Article | Published:

SCAI acts as a suppressor of cancer cell invasion through the transcriptional control of β1-integrin

Nature Cell Biology volume 11, pages 557568 (2009) | Download Citation

Subjects

Abstract

Gene expression reprogramming governs cellular processes such as proliferation, differentiation and cell migration through the complex and tightly regulated control of transcriptional cofactors that exist in multiprotein complexes. Here we describe SCAI (suppressor of cancer cell invasion), a novel and highly conserved protein that regulates invasive cell migration through three-dimensional matrices. SCAI acts on the RhoA–Dia1 signal transduction pathway and localizes in the nucleus, where it binds and inhibits the myocardin-related transcription factor MAL by forming a ternary complex with serum response factor (SRF). Genome-wide expression analysis surprisingly reveals that one of the strongest upregulated genes after suppression of SCAI is β1-integrin. Decreased levels of SCAI are tightly correlated with increased invasive cell migration, and SCAI is downregulated in several human tumours. Functional analysis of the β1-integrin gene strongly argues that SCAI is a novel transcriptional cofactor that controls gene expression downstream of Dia1 to dictate changes in cell invasive behaviour.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Accessions

ArrayExpress

References

  1. 1.

    & Biological control through regulated transcriptional coactivators. Cell 119, 157–167 (2004).

  2. 2.

    & The diaphanous-related formin mDia1 controls serum response factor activity through its effects on actin polymerization. Mol. Biol. Cell 13, 4088–4099 (2002).

  3. 3.

    & Staying in shape with formins. Dev. Cell 10, 693–706 (2006).

  4. 4.

    , , , & A role for VASP in RhoA-Diaphanous signalling to actin dynamics and SRF activity. EMBO J. 22, 3050–3061 (2003).

  5. 5.

    et al. Megakaryoblastic leukemia 1, a potent transcriptional coactivator for serum response factor (SRF), is required for serum induction of SRF target genes. Mol. Cell. Biol. 23, 6597–6608 (2003).

  6. 6.

    , , & Actin dynamics control SRF activity by regulation of its coactivator MAL. Cell 113, 329–342 (2003).

  7. 7.

    , , & Nuclear actin regulates dynamic subcellular localization and activity of the SRF cofactor MAL. Science 316, 1749–1752 (2007).

  8. 8.

    et al. Fusion of two novel genes, RBM15 and MKL1, in the t(1;22)(p13;q13) of acute megakaryoblastic leukemia. Nature Genet. 28, 220–221 (2001).

  9. 9.

    et al. Involvement of a human gene related to the Drosophila spen gene in the recurrent t(1;22) translocation of acute megakaryocytic leukemia. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 98, 5776–5779 (2001).

  10. 10.

    & Evidence for tension-based regulation of Drosophila MAL and SRF during invasive cell migration. Dev. Cell 7, 85–93 (2004).

  11. 11.

    Mechanisms of cancer cell invasion. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 15, 87–96 (2005).

  12. 12.

    , & Integrin signaling to the actin cytoskeleton. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 15, 572–582 (2003).

  13. 13.

    O. Integrins: bidirectional, allosteric signaling machines. Cell 110, 673–687 (2002).

  14. 14.

    , , , & Integrins in invasive growth. J. Clin. Invest. 109, 999–1006 (2002).

  15. 15.

    et al. Rab25 associates with α5β1-integrin to promote invasive migration in 3D microenvironments. Dev Cell 13, 496–510 (2007).

  16. 16.

    & β1-integrin function in vivo: adhesion, migration and more. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 24, 403–411 (2005).

  17. 17.

    et al. Identification and testing of a gene expression signature of invasive carcinoma cells within primary mammary tumors. Cancer Res 64, 8585–8594 (2004).

  18. 18.

    et al. Targeted disruption of β1-integrin in a transgenic mouse model of human breast cancer reveals an essential role in mammary tumor induction. Cancer Cell 6, 159–170 (2004).

  19. 19.

    et al. Increased β1-integrin is associated with decreased survival in invasive breast cancer. Cancer Res. 67, 659–664 (2007).

  20. 20.

    et al. Dia1 and IQGAP1 interact in cell migration and phagocytic cup formation. J. Cell Biol. 178, 193–200 (2007).

  21. 21.

    , & MAL and Ternary Complex Factor use different mechanisms to contact a common surface on the Serum Response Factor DNA-binding domain. Mol. Cell. Biol. 26, 4134–4148 (2006).

  22. 22.

    P., , & Phenotypic modulation of smooth muscle cells through interaction of Foxo4 and myocardin. Dev. Cell 9, 261–270 (2005).

  23. 23.

    et al. Positive feedback between Dia1, LARG, and RhoA regulates cell morphology and invasion. Genes Dev. 21, 1478–1483 (2007).

  24. 24.

    et al. Compensation mechanism in tumor cell migration: mesenchymal-amoeboid transition after blocking of pericellular proteolysis. J. Cell Biol. 160, 267–277 (2003).

  25. 25.

    et al. β1-Integrin-dependent cell adhesion to EMILIN-1 is mediated by the gC1q domain. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 6160–6167 (2003).

  26. 26.

    , , , & Myocardin-related transcription factors and SRF are required for cytoskeleton dynamics and experimental metastasis. Nature Cell Biol. 11, 257–268 (2009).

  27. 27.

    et al. TGFβ primes breast tumors for lung metastasis seeding through angiopoietin-like 4. Cell 133, 66–77 (2008).

  28. 28.

    et al. Mitf regulation of Dia1 controls melanoma proliferation and invasiveness. Genes Dev. 20, 3426–3439 (2006).

  29. 29.

    & High mobility of proteins in the mammalian cell nucleus. Nature 404, 604–609 (2000).

  30. 30.

    , , & Functional interactions between the Forkhead transcription factor FOXK1 and the MADS-box protein SRF. Nucleic Acids Res. 35, 5203–5212 (2007).

  31. 31.

    , , & Plexin-B family members demonstrate non-redundant expression patterns in the developing mouse nervous system: an anatomical basis for morphogenetic effects of Sema4D during development. Eur J. Neurosci. 19, 2622–2632 (2004).

  32. 32.

    et al. TM4: a free, open-source system for microarray data management and analysis. BioTechniques 34, 374–378 (2003).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank B. Di Ventura and W. Birchmeier for critical reading, and R. Treisman and T. Worzfeld for stimulating discussions. We are grateful to A. Ripperger, K. Reeck and G. Streichert for technical assistance, and U. Engel at the Nikon Imaging Center for imaging advice. This work was funded by the Emmy Noether Program of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (GR 2111/1-3) and the Wilhelm Sander-Stiftung (2008.020.1) to R.G. R.G. is a member of the excellence cluster Cellular Networks and supported by the CHS Foundation. J.I. is supported by the EMBO Young Investigator Program, Academy of Finland, and the European Research Council.

Author information

Author notes

    • Dominique T. Brandt
    •  & Christian Baarlink

    These authors contributed equally to this work

Affiliations

  1. Institute of Pharmacology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 366, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.

    • Dominique T. Brandt
    • , Christian Baarlink
    • , Thomas M. Kitzing
    •  & Robert Grosse
  2. Helmholtz Zentrum München, Institute of Molecular Immunology, Marchionistrasse 25, 81377 Munich, Germany.

    • Elisabeth Kremmer
  3. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland and University of Turku, Turku FIN-20520, Finland.

    • Johanna Ivaska
  4. Department of Clinical Chemistry, Center of Clinical Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany.

    • Peter Nollau

Authors

  1. Search for Dominique T. Brandt in:

  2. Search for Christian Baarlink in:

  3. Search for Thomas M. Kitzing in:

  4. Search for Elisabeth Kremmer in:

  5. Search for Johanna Ivaska in:

  6. Search for Peter Nollau in:

  7. Search for Robert Grosse in:

Contributions

D.T.B. and C.B. designed, performed and analysed the majority of experiments; T.M.K. generated data in Figs 6 and 7. E.K. generated monoclonal antibodies against SCAI; J.I. generated the data in Fig. 7d, and P.N. the data in Fig. 7a. R.G. generated data in Fig. 5, designed and discussed experiments and wrote the manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert Grosse.

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Information

Excel files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Table 1

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb1862

Further reading