Étude des mécanismes moléculaires qui contrôlent l’interaction entre EFA6 et ses partenaires

The small G protein Arf6 and its exchange factor EFA6 control numerous cellular processes such as actin cytoskeleton remodeling, vesicular transport and apico-basal cell polarity. They are also involved in clathrin-dependent endocytosis. In this work we identify different mechanisms by which EFA6 interaction with its various partners is regulated. We have highlighted a direct interaction between the N-BAR domain of endophilin and the Sec7 domain of EFA6. We demonstrated that this interaction is regulated by the membrane curvature. EFA6 interacts and recruits endophilin on a flat lipid membrane whereas the protein complex does not occur in the presence of curved vesicules. We showed that endophilin stimulates the nucleotidic exchange activity of EFA6 on Arf6. Next we demonstrated that the catalytic activity of EFA6 is regulated by a negative feedback loop specifically mediated by the Arf6-GTP. We observed in the presence of Arf6-GTP a decrease of EFA6 catalytic activity and we showed that this effect was due to an interaction between Arf6-GTP and PH-C-terminal domain of EFA6. Finally we demonstrated an intramolecular folding between the C-terminal domain and the PH domain of EFA6 that controls the interaction of the C-terminus domain with various partners including β-arrestin and surprisingly the inactive GDP form of Arf6.La petite protéine G Arf6 et son facteur d'échange EFA6 sont impliquées dans de nombreux processus cellulaires tels que le remodelage du cytosquelette d’actine, le transport vésiculaire et mise en place de la polarité épithéliale. Elles jouent également un rôle dans la voie d'endocytose dépendante de la clathrine. Ce travail de thèse nous a permis d’identifier différents mécanismes régulant l’interaction d’EFA6 avec ses différents partenaires. Nous avons pu mettre en évidence une interaction directe entre le domaine N-BAR de l’endophiline et le domaine Sec7 d’EFA6. Nous avons démontré que la courbure membranaire était un facteur régulant cette interaction. EFA6 est capable d’interagir et de recruter l’endophiline sur une membrane lipidique plane alors qu’en présence de vésicules courbées le complexe protéique ne se forme pas. Nous observons également que l’endophiline stimule l’activité d’échange nucléotidique d’EFA6 sur Arf6. Dans un second temps nous avons démontré, dans une étude menée par le Dr Cherfils, que l’activité catalytique d’EFA6 était régulée par une boucle de rétrocontrôle négatif exercée spécifiquement par la protéine Arf6-GTP. Celle-ci induit une diminution de l’activité d’échange d’EFA6 probablement grâce à sa capacité à interagir avec le domaine PH-C-terminal d’EFA6. Enfin, nous avons mis en évidence un repli intramoléculaire entre le domaine C-terminal et le domaine PH d’EFA6 qui semble contrôler l’interaction de cette extrémité C-terminale avec différents partenaires dont la β-arrestine et de façon surprenante la protéine Arf6 dans sa forme inactive

Molecular mechanisms that control the interaction between EFA6 and its partners

La petite protéine G Arf6 et son facteur d'échange EFA6 sont impliquées dans de nombreux processus cellulaires tels que le remodelage du cytosquelette d’actine, le transport vésiculaire et mise en place de la polarité épithéliale. Elles jouent également un rôle dans la voie d'endocytose dépendante de la clathrine. Ce travail de thèse nous a permis d’identifier différents mécanismes régulant l’interaction d’EFA6 avec ses différents partenaires. Nous avons pu mettre en évidence une interaction directe entre le domaine N-BAR de l’endophiline et le domaine Sec7 d’EFA6. Nous avons démontré que la courbure membranaire était un facteur régulant cette interaction. EFA6 est capable d’interagir et de recruter l’endophiline sur une membrane lipidique plane alors qu’en présence de vésicules courbées le complexe protéique ne se forme pas. Nous observons également que l’endophiline stimule l’activité d’échange nucléotidique d’EFA6 sur Arf6. Dans un second temps nous avons démontré, dans une étude menée par le Dr Cherfils, que l’activité catalytique d’EFA6 était régulée par une boucle de rétrocontrôle négatif exercée spécifiquement par la protéine Arf6-GTP. Celle-ci induit une diminution de l’activité d’échange d’EFA6 probablement grâce à sa capacité à interagir avec le domaine PH-C-terminal d’EFA6. Enfin, nous avons mis en évidence un repli intramoléculaire entre le domaine C-terminal et le domaine PH d’EFA6 qui semble contrôler l’interaction de cette extrémité C-terminale avec différents partenaires dont la β-arrestine et de façon surprenante la protéine Arf6 dans sa forme inactive.The small G protein Arf6 and its exchange factor EFA6 control numerous cellular processes such as actin cytoskeleton remodeling, vesicular transport and apico-basal cell polarity. They are also involved in clathrin-dependent endocytosis. In this work we identify different mechanisms by which EFA6 interaction with its various partners is regulated. We have highlighted a direct interaction between the N-BAR domain of endophilin and the Sec7 domain of EFA6. We demonstrated that this interaction is regulated by the membrane curvature. EFA6 interacts and recruits endophilin on a flat lipid membrane whereas the protein complex does not occur in the presence of curved vesicules. We showed that endophilin stimulates the nucleotidic exchange activity of EFA6 on Arf6. Next we demonstrated that the catalytic activity of EFA6 is regulated by a negative feedback loop specifically mediated by the Arf6-GTP. We observed in the presence of Arf6-GTP a decrease of EFA6 catalytic activity and we showed that this effect was due to an interaction between Arf6-GTP and PH-C-terminal domain of EFA6. Finally we demonstrated an intramolecular folding between the C-terminal domain and the PH domain of EFA6 that controls the interaction of the C-terminus domain with various partners including β-arrestin and surprisingly the inactive GDP form of Arf6

Binding Site and Inhibitory Mechanism of the Mambalgin-2 Pain-relieving Peptide on Acid-sensing Ion Channel 1a

International audienc

Arf6 exchange factor EFA6 and endophilin directly interact at the plasma membrane to control clathrin-mediated endocytosis

International audienceMembers of the Arf family of small G proteins are involved in membrane traffic and organelle structure. They control the recruitment of coat proteins, and modulate the structure of actin filaments and the lipid composition of membranes. The ADP-ribosylation factor 6 (Arf6) isoform and the exchange factor for Arf6 (EFA6) are known to regulate the endocytic pathway of many different receptors. To determine the molecular mechanism of the EFA6/Arf6 function in vesicular transport, we searched for new EFA6 partners. In a two-hybrid screening using the catalytic Sec7 domain as a bait, we identified endophilin as a new partner of EFA6. Endophilin contains a Bin/Amphiphysin/Rvs (BAR) domain responsible for membrane bending, and an SH3 domain responsible for the recruitment of dynamin and synaptojanin, two proteins involved, respectively, in the fission and uncoating of clathrin-coated vesicles. By using purified proteins, we confirmed the direct interaction, and identified the N-BAR domain as the binding motif to EFA6A. We showed that endophilin stimulates the catalytic activity of EFA6A on Arf6. In addition, we observed that the Sec7 domain competes with flat but not with highly curved lipid membranes to bind the N-BAR. In cells, expression of EFA6A recruits endophilin to EFA6A-positive plasma membrane ruffles, whereas expression of endophilin rescues the EFA6A-mediated inhibition of transferrin internalization. Overall, our results support a model whereby EFA6 recruits endophilin on flat areas of the plasma membrane to control Arf6 activation and clathrin-mediated endocytosis

IL-34 and CSF-1 display an equivalent macrophage differentiation ability but a different polarization potential

CSF-1 and IL-34 share the CSF-1 receptor and no differences have been reported in the signaling pathways triggered by both ligands in human monocytes. IL-34 promotes the differentiation and survival of monocytes, macrophages and osteoclasts, as CSF-1 does. However, IL-34 binds other receptors, suggesting that differences exist in the effect of both cytokines. In the present study, we compared the differentiation and polarization abilities of human primary monocytes in response to CSF-1 or IL-34. CSF-1R engagement by one or the other ligands leads to AKT and caspase activation and autophagy induction through expression and activation of AMPK and ULK1. As no differences were detected on monocyte differentiation, we investigated the effect of CSF-1 and IL-34 on macrophage polarization into the M1 or M2 phenotype. We highlighted a striking increase in IL-10 and CCL17 secretion in M1 and M2 macrophages derived from IL-34 stimulated monocytes, respectively, compared to CSF-1 stimulated monocytes. Variations in the secretome induced by CSF-1 or IL-34 may account for their different ability to polarize naïve T cells into Th1 cells. In conclusion, our findings indicate that CSF-1 and IL-34 exhibit the same ability to induce human monocyte differentiation but may have a different ability to polarize macrophages

ATP-competitive Plk1 inhibitors induce caspase 3-mediated Plk1 cleavage and activation in hematopoietic cell lines

International audiencePolo-like kinases (Plks) define a highly conserved family of Ser/Thr kinases with crucial roles in the regulation of cell division. Here we show that Plk1 is cleaved by caspase 3, but not by other caspases in different hematopoietic cell lines treated with competitive inhibitors of the ATP-binding pocket of Plk1. Intriguingly, Plk1 was not cleaved in cells treated with Rigosertib, a non-competitive inhibitor of Plk1, suggesting that binding of the inhibitor to the ATP binding pocket of Plk1 triggers a conformational change and unmasks a cryptic caspase 3 cleavage site on the protein. Cleavage occurs after Asp-404 in a DYSD/K sequence and separates the kinase domain from the two PBDs of Plk1. All Plk1 inhibitors triggered G2/M arrest, activation of caspases 2 and 3, polyploidy, multiple nuclei and mitotic catastrophe, albeit at higher concentrations in the case of Rigosertib. Upon BI-2536 treatment, Plk1 cleavage occurred only in the cytosolic fraction and cleaved Plk1 accumulated in this subcellular compartment. Importantly, the cleaved N-Terminal fragment of Plk1 exhibited a higher enzymatic activity than its non-cleaved counterpart and accumulated into the cytoplasm conversely to the full length and the C-Terminal Plk1 fragments that were found essentially into the nucleus. Finally, the DYSD/K cleavage site was highly conserved during evolution from c. elegans to human. In conclusion, we described herein for the first time a specific cleavage of Plk1 by caspase 3 following treatment of cancer cells with ATP-competitive inhibitors of Plk1

IL-34 and CSF-1 display an equivalent macrophage differentiation ability but a different polarization potential

International audienceCSF-1 and IL-34 share the CSF-1 receptor and no differences have been reported in the signaling pathways triggered by both ligands in human monocytes. IL-34 promotes the differentiation and survival of monocytes, macrophages and osteoclasts, as CSF-1 does. However, IL-34 binds other receptors, suggesting that differences exist in the effect of both cytokines. In the present study, we compared the differentiation and polarization abilities of human primary monocytes in response to CSF-1 or IL-34. CSF-1R engagement by one or the other ligands leads to AKT and caspase activation and autophagy induction through expression and activation of AMPK and ULK1. As no differences were detected on monocyte differentiation, we investigated the effect of CSF-1 and IL-34 on macrophage polarization into the M1 or M2 phenotype. We highlighted a striking increase in IL-10 and CCL17 secretion in M1 and M2 macrophages derived from IL-34 stimulated monocytes, respectively, compared to CSF-1 stimulated monocytes. Variations in the secretome induced by CSF-1 or IL-34 may account for their different ability to polarize naïve T cells into Th1 cells. In conclusion, our findings indicate that CSF-1 and IL-34 exhibit the same ability to induce human monocyte differentiation but may have a different ability to polarize macrophages

Targeting the CSF1/CSF1R axis is a potential treatment strategy for malignant meningiomas

BACKGROUND: Malignant meningiomas are fatal and lack effective therapy. As M2 macrophages are the most prevalent immune cell type in human meningiomas, we hypothesized that normalizing this immunosuppressive population would be an effective treatment strategy. METHODS: We used CIBERSORTx to examine the proportions of 22 immune subsets in human meningiomas. We targeted the colony-stimulating factor 1 (CSF1) or CSF1 receptor (CSF1R) axis, an important regulator of macrophage phenotype, using monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in a novel immunocompetent murine model (MGS1) for malignant meningioma. RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) was performed to identify changes in gene expression in the tumor microenvironment (TME). Mass cytometry was used to delineate changes in immune subsets after treatment. We measured patients’ plasma CSF1 levels using ELISA and CSF1R expression using multiplex quantitative immunofluorescence in a human meningioma tissue microarray. RESULTS: Human meningiomas are heavily enriched for immunosuppressive myeloid cells. MGS1 recapitulates the TME of human meningiomas, including an abundance of myeloid cells, a paucity of infiltrating T cells, and low programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Treatment of murine meningiomas with anti-CSF1/CSF1R, but not programmed cell death receptor 1 (PD-1), mAbs abrogate tumor growth. RNA-seq and mass cytometry analyses reveal a myeloid cell reprogramming with limited effect on T cells in the TME. CSF1 plasma levels are significantly elevated in human patients, and CSF1R is highly expressed on CD163(+) macrophages within the human TME. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that anti-CSF1/CSF1R antibody treatment may be an effective normalization cancer immunotherapy for malignant meningiomas