Regulation of Brown Fat Adipogenesis by Protein Tyrosine Phosphatase 1B

Protein-tyrosine phosphatase 1B (PTP1B) is a physiological regulator of insulin signaling and energy balance, but its role in brown fat adipogenesis requires additional investigation.To precisely determine the role of PTP1B in adipogenesis, we established preadipocyte cell lines from wild type and PTP1B knockout (KO) mice. In addition, we reconstituted KO cells with wild type, substrate-trapping (D/A) and sumoylation-resistant (K/R) PTP1B mutants, then characterized differentiation and signaling in these cells. KO, D/A- and WT-reconstituted cells fully differentiated into mature adipocytes with KO and D/A cells exhibiting a trend for enhanced differentiation. In contrast, K/R cells exhibited marked attenuation in differentiation and lipid accumulation compared with WT cells. Expression of adipogenic markers PPARγ, C/EBPα, C/EBPδ, and PGC1α mirrored the differentiation pattern. In addition, the differentiation deficit in K/R cells could be reversed completely by the PPARγ activator troglitazone. PTP1B deficiency enhanced insulin receptor (IR) and insulin receptor substrate 1 (IRS1) tyrosyl phosphorylation, while K/R cells exhibited attenuated insulin-induced IR and IRS1 phosphorylation and glucose uptake compared with WT cells. In addition, substrate-trapping studies revealed that IRS1 is a substrate for PTP1B in brown adipocytes. Moreover, KO, D/A and K/R cells exhibited elevated AMPK and ACC phosphorylation compared with WT cells.These data indicate that PTP1B is a modulator of brown fat adipogenesis and suggest that adipocyte differentiation requires regulated expression of PTP1B

ER-Bound Protein Tyrosine Phosphatase PTP1B Interacts with Src at the Plasma Membrane/Substrate Interface

PTP1B is an endoplasmic reticulum (ER) anchored enzyme whose access to substrates is partly dependent on the ER distribution and dynamics. One of these substrates, the protein tyrosine kinase Src, has been found in the cytosol, endosomes, and plasma membrane. Here we analyzed where PTP1B and Src physically interact in intact cells, by bimolecular fluorescence complementation (BiFC) in combination with temporal and high resolution microscopy. We also determined the structural basis of this interaction. We found that BiFC signal is displayed as puncta scattered throughout the ER network, a feature that was enhanced when the substrate trapping mutant PTP1B-D181A was used. Time-lapse and co-localization analyses revealed that BiFC puncta did not correspond to vesicular carriers; instead they localized at the tip of dynamic ER tubules. BiFC puncta were retained in ventral membrane preparations after cell unroofing and were also detected within the evanescent field of total internal reflection fluorescent microscopy (TIRFM) associated to the ventral membranes of whole cells. Furthermore, BiFC puncta often colocalized with dark spots seen by surface reflection interference contrast (SRIC). Removal of Src myristoylation and polybasic motifs abolished BiFC. In addition, PTP1B active site and negative regulatory tyrosine 529 on Src were primary determinants of BiFC occurrence, although the SH3 binding motif on PTP1B also played a role. Our results suggest that ER-bound PTP1B dynamically interacts with the negative regulatory site at the C-terminus of Src at random puncta in the plasma membrane/substrate interface, likely leading to Src activation and recruitment to adhesion complexes. We postulate that this functional ER/plasma membrane crosstalk could apply to a wide array of protein partners, opening an exciting field of research

Regulation of Signaling at Regions of Cell-Cell Contact by Endoplasmic Reticulum-Bound Protein-Tyrosine Phosphatase 1B

Protein-tyrosine phosphatase 1B (PTP1B) is a ubiquitously expressed PTP that is anchored to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). PTP1B dephosphorylates activated receptor tyrosine kinases after endocytosis, as they transit past the ER. However, PTP1B also can access some plasma membrane (PM)-bound substrates at points of cell-cell contact. To explore how PTP1B interacts with such substrates, we utilized quantitative cellular imaging approaches and mathematical modeling of protein mobility. We find that the ER network comes in close proximity to the PM at apparently specialized regions of cell-cell contact, enabling PTP1B to engage substrate(s) at these sites. Studies using PTP1B mutants show that the ER anchor plays an important role in restricting its interactions with PM substrates mainly to regions of cell-cell contact. In addition, treatment with PTP1B inhibitor leads to increased tyrosine phosphorylation of EphA2, a PTP1B substrate, specifically at regions of cell-cell contact. Collectively, our results identify PM-proximal sub-regions of the ER as important sites of cellular signaling regulation by PTP1B

p21-activated kinase signaling in breast cancer

The p21-activated kinases signal through a number of cellular pathways fundamental to growth, differentiation and apoptosis. A wealth of information has accumulated at an impressive pace in the recent past, both with regard to previously identified targets for p21-activated kinases that regulate the actin cytoskeleton and cellular stress pathways and with regard to newly identified targets and their role in cancer. Emerging data also provide new clues towards a previously unappreciated link between these various cellular processes. The present review attempts to provide a quick tutorial to the reader about the evolving significance of p21-activated kinases and small GTPases in breast cancer, using information from mouse models, tissue culture studies, and human materials

The potential of optical proteomic technologies to individualize prognosis and guide rational treatment for cancer patients

Genomics and proteomics will improve outcome prediction in cancer and have great potential to help in the discovery of unknown mechanisms of metastasis, ripe for therapeutic exploitation. Current methods of prognosis estimation rely on clinical data, anatomical staging and histopathological features. It is hoped that translational genomic and proteomic research will discriminate more accurately than is possible at present between patients with a good prognosis and those who carry a high risk of recurrence. Rational treatments, targeted to the specific molecular pathways of an individual’s high-risk tumor, are at the core of tailored therapy. The aim of targeted oncology is to select the right patient for the right drug at precisely the right point in their cancer journey. Optical proteomics uses advanced optical imaging technologies to quantify the activity states of and associations between signaling proteins by measuring energy transfer between fluorophores attached to specific proteins. Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET) and fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy (FLIM) assays are suitable for use in cell line models of cancer, fresh human tissues and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue (FFPE). In animal models, dynamic deep tissue FLIM/FRET imaging of cancer cells in vivo is now also feasible. Analysis of protein expression and post-translational modifications such as phosphorylation and ubiquitination can be performed in cell lines and are remarkably efficiently in cancer tissue samples using tissue microarrays (TMAs). FRET assays can be performed to quantify protein-protein interactions within FFPE tissue, far beyond the spatial resolution conventionally associated with light or confocal laser microscopy. Multivariate optical parameters can be correlated with disease relapse for individual patients. FRET-FLIM assays allow rapid screening of target modifiers using high content drug screens. Specific protein-protein interactions conferring a poor prognosis identified by high content tissue screening will be perturbed with targeted therapeutics. Future targeted drugs will be identified using high content/throughput drug screens that are based on multivariate proteomic assays. Response to therapy at a molecular level can be monitored using these assays while the patient receives treatment: utilizing re-biopsy tumor tissue samples in the neoadjuvant setting or by examining surrogate tissues. These technologies will prove to be both prognostic of risk for individuals when applied to tumor tissue at first diagnosis and predictive of response to specifically selected targeted anticancer drugs. Advanced optical assays have great potential to be translated into real-life benefit for cancer patients

NIST interlaboratory study on glycosylation analysis of monoclonal antibodies : comparison of results from diverse analytical methods

Glycosylation is a topic of intense current interest in the development of biopharmaceuticals since it is related to drug safety and efficacy. This work describes results of an interlaboratory study on the glycosylation of the Primary Sample (PS) of NISTmAb, a monoclonal antibody reference material. Seventy‑six laboratories from industry, university, research, government, and hospital sectors in Europe, North America, Asia, and Australia submitted a total of 103 reports on glycan distributions. The principal objective of this study was to report and compare results for the full range of analytical methods presently used in the glycosylation  analysis of mAbs. Therefore, participation was unrestricted, with laboratories choosing their own measurement techniques. Protein glycosylation was determined in various ways, including at the level of intact mAb, protein fragments, glycopeptides, or released glycans, using a wide variety of methods for derivatization, separation, identification, and quantification. Consequently, the diversity of results was enormous, with the number of glycan compositions identified by each laboratory ranging from 4 to 48. In total, one hundred sixteen glycan compositions were reported, of which 57 compositions could be assigned consensus abundance values. These consensus medians provide community-derived values for NISTmAb PS. Agreement with the consensus medians did not depend on the specific method or laboratory type.. The study provides a view of the current state-of-the-art for biologic glycosylation measurement and suggests a clear need for harmonization of glycosylation analysis methods

NIST Interlaboratory Study on Glycosylation Analysis of Monoclonal Antibodies: Comparison of Results from Diverse Analytical Methods

Glycosylation is a topic of intense current interest in the development of biopharmaceuticals because it is related to drug safety and efficacy. This work describes results of an interlaboratory study on the glycosylation of the Primary Sample (PS) of NISTmAb, a monoclonal antibody reference material. Seventy-six laboratories from industry, university, research, government, and hospital sectors in Europe, North America, Asia, and Australia submit- Avenue, Silver Spring, Maryland 20993; 22Glycoscience Research Laboratory, Genos, Borongajska cesta 83h, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia; 23Faculty of Pharmacy and Biochemistry, University of Zagreb, A. Kovacˇ ic´ a 1, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia; 24Department of Chemistry, Georgia State University, 100 Piedmont Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia 30303; 25glyXera GmbH, Brenneckestrasse 20 * ZENIT / 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; 26Health Products and Foods Branch, Health Canada, AL 2201E, 251 Sir Frederick Banting Driveway, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0K9 Canada; 27Graduate School of Advanced Sciences of Matter, Hiroshima University, 1-3-1 Kagamiyama Higashi-Hiroshima 739–8530 Japan; 28ImmunoGen, 830 Winter Street, Waltham, Massachusetts 02451; 29Department of Medical Physiology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, ul. Michalowskiego 12, 31–126 Krakow, Poland; 30Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University, 400 N. Broadway Street Baltimore, Maryland 21287; 31Mass Spec Core Facility, KBI Biopharma, 1101 Hamlin Road Durham, North Carolina 27704; 32Division of Mass Spectrometry, Korea Basic Science Institute, 162 YeonGuDanji-Ro, Ochang-eup, Cheongwon-gu, Cheongju Chungbuk, 363–883 Korea (South); 33Advanced Therapy Products Research Division, Korea National Institute of Food and Drug Safety, 187 Osongsaengmyeong 2-ro Osong-eup, Heungdeok-gu, Cheongju-si, Chungcheongbuk-do, 363–700, Korea (South); 34Center for Proteomics and Metabolomics, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands; 35Ludger Limited, Culham Science Centre, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, OX14 3EB, United Kingdom; 36Biomolecular Discovery and Design Research Centre and ARC Centre of Excellence for Nanoscale BioPhotonics (CNBP), Macquarie University, North Ryde, Australia; 37Proteomics, Central European Institute for Technology, Masaryk University, Kamenice 5, A26, 625 00 BRNO, Czech Republic; 38Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems, Sandtorstrasse 1, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany; 39Department of Biomolecular Sciences, Max Planck Institute of Colloids and Interfaces, 14424 Potsdam, Germany; 40AstraZeneca, Granta Park, Cambridgeshire, CB21 6GH United Kingdom; 41Merck, 2015 Galloping Hill Rd, Kenilworth, New Jersey 07033; 42Analytical R&D, MilliporeSigma, 2909 Laclede Ave. St. Louis, Missouri 63103; 43MS Bioworks, LLC, 3950 Varsity Drive Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108; 44MSD, Molenstraat 110, 5342 CC Oss, The Netherlands; 45Exploratory Research Center on Life and Living Systems (ExCELLS), National Institutes of Natural Sciences, 5–1 Higashiyama, Myodaiji, Okazaki 444–8787 Japan; 46Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Nagoya City University, 3–1 Tanabe-dori, Mizuhoku, Nagoya 467–8603 Japan; 47Medical & Biological Laboratories Co., Ltd, 2-22-8 Chikusa, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464–0858 Japan; 48National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, Blanche Lane, South Mimms, Potters Bar, Hertfordshire EN6 3QG United Kingdom; 49Division of Biological Chemistry & Biologicals, National Institute of Health Sciences, 1-18-1 Kamiyoga, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo 158–8501 Japan; 50New England Biolabs, Inc., 240 County Road, Ipswich, Massachusetts 01938; 51New York University, 100 Washington Square East New York City, New York 10003; 52Target Discovery Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX3 7FZ, United Kingdom; 53GlycoScience Group, The National Institute for Bioprocessing Research and Training, Fosters Avenue, Mount Merrion, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland; 54Department of Chemistry, North Carolina State University, 2620 Yarborough Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27695; 55Pantheon, 201 College Road East Princeton, New Jersey 08540; 56Pfizer Inc., 1 Burtt Road Andover, Massachusetts 01810; 57Proteodynamics, ZI La Varenne 20–22 rue Henri et Gilberte Goudier 63200 RIOM, France; 58ProZyme, Inc., 3832 Bay Center Place Hayward, California 94545; 59Koichi Tanaka Mass Spectrometry Research Laboratory, Shimadzu Corporation, 1 Nishinokyo Kuwabara-cho Nakagyo-ku, Kyoto, 604 8511 Japan; 60Children’s GMP LLC, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Place Memphis, Tennessee 38105; 61Sumitomo Bakelite Co., Ltd., 1–5 Muromati 1-Chome, Nishiku, Kobe, 651–2241 Japan; 62Synthon Biopharmaceuticals, Microweg 22 P.O. Box 7071, 6503 GN Nijmegen, The Netherlands; 63Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., 40 Landsdowne Street Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139; 64Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Texas Tech University, 2500 Broadway, Lubbock, Texas 79409; 65Thermo Fisher Scientific, 1214 Oakmead Parkway Sunnyvale, California 94085; 66United States Pharmacopeia India Pvt. Ltd. IKP Knowledge Park, Genome Valley, Shamirpet, Turkapally Village, Medchal District, Hyderabad 500 101 Telangana, India; 67Alberta Glycomics Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G2 Canada; 68Department of Chemistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G2 Canada; 69Department of Chemistry, University of California, One Shields Ave, Davis, California 95616; 70Horva´ th Csaba Memorial Laboratory for Bioseparation Sciences, Research Center for Molecular Medicine, Doctoral School of Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Egyetem ter 1, Hungary; 71Translational Glycomics Research Group, Research Institute of Biomolecular and Chemical Engineering, University of Pannonia, Veszprem, Egyetem ut 10, Hungary; 72Delaware Biotechnology Institute, University of Delaware, 15 Innovation Way Newark, Delaware 19711; 73Proteomics Core Facility, University of Gothenburg, Medicinaregatan 1G SE 41390 Gothenburg, Sweden; 74Department of Medical Biochemistry and Cell Biology, University of Gothenburg, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, Medicinaregatan 9A, Box 440, 405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden; 75Department of Clinical Chemistry and Transfusion Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Bruna Straket 16, 41345 Gothenburg, Sweden; 76Department of Chemistry, University of Hamburg, Martin Luther King Pl. 6 20146 Hamburg, Germany; 77Department of Chemistry, University of Manitoba, 144 Dysart Road, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T 2N2; 78Laboratory of Mass Spectrometry of Interactions and Systems, University of Strasbourg, UMR Unistra-CNRS 7140, France; 79Natural and Medical Sciences Institute, University of Tu¨ bingen, Markwiesenstrae 55, 72770 Reutlingen, Germany; 80Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research and Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Padualaan 8, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands; 81Division of Bioanalytical Chemistry, Amsterdam Institute for Molecules, Medicines and Systems, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, de Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 82Department of Chemistry, Waters Corporation, 34 Maple Street Milford, Massachusetts 01757; 83Zoetis, 333 Portage St. Kalamazoo, Michigan 49007 Author’s Choice—Final version open access under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY license. Received July 24, 2019, and in revised form, August 26, 2019 Published, MCP Papers in Press, October 7, 2019, DOI 10.1074/mcp.RA119.001677 ER: NISTmAb Glycosylation Interlaboratory Study 12 Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 19.1 Downloaded from https://www.mcponline.org by guest on January 20, 2020 ted a total of 103 reports on glycan distributions. The principal objective of this study was to report and compare results for the full range of analytical methods presently used in the glycosylation analysis of mAbs. Therefore, participation was unrestricted, with laboratories choosing their own measurement techniques. Protein glycosylation was determined in various ways, including at the level of intact mAb, protein fragments, glycopeptides, or released glycans, using a wide variety of methods for derivatization, separation, identification, and quantification. Consequently, the diversity of results was enormous, with the number of glycan compositions identified by each laboratory ranging from 4 to 48. In total, one hundred sixteen glycan compositions were reported, of which 57 compositions could be assigned consensus abundance values. These consensus medians provide communityderived values for NISTmAb PS. Agreement with the consensus medians did not depend on the specific method or laboratory type. The study provides a view of the current state-of-the-art for biologic glycosylation measurement and suggests a clear need for harmonization of glycosylation analysis methods. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 19: 11–30, 2020. DOI: 10.1074/mcp.RA119.001677.L

Reading Between the Lines: Maternity Benefit Law in India and Whom It Truly Benefits

The gendered and performative role of motherhood, an ideal of patriarchy, has been codified into the letters of law. A feminist lens has been applied to understand how motherhood and patriarchy interact within the maternity benefit law in India, which is primarily regulated by the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, as amended in 2017. An attempt is made to determine whether the extant law truly benefits all women equally without discrimination. It is critically examined, using an intersectional approach, to ascertain whether it ensures the welfare of all women or is yet another systemic attempt to further the patriarchy. The progress of the law is evaluated and corporate maternity benefit policies in India are analysed to assess whether the law requires revisions and of what type to achieve its true objective