleotide probe and 0.1 µg of denatured calf thymus DNA, in modified buffer Z+ (58.5 mmol/L KCl) for 30 minutes at room temperature, as previously.12
Electrophoresis was performed on 5% nondenaturing polyacrylamide gels
at 25 mA in 1 × TAE at 4°C. Autoradiography of gels was
performed (Bioimage Analyzer BAS 2000; Fuji Photo Film Co., Tokyo,
Japan). Competition experiments were performed with 10-fold to 250-fold
molar excess of unlabeled oligonucleotides,
relative to the labeled probe. For SS assays, 1 µL each of antiserum
specific for HIF-1 (provided by Dr DM Livingston35),
HIF-1 (Affinity Bioreagents, Golden, CO), or c-Myc (Calbiochem, La
Jolla, CA) were added to the binding reaction mixture without the
labeled probe. These mixtures were incubated for 30 minutes at 4°C.
The labeled probe was then added, and incubation continued for 30 minutes at room temperature.
Western blot analysis
For Western blots, anti-HIF-1 monoclonal antibody (mAb) (Novus
Biologicals, Littleton, CO) was used according to the manufacturer's protocol. In brief, 30 µg of nuclear or whole-cell extracts per lane
were resolved using SDS/6% polyacrylamide gels. The proteins were then
transferred onto nitrocellulose membranes in the
blotting buffer (5% [vol/vol] methanol, 25 mmol/L Tris, 120 mmol/L glycine). Membranes were blocked with 5%
nonfat dried milk, 2% bovine serum albumin, and TBS-T (50 mmol/L
Tirs-Cl [pH 7.5], 150 mmol/L NaCl, and 0.1% Tween-20). Endogenous
HIF-1 protein was probed with 1:1000 dilution of anti-HIF-1 mAb.
Horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse IgG (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA) was used as a secondary antibody at a
dilution of 1 in 5000 in nonfat dried milk/TBS-T. The protein complexes
were visualized by enhanced chemiluminescence
reagents (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Piscataway, NJ).
Statistical analysis
The results are expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean
(SEM). Comparison of 2 means was performed by the use of unpaired Student's t tests. Statistical significance was assumed at a
value of P < 0.05.
 |
Results |
Analysis of the human VEGF promoter response to nitric oxide
A luciferase reporter phVEGF1 was used to test the effect of NO
donors on the activity of the human VEGF promoter in A-172 cells. SNAP
enhanced the activity of the transfected promoter in a dose-dependent
manner within 6 to 12 hours (Figure 1). The chemically distinct NO donor
3-(2-hydroxy-1-(1-methylethyl)-2-nitrosohydrazino)-1-propanamine (NOC5)
was as effective as SNAP in inducing the reporter gene activation
(Figure 1C), whereas acetylpenicillamine (AP), the non-NO-releasing
analog of SNAP, did not elicit any promoter response at concentrations
up to 0.5 mmol/L (Figure 1D). These results suggest that NO enhances
the transcription of the VEGF gene. Similar dose-response correlations
and induction kinetics were observed in the same cells for the
endogenous VEGF gene activation by these NO donors.27 The
response of the transfected VEGF promoter to SNAP was transient. It was
maximal after 12 hours (P < 0.01 versus control) and
decreased by 24 hours (Figure 1A). This was due to the relatively
limited half-life of NO release by this compound in aqueous
media.36 The late decrease in the promoter activity observed with a single dose of SNAP was prevented by a second application of this compound after the first 12 hours of stimulation (P < 0.05 versus control) (Figure 1A). For comparison, the
effect of hypoxia (1% O2) on phVEGF1 expression was also
determined in A-172 cells under the same experimental conditions. As
shown in Figure 1A, transcription of the transfected reporter gene was enhanced by hypoxia (P < 0.01 versus control). This is
consistent with the fact that this reporter contains the HRE of the
VEGF gene.9,10,12 The response of the transfected VEGF
promoter to SNAP and hypoxia in human hepatoma Hep3B cells was also
tested. Maximum induction was obtained in 36 hours after exposure to
hypoxia and 24 hours or later after exposure to SNAP (Figure
2).



View larger version (202724K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 1.
Effect of NO and hypoxia on the expression of the VEGF
reporter gene in A-172 cells.
(A) Time-course of human VEGF promoter activity in A-172 cells. The
cells were exposed to normoxia (21% O2), hypoxia (1%
O2), DMSO (0.1%), or SNAP (0.5 mmol/L in 0.1% DMSO) for
0, 6, 12, or 24 hours. In the result labeled 12 + 12h, a half dose of
SNAP was added at 24 hours, and the remaining dose was added 12 hours
before harvesting the cells. *P < 0.05,
**P < 0.01 versus corresponding controls; n = 6
independent experiments. (B-D) Effect of SNAP (B), NOC5 (C), and AP (D)
on human VEGF promoter activity in A-172 cells. The cells were
stimulated for 12 hours under normoxic or hypoxic conditions. The final
concentration of DMSO was 0.1% in (B) and (D). (NOC5 was dissolved in
PBS.) (B): n = 8; *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01
versus control in normoxia, #P < 0.01 versus control in
hypoxia. (C): n = 8; *P < 0.01 versus control in
normoxia, #P < 0.01 versus control in hypoxia. (D):
n = 6; no significant difference. Relative luc activity represents
the mean ± SEM of the ratio of luciferase/ -galactosidase
activity.
|
|

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 2.
Time-course of human VEGF promoter activity in Hep3B
cells.
The cells were exposed to the same conditions as Figure 1 for 12, 24, 36, 48, or 60 hours. All data within 24-60 hours are significantly
greater than for controls (P < 0.01). n = 6 independent
experiments. Fold induction by hypoxia or by SNAP represents the ratio
of relative luc activity in cells at 1% O2, or 0.5 mmol/L
SNAP in 0.1% DMSO, to those in 21% O2 or 0.1% DMSO,
respectively.
|
|
The response seen in Hep3B cells was more intense than the response to
either stimulus in A-172 cells. This was also seen in this cell line
under hypoxia.12 However, it should be noted that the
relatively low quantitative responses of phVEGF1 to NO and hypoxia that
we observed appear to be a general feature of the response of both
chromosomal10 and transfected VEGF genes to
inducers.10,37 The overall response of this gene to a
variety of stimuli, including NO, results from a combination of
transcriptional activation and mRNA
stabilization.10,27,38,39
When cells were stimulated with either SNAP or NOC5 under hypoxic
conditions, maximal promoter activation was achieved by lower
concentrations of NO donors, as compared with normoxic conditions (Figure 1B and C). However, 0.5 mmol/L of either donor, the optimal concentration for reporter activation under normoxia, inhibited hypoxic
induction of the reporter gene (Figure 1B and C).
The NOS inhibitors NG-nitro-L-arginine methyl ester
(L-NAME, 2 mmol/L) or aminoguanidine (AG, 5 mmol/L) did not interfere
with hypoxia-induced VEGF promoter activation (Figure
3A). This indicates that NO production by
endogenous NOS is not essential for transcriptional regulation of the
VEGF gene in hypoxic cells. Studies with GC inhibitors have suggested
that VEGF mRNA accumulation in response to NO donors is mediated by an
increase in intracellular cGMP levels.27 The response of
the reporter to NO in the presence of GC inhibitors was therefore
analyzed. When cells were incubated with SNAP for 12 hours in the
presence of either methylene blue (MB, 25 µmol/L) or
6-anilino-5,8-quinolinequinone (LY83 583, 1.25 µmol/L), NO-induced
promoter activation was completely inhibited (P < 0.01
versus control in SNAP). In contrast, acting alone, 1H-[1,2,4]oxidiazolo[4,3-a]quinoxalin-1-1 (ODQ, 25 µmol/L),
another specific GC inhibitor, did not inhibit the NO-induced
transcriptional activation even at the higher
concentration. However, LY83 583 (1.25 µmol/L) could attenuate the
activation to the levels of the untreated cells in the presence of ODQ
(25 µmol/L) (P < 0.05 versus ODQ+SNAP) (Figure 3B). In
addition, to test if an increase of cGMP levels could enhance VEGF
promoter activity, 8-Br-cGMP (a protein kinase G activator) was added
to the culture medium at a concentration of 800 µmol/L, in the
presence or absence of LY83 583 (1.25 µmol/L). In both cases,
8-Br-cGMP did not show any effect on NO-induced promoter activity.
Hypoxic induction of the same reporter gene was unaffected by either GC
inhibitor or by 8-Br-cGMP when tested under the same experimental
conditions (Figure 3B). Despite the suppression of NO-induced VEGF
promoter activation by MB and LY83 583, these results suggest that the NO-induced activation is not mediated by the GC/cGMP pathway.



View larger version (252423K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 3.
Effects of inhibitors on human VEGF promoter activity in
A-172 cells.
The cells were exposed to the same conditions as Figure 1
for 12 hours. (A) Effect of the NOS inhibitor (2 mmol/L L-NAME or 5 mmol/L AG). n = 8; no significant difference. (B) Effect of the GC
inhibitor and/or protein kinase G activator (25 µmol/L MB, 1.25 µmol/L LY83 583, or 25 µmol/L ODQ and/or 800 µmol/L 8-Br-cGMP).
n = 6; *P < 0.01 versus control in SNAP,
#P < 0.05 and +P < 0.01 versus ODQ in SNAP, and
8-Br-cGMP in SNAP, respectively. (C): n = 6; *P < 0.01
versus control in hypoxic conditions. (C) Effect of SNP.
*P < 0.01 versus control in hypoxic conditions.
|
|
It has been recently reported that NO suppresses hypoxic induction of
VEGF gene by using SNP as an NO donor in human hepatoma cell
lines.23,25 Our studies with SNP demonstrated that it attenuated the VEGF promoter activation by hypoxia in a dose-dependent manner. Moreover, it had no significant effect under normoxia at
concentrations up to 100 µmol/L in A-172 cells (Figure 3C) and Hep3B
cells (data not shown), in contrast to our results with SNAP and NOC5.
Identification of the NO-response elements of the human VEGF
gene
To determine the NO-response element of the human VEGF promoter, we
constructed a series of deletion mutants of phVEGF1 and tested their
response to SNAP (0.5 mmol/L for 12 hours) following transient
transfection in A-172 cells. Removal of DNA sequences between positions
-2279 and -1014 did not cause any significant change in the hypoxia- or
NO-induced activation of the VEGF reporter gene (Figure
4A). A further deletion to -794 (phVEGF4)
significantly reduced the promoter response to either stimulus
(P < 0.01 and < 0.05 versus phVEGF3 in hypoxia and in
SNAP, respectively). It should be noted that a similar stepwise
decrease in the response of the VEGF reporter genes to hypoxia has been
reported previously.9,11,12 To confirm that NO-response
element is indeed located in the -1014 and -794 region, we tested the
ability of this sequence to confer NO-inducibility to the HSV-TK
promoter. As shown in Figure 4B, this is the case. Deletion of the VEGF
promoter sequence between -960 and -903 (pHRA) completely lost the
response to SNAP (P < 0.01 versus pHRE in SNAP). Analysis
of an additional recombinant (pHRB) further locates the NO-response
element between positions -986 and -922 (P < 0.01 versus
pHRA in SNAP). It overlaps with the HRE of the VEGF gene. Sequence
comparisons between human, mouse, and rat VEGF genes in this DNA region
reveal a high degree of evolutionary conservation. In particular, there
is conformity in 4 sequences. These correspond to the HIF-1 binding
site 5'-TACGTGGG (-975 to -968); the AP-1 site 5'-TGACTAA
(-937 to -931); the "NF- B-like' sequence 5'-GGGTTTTGCC
(-1,000 to -991); and the sequence 5'-ACAGGTC (-962 to -956),
which we call the HIF-1 ancillary sequence. The last has been
previously suggested to be essential for hypoxic induction of the VEGF
promoter.9



View larger version (141617K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 4.
Localization of VEGF 5'-flanking sequences that
mediate transcriptional response to hypoxia or SNAP.
VEGF sequences were cloned to the promoterless pGL2 basic vector (A) or
5' to an HSV-TK promoter-luciferase transcription unit of
pT81luc0 (B, C). The locations of restriction sites are shown relative
to the transcription start site. Relative luc activity is defined as
the mean ratio of luciferase/ -galactosidase activity ± SEM. Fold
induction, by hypoxia or SNAP, represents the ratio of relative luc
activity in cells at 1% O2 or 0.5 mmol/L SNAP in 0.1%
DMSO to those at 21% O2 or 0.1% DMSO, respectively. (A)
n = 8 (hypoxia) or n = 11 (SNAP); *P < 0.05 versus
phVEGF1 and <0.01 versus phVEGF3 in hypoxia, #P < 0.01
versus phVEGF1 and < 0.05 versus phVEGF3 in SNAP. (B) n = 8;
*P < 0.01 versus pHRB in hypoxia, **P < 0.05
versus pHRE in hypoxia, #P < 0.01 versus pHRB in SNAP, and
##P < 0.05 versus pHREL in SNAP. (C) Nucleotides of
transcription factor binding sites (HIF-1 binding site, HIF-1 ancillary
sequence, AP-1) are underlined (-975 to -968, -962 to -956, and -937 to
-931, respectively), and substituted bases are shown in lowercase
letters. n = 6; *P < 0.01 versus pHRE and < 0.05 versus pHREm3 in hypoxia, **P < 0.05 versus pHRE in
hypoxia, #P < 0.01 versus pHRE and < 0.05 versus pHREm3
in SNAP, and ##P < 0.05 versus pHRE in SNAP.
|
|
To determine the role of each of these sequence elements in the
NO-mediated responses, we tested responses of pHRE and its related
mutants to SNAP. The response of pHRE was quantitatively and
qualitatively comparable to that of phVEGF3 (Figure 4A). Mutation in
the HIF-1 binding site (pHREm1) or in the HIF-1 ancillary sequence (pHREm2) completely abolished the NO-induced activation of the promoter
(P < 0.01 versus pHRE), and mutation in the AP-1 site (pHREm3) inhibited, partially but significantly, the response to NO
(P < 0.05 versus pHRE) (Figure 4C). As controls, the
response of these reporters to hypoxia was also measured under the same conditions and was found to be superimposable to that of NO. The effects of NO and hypoxia on these reporters were also the same when
tested in Hep3B cells (data not shown). Taken together, these results
indicate that the NO-response and hypoxia-response sequences of the
human VEGF gene co-localize with the HIF-1 binding site; the HIF-1
ancillary sequence; and in part, the AP-1 site.
Characterization of NO-responsive nuclear proteins that bind to the
HIF-1 site of the human VEGF gene
To identify the transcription factor(s) present in A-172 cells that
may interact with the NO-response element, and in particular with the
HIF-1 site, we analyzed the in vitro binding of nuclear proteins to a
labeled WT HIF (-985 to -960) double-stranded oligonucleotide (Figure
5A). Several DNA-protein complexes were
detected, as shown in Figure 5B. Four bands are present when using
nuclear extracts from both control and SNAP-stimulated cells (NS, C1,
C2, C3). The lowest band (NS) does not represent a specific complex
since it can interact with a variety of wild-type and mutated
oligonucleotides. The other 3 complexes (C1, C2, C3) represent proteins
interacting specifically with the HIF-1 site or
with its flanking sequences. These 3 complexes are detected using
probes containing the HIF-1 site from either VEGF9,12 or
erythropoietin (Epo)12,40,41 genes. It has been suggested
that the complexes represent constitutive binding of ATF-1 and CREB-1
transcription factors within or near HIF-1 sites.42




View larger version (199288110K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 5.
NO and hypoxia-enhance HIF-1 binding activity.
(A) Oligonucleotide sequences for EMSA. Nucleotides of functional
transcription factor binding sites are underlined, and substituted
bases are shown in lowercase letters. WT HIF was used as a labeled
probe. (B, C) EMSAs showing the binding specificity of nuclear factors
from SNAP-treated cells (B) or hypoxia-treated cells (C). Nuclear
extracts (5 µg) from A-172 cells, treated by 0.1% DMSO or 0.5 mmol/L
SNAP (B), or under normoxic or hypoxic (1% O2) conditions
(C), were incubated with WT HIF probe for 30 minutes in the presence of
no competitor0 or 10-, 50-, or 250-fold molar excess of
unlabeled competitor oligonucleotides. SNAP-induced or hypoxia-induced
(H1 and H2), constitutive (C1, C2, C3), and nonspecific (NS) complexes
are indicated. (D) SS of HRE binding complexes. Nuclear extracts (5 µg) from A-172 cells treated by 0.5 mmol/L SNAP or by hypoxia were
incubated with labeled WT HIF probe, in the presence or absence of mAbs
against HIF-1 , HIF-1 , or c-Myc as potential supershifting
reagents. The shifted complexes (SS) are indicated. Ab = antibody,
N.E. = nuclear extract, S = SNAP, and H = hypoxia.
|
|
The remaining 2 upper bands (H1 and H2) were faint in extracts from
untreated cells, but quite intense following cell exposure to SNAP
(Figure 5B). These labeled complexes were inhibited by an excess of
unlabeled oligonucleotides containing the wild-type HIF-1 site from
either the human VEGF or Epo genes (WT HIF, HRA, HRAm1, HRB, HRBm2, WT
Epo). However, they were not inhibited by an excess of oligonucleotides
containing mutation in the HIF-1 site (MUT HIF, HRAm2, HRBm1, MUT Epo)
or by an SP-1-binding oligonucleotide of unrelated sequence (SP-1)
(Figure 5B). Nuclear extracts from hypoxic A-172 cells showed a similar
pattern of binding (Figure 5C). However, the intensity of H2 is
generally stronger than that of H1 in the NO-treated cells, while both
are similarly enhanced in the hypoxic cells.
To verify the presence of HIF-1 protein in H1 and H2 complexes, we then
used antibodies against both HIF-1 and HIF-1 /ARNT in supershift
(SS) assays. As shown in Figure 5D, both NO-induced and hypoxia-induced
H complexes were indeed completely supershifted by either
anti-HIF-1 or anti-HIF-1 antibodies but not by unrelated anti-c-Myc antiserum.
Gel shift assays of Hep3B nuclear extracts were also performed for
HIF-1 binding to the WT HIF probe. H1 and H2 complexes were quite
visible in NO-treated and hypoxia-treated cell extracts, and the
patterns of relative amounts of these bands were quite similar to those
seen in A-172 nuclear extracts (Figure 6).
The SS assay demonstrated that these inducible bands also contained HIF-1 and protein (data not shown). These results indicate that
NO and hypoxia induce HIF-1 binding activity in A-172 and Hep3B cells.

View larger version (81K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 6.
EMSA with nuclear extracts from Hep3B cells.
Nuclear extracts (5 µg) from Hep3B cells, treated by 0.1% DMSO or
0.5 mmol/L SNAP (8 hours) or under normoxic or hypoxic conditions (12 hours), were incubated with WT HIF probe for 30 minutes at room
temperature. SNAP-induced or hypoxia-induced complexes (H1 and H2) are
indicated. D = DMSO, S = SNAP, N = normoxia, and H = hypoxia.
|
|
It has been reported that the amount of HIF-1 protein is
significantly increased under hypoxic conditions. This response depends
upon the stabilization of HIF-1 rather than increased HIF-1 mRNA
levels, and the abundance of HIF-1 protein primarily determines the
enhancement of HIF-1 binding activity.34,43 To examine
whether NO affects the HIF-1 accumulation, we performed Western blot
analysis with mAb anti-HIF-1 . The nuclear and whole-cell extracts
were prepared from A-172 cells. NO as well as hypoxia significantly
induced HIF-1 accumulation in both the nucleus and the whole cell
(Figures 7A and 7B). This indicates that the abundance of HIF-1 also
accounts for NO-induced HIF-1 activation.
 |
Discussion |
NO regulation of VEGF gene transcription and HIF-1 binding activity
In the present work, NO and hypoxia have been found to significantly
induce the expression of a human VEGF reporter gene in glioblastoma and
hepatoma cells. We have previously shown that VEGF mRNA rapidly
accumulates following exposure to NO donors in these cells, and that
this is prevented by pretreating the cells with the RNA polymerase
inhibitor actinomycin D.27 These results suggest that NO
activates the transcription of the endogenous VEGF gene as well as the
transfected VEGF reporter gene.
The transcription factor HIF-1 plays a central role in hypoxic
induction of the VEGF gene by binding to its target DNA sequence. NO-induced VEGF expression is also, at least in part, mediated by
activation and subsequent binding of HIF-1. Therefore, NO and hypoxia
may share common features in the pathways of VEGF induction.
SNAP stimulates the VEGF reporter expression for 60 hours in Hep3B
cells (Figure 2), in contrast to its transient effect on the same
reporter expression in A-172 cells (Figure 1A). We cannot explain
clearly the reason for this difference. It may be that the pathway from
NO to VEGF promoter activation is different between these cell lines or
that SNAP has different kinetics of NO release in these 2 cell lines
due to their different redox status. To confirm that NO is responsible
for these effects, we performed a further experiment using a specific
NO scavenger,
2-(4-carboxyphenyl)-4,4,5,5-tetramethyl-imidazoline-1-oxyl-3-oxide (carboxy-PTIO) (Dojindo Laboratories, Osaka, Japan). When stable transformants of both A-172 and Hep3B cells with phVEGF1 were pretreated with this, the reporter activation by SNAP was completely blocked, but this effect was not produced by hypoxia (our unpublished data). This result indicates that NO was an effector in both cases.
Optimal concentrations of NO donors for VEGF reporter gene expression
in normoxia cause an inhibitory effect on the gene activation by
hypoxia (Figure 1B and C). This may be attributed to higher concentrations of NO released from NO donors under hypoxia than under
normoxia, as exposure to excessive amounts of NO could be toxic.44 This indicates that the final effect of NO on VEGF expression (activation or suppression) could also depend on the redox
status of the cellular environment.
HIF-1 protein levels were massively upregulated in various cell
lines under hypoxia, while HIF-1 mRNA levels were unchanged under
the same conditions. Similarly, in the present work a dramatic increase
in HIF-1 protein levels was seen in NO-treated A-172 cells (Figure
7A and B), although we were unable to
detect a significant change in HIF-1 mRNA. Thus, an increase in
HIF-1 mRNA may not be the main mechanism for HIF-1 protein
accumulation, but rather post-transcriptional or post-translational
mechanisms34,43 may be involved. HIF-1 is rapidly
degraded under normoxia, while it is stabilized and immediately
translocated to the nucleus under hypoxia. Our results demonstrate that
HIF-1 protein levels were elevated not only in the nucleus, but also
in the whole cell (Figure 7A and B). This suggests that accumulation of
HIF-1 , as well as its translocation to the nucleus, may play a
central role in NO-induced and hypoxia-induced activation of this
transcription factor.

View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 7.
Expression of HIF-1 proteins in A-172 cells.
Nuclear extracts (A) and whole-cell extracts (B) were prepared from
A-172 cells under the following conditions: untreated or
hypoxia-treated (12 hours), DMSO-treated (8 hours), or SNAP-treated (8 hours). The cells were subjected to Western blot analysis using mAb
anti-HIF-1 .
|
|
Although HIF-1 binding activity and HIF-1 accumulation are similarly
induced by NO and hypoxic stimulation, EMSA showed that relative
amounts of doublet bands are different in extracts from NO-treated and
hypoxia-treated cells. There are some possible mechanisms that could
account for this difference. It may be attributable to the different
status of phosphorylation. DNA binding of HIF-1 is regulated by protein
phosphorylation,45 and the status of phosphorylation can
affect the mobility of the target protein in polyacrylamide gels. It is
also possible that different coactivators may be involved in HIF-1
activation by hypoxia when compared with that activated by NO.
A number of NO effects appear to be mediated by soluble GC,
heme-containing proteins that react directly with NO and thereby induce
an increase in intracellular cGMP levels.18,19 An
involvement of cGMP in NO-induced activation of the endogenous VEGF
promoter was suggested by results obtained with the GC inhibitors MB
and LY8 358 3.27 However, as described here, another GC
inhibitor (ODQ) did not attenuate NO-induced activation of the
transfected VEGF promoter (Figure 3B). Moreover, 8-Br-cGMP did not
mimic VEGF reporter gene induction by NO, even when used in conjunction
with a NO donor and LY83 583. Hypoxic induction of this reporter gene and HIF-1 binding activity were unaffected by either MB or LY83 583
(Figure 3B). These results indicate that NO-induced activation of the
gene promoter and the HIF-1 factor does not occur via cGMP-mediated signal transduction. They also show that NO and hypoxia act through distinct pathways, or via different molecular components of a single
pathway, because of the different responses to MB and LY83 583.
Controversial effect of NO on VEGF expression and angiogenesis
The role of NO in angiogenesis is controversial. Nitric oxide donors
inhibit angiogenesis in the chick chorioallantoic membrane, the tube
formation in the matrigel tube formation assay,46 and the
growth and metastatic properties of the Lewis lung tumor in mice.47 Nitric oxide donors inhibited VEGF expression in
the arterial wall in response to balloon angioplasty21 and
in rat lungs during acute and chronic hypoxia.22 In
contrast, there are some observations that NO enhances the expression
of angiogenic activity. Nitric oxide synthase activity correlates
positively with tumor growth and vascular density.28-30
Human colon tumor cell lines transfected with a NOS-encoding gene grew
faster and were more vascularized than the parent cell lines in
vivo.48 Nitric oxide produced in vascular endothelium has
also been suggested as a downstream mediator for VEGF receptors in
angiogenesis.49 Exogenous NO and endogenous NO, elicited by
substance P, enhanced angiogenesis in vivo. Nitric oxide also enhanced
the proliferation and migration of endothelial cells in
vitro.50 Moreover, promoting endothelial NOS activity
accelerated in vivo angiogenesis.51
Some recent reports show an inhibitory effect of NO on VEGF
expression.23-25 Sogawa et al23 and Huang et
al25 demonstrated that SNP suppresses hypoxia-induced VEGF
gene activation and HIF-1 binding activity. As shown in this work, SNP
inhibits the hypoxic induction of the VEGF gene in a dose-dependent
manner in glioblastoma and hepatoma cell lines, in contrast to the
effects of SNAP and NOC5. This contradiction is clearly due to the
specific nature of SNP. SNAP and NOC5 are chemically distinct compounds
that generate NO radicals spontaneously. In contrast, after donating
NO, SNP disintegrates into ferrocyanide, ferricyanide, iron ions, and cyanide, each of which has a variety of biological
effects.52 There is no definite explanation for the cause
of the inhibitory effect of SNP, as ferrocyanide and ferricyanide at
concentrations up to 100 µmol/L made no change on VEGF promoter
activity in A-172 cells (our unpublished data). Therefore, SNP is far
from an ideal NO donor. Sogawa et al23 also used
S-nitrosoglutathione (GSNO) and 3-morpholinosydnonimine (SIN-1) only
under hypoxic conditions.
We also examined the effects of these compounds and found that they
showed remarkable induction of the VEGF reporter gene under normoxic
conditions in both A-172 and Hep3B cells (our unpublished data). These
results suggest that SNP has a distinct effect on the promoter
activity, when compared with other NO donors, and that its inhibitory
effect may not simply be attributable to NO itself. In another recent
report,24 the cell lines used were not tumor cells but were
vascular endothelial and smooth muscle cells. SNAP downregulated VEGF
expression by inhibiting PKC-induced AP-1 binding activity in smooth
muscle cells.21 Nitric oxide inhibits proliferation and
migration of endothelial cells.53,54 These contradictory
data indicate that NO has both inhibitory and activating effects on
angiogenesis, depending upon the cellular environment and the types of
cells in which assays are performed. Nitric oxide chemistry is highly
redox-sensitive. This may also explain the contradictory effects of NO
on HIF-1 activation in different cell systems and why MB and LY83 583
(but not ODQ) are inhibitory, as the former 2 compounds are known to
generate superoxide anions.55,56
Conclusions and implications
Our results imply a direct involvement of NO in the control of
angiogenesis through its regulation of VEGF expression, where HIF-1
activity appears to be essential.57 Moreover, the
identification of HIF-1 as an additional molecular target of NO opens a
new path for the molecular
characterization of the effects of this intercellular mediator on gene
transcription. Furthermore, these findings also suggest a role of NO
and its redox derivatives in tissue reactions to hypoxia. Indeed, given
the importance of HIF-1 in the genomic responses of hypoxic cells,
these results establish a direct link between NO and the adaptation of
normal and neoplastic cells and tissues to low oxygen tension. This
helps explain why NO donors can exert such diverse beneficial
therapeutic actions, for example, in cardiovascular
diseases,58 in ischemic brain injury,59 and
following surgically related ischemic-reperfusion
injuries.60 On the other hand, there is a strong positive
correlation between NO production and tumor
angiogenesis.28-30,61 These last observations suggest that
there may be possible risks of long-term treatments with
pharmacological agents that potentiate NO in patients suffering from
(or at risk of) cancer, where enhanced angiogenesis would be hazardous.
 |
Acknowledgments |
We thank Alexander Minchenko for providing the human VEGF promoter DNA,
Steven K. Nordeen and Luigi Cicatiello for providing the pT81luc0
vector, and David M. Livingston for providing anti-HIF-1 antibodies.
 |
Footnotes |
Submitted February 1, 1999; accepted September 1, 1999.
Supported by a Research Resident Fellowship from the Foundation for the
Promotion of Cancer Research and by a Grant from the Ministry of Health
and Welfare for the Second-term Comprehensive 10 Year Strategy for
Cancer Control.
A.W., F. D'A., and R.A. were Foreign Research Fellows of the
Foundation for the Promotion of Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Reprints: Hiroyasu Esumi, Investigative Treatment Division,
National Cancer Center Research Institute East, 6-5-1 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan; e-mail: hesumi{at}east.ncc.go.jp.
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.
 |
References |
1.
Folkman J, Shing Y.
Angiogenesis.
J Biol Chem.
1992;267:10931-10934[Free Full Text].
2.
D'Amore PA, Thompson RW.
Mechanisms of angiogenesis.
Annu Rev Physiol.
1987;49:453-464[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
3.
Folkman J, D'Amore PA.
Blood vessel formation: what is its molecular basis?
Cell.
1996;87:1153-1155[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
4.
Folkman J.
Angiogenesis in cancer, vascular, rheumatoid and other disease.
Nat Med.
1995;1:27-31[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
5.
Skobe M, Rockwell P, Goldstein N, Vosseler S, Fusenig NE.
Halting angiogenesis suppresses carcinoma cell invasion.
Nat Med.
1997;3:1222-1227[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
6.
Ferrara N, Davis-Smyth T.
The biology of vascular endothelial growth factor.
Endocr Rev.
1997;18:4-25[Abstract/Free Full Text].
7.
Carmeliet P, Ferreira V, Breier G, Pollefeyt S, Kieckens L, Gertsenstein M, Fahrig M, Vandenhoeck A, Harpal K, Eberhardt C, Declercq C, Pawling J, Moons L, Collen D, Risau W, Nagy A.
Abnormal blood vessel development and lethality in embryos lacking a single VEGF allele.
Nature.
1996;380:435-439[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
8.
Klagsbrun M, D'Amore PA.
Vascular endothelial growth factor and its receptors.
Cytokine Growth Factor Rev.
1996;7:259-257[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
9.
Liu Y, Cox SR, Morita T, Kourembanas S.
Hypoxia regulates vascular endothelial growth factor gene expression in endothelial cells. Identification of a 5' enhancer.
Circ Res.
1995;77:638-643[Abstract/Free Full Text].
10.
Ikeda E, Achen MG, Breier G, Risau W.
Hypoxia-induced transcriptional activation and increased mRNA stability of vascular endothelial growth factor in C6 glioma cells.
J Biol Chem.
1995;270:19,761-19,766[Abstract/Free Full Text].
11.
Levy AP, Levy NS, Wegner S, Goldberg MA.
Transcriptional regulation of the rat vascular endothelial growth factor gene by hypoxia.
J Biol Chem.
1995;270:13,333-13,340[Abstract/Free Full Text].
12.
Forsythe JA, Jiang BH, Iyer NV, Agani F, Leung SW, Koos RD, Semenza GL.
Activation of vascular endothelial growth factor gene transcription by hypoxia-inducible factor 1.
Mol Cell Biol.
1996;16:4604-4613[Abstract].
13.
Ema M, Taya S, Yokotani N, Sogawa K, Matsuda Y, Fujii-Kuriyama Y.
A novel bHLH-PAS factor with close sequence similarity to hypoxia-inducible factor 1alpha regulates the VEGF expression and is potentially involved in lung and vascular development.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.
1997;94:4273-4278 |