Article | Published:

A regulated PNUTS mRNA to lncRNA splice switch mediates EMT and tumour progression

Nature Cell Biology volume 19, pages 11051115 (2017) | Download Citation

  • An Addendum to this article was published on 29 November 2017

This article has been updated


The contribution of lncRNAs to tumour progression and the regulatory mechanisms driving their expression are areas of intense investigation. Here, we characterize the binding of heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein E1 (hnRNP E1) to a nucleic acid structural element located in exon 12 of PNUTS (also known as PPP1R10) pre-RNA that regulates its alternative splicing. HnRNP E1 release from this structural element, following its silencing, nucleocytoplasmic translocation or in response to TGFβ, allows alternative splicing and generates a non-coding isoform of PNUTS. Functionally the lncRNA-PNUTS serves as a competitive sponge for miR-205 during epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT). In mesenchymal breast tumour cells and in breast tumour samples, the expression of lncRNA-PNUTS is elevated and correlates with levels of ZEB mRNAs. Thus, PNUTS is a bifunctional RNA encoding both PNUTS mRNA and lncRNA-PNUTS, each eliciting distinct biological functions. While PNUTS mRNA is ubiquitously expressed, lncRNA-PNUTS appears to be tightly regulated dependent on the status of hnRNP E1 and tumour context.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Change history

  • 13 November 2017

    In this Addendum, the authors include western blot data using a C-terminal PNUTS antibody. This is important in that an annotation of the alternative spliced form of PNUTS, denoted in the UCSC genome browser (, depicts it as a non-coding RNA. However, downstream of the alternative splice site is an alternative AUG located in frame in the PNUTS ORF at position 1039. The potential for a protein product of 61 kDa being generated from this AUG was examined experimentally using a C-terminal raised antibody to PNUTS to exclude the possibility that the N-terminal deletion of the splice isoform was not the reason that the predicted 61-kDa protein was not detected in cells using an N-terminal generated antibody. The results presented here confirm our previous results using the N-terminal PNUTS antibody and originally presented in Supplementary Fig. 2b of the Article; namely, that this predicted 61-kDa product is not detectable in cells under the conditions used, even under conditions of overexpression.  Figure (see PDF): lncRNA-PNUTS does not encode for a N-terminal truncated-protein product. The result of a western blot analysis of PNUTS protein expression in CaCo-2 cells upon transient lncRNA-PNUTS expression (3 days) or TGFβ treatment (1 day) is shown. The C-terminal antibody used was EPR11706 (Abcam: Ab173285; clone PPP1R10; 1/1000 dilution) raised against the C-terminal region of the PNUTS protein (amino acids 550–650). The western blot protocol and extracts used in this experiment were identical to those described in Supplementary Fig. 2 of the original Article.


Primary accessions

Gene Expression Omnibus


  1. 1.

    et al. Global cancer statistics. CA. Cancer J. Clin. 61, 69–90 (2011).

  2. 2.

    & A perspective on cancer cell metastasis. Science 331, 1559–1564 (2011).

  3. 3.

    & Cancer metastasis: building a framework. Cell 127, 679–695 (2006).

  4. 4.

    , & Breast cancer metastasis: markers and models. Nat. Rev. Cancer 5, 591–602 (2005).

  5. 5.

    & From junk to master regulators of invasion: lncRNA functions in migration, EMT and metastasis. Int. J. Cancer 139, 269–280 (2016).

  6. 6.

    & Small RNAs as guardians of the genome. Cell 136, 656–668 (2009).

  7. 7.

    & Long noncoding RNAs: cellular address codes in development and disease. Cell 152, 1298–1307 (2013).

  8. 8.

    et al. A long noncoding RNA activated by TGF-β promotes the invasion-metastasis cascade in hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Cell 25, 666–681 (2014).

  9. 9.

    & Challenges in the analysis of long noncoding RNA functionality. FEBS Lett. 590, 2342–2353 (2016).

  10. 10.

    & Endogenous microRNA sponges: evidence and controversy. Nat. Rev. Genet. 17, 272–283 (2016).

  11. 11.

    & Role of EMT in metastasis and therapy resistance. J. Clin. Med. 5, 17 (2016).

  12. 12.

    & Epithelial–mesenchymal plasticity: a central regulator of cancer progression. Trends Cell Biol. 25, 675–686 (2015).

  13. 13.

    et al. TGF-β-mediated phosphorylation of hnRNP E1 induces EMT via transcript-selective translational induction of Dab2 and ILEI. Nat. Cell Biol. 12, 286–293 (2010).

  14. 14.

    et al. The human NANOS3 gene contributes to lung tumour invasion by inducing epithelial—mesenchymal transition. J. Pathol. 237, 25–37 (2015).

  15. 15.

    et al. Identification of an mRNP complex regulating tumorigenesis at the translational elongation step. Mol. Cell 41, 419–431 (2011).

  16. 16.

    , & Heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins (hnRNPs) in cellular processes: focus on hnRNP E1’s multifunctional regulatory roles. RNA 16, 1449–1462 (2010).

  17. 17.

    et al. Alternative isoform regulation in human tissue transcriptomes. Nature 456, 470–476 (2008).

  18. 18.

    et al. PCBP-1 regulates alternative splicing of the CD44 gene and inhibits invasion in human hepatoma cell line HepG2 cells. Mol. Cancer 9, 72 (2010).

  19. 19.

    et al. Pre-spliceosomal binding of U1 small nuclear ribonucleoprotein (RNP) and heterogenous nuclear RNP E1 is associated with suppression of a growth hormone receptor pseudoexon. Mol. Endocrinol. 21, 2529–2540 (2007).

  20. 20.

    et al. Genes that mediate breast cancer metastasis to lung. Nature 436, 518–524 (2005).

  21. 21.

    et al. Human splicing finder: an online bioinformatics tool to predict splicing signals. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, e67 (2009).

  22. 22.

    , & Identification and characterization of an hnRNP E1 translational silencing motif. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, 5892–5907 (2016).

  23. 23.

    , & The human dystrophin gene requires 16 hours to be transcribed and is cotranscriptionally spliced. Nat. Genet. 9, 184–190 (1995).

  24. 24.

    et al. The miR-200 family and miR-205 regulate epithelial to mesenchymal transition by targeting ZEB1 and SIP1. Nat. Cell Biol. 10, 593–601 (2008).

  25. 25.

    et al. MicroRNA-205 signaling regulates mammary stem cell fate and tumorigenesis. J. Clin. Invest. 124, 3093–3106 (2014).

  26. 26.

    et al. The epithelial-mesenchymal transition generates cells with properties of stem cells. Cell 133, 704–715 (2008).

  27. 27.

    , , , & Prospective identification of tumorigenic breast cancer cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 3983–3988 (2003).

  28. 28.

    Splicing noncoding RNAs from the inside out. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. RNA 6, 651–660 (2015).

  29. 29.

    , & Identification of potentially new bifunctional RNA based on genome-wide data-mining of alternative splicing events. Biochimie 93, 2024–2027 (2011).

  30. 30.

    & The ZEB/miR-200 feedback loop—a motor of cellular plasticity in development and cancer? EMBO Rep. 11, 670–677 (2010).

  31. 31.

    et al. Metastatic heterogeneity of breast cancer cells is associated with expression of a heterogeneous TGFβ-activating miR424-503 gene cluster. Cancer Res. 74, 6107–6118 (2014).

  32. 32.

    , & TGF-β promotes heterogeneity and drug resistance in squamous cell carcinoma. Cell 160, 963–976 (2015).

  33. 33.

    et al. Alternative splicing: a pivotal step between eukaryotic transcription and translation. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 14, 153–165 (2013).

  34. 34.

    & RNA in unexpected places: long non-coding RNA functions in diverse cellular contexts. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 14, 699–712 (2013).

  35. 35.

    et al. The long noncoding RNAs NEAT1 and MALAT1 bind active chromatin sites. Mol. Cell 55, 791–802 (2014).

  36. 36.

    et al. lncRNA directs cooperative epigenetic regulation downstream of chemokine signals. Cell 159, 1110–1125 (2014).

  37. 37.

    et al. A regulatory mechanism that detects premature nonsense codons in T-cell receptor transcripts in vivo is reversed by protein synthesis inhibitors in vitro. J. Biol. Chem. 270, 28995–29003 (1995).

  38. 38.

    , & Compartmentalization of hnRNP-K during cell cycle progression and its interaction with calponin in the cytoplasm. J. Cell. Biochem. 95, 1042–1056 (2005).

  39. 39.

    et al. Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition is not required for lung metastasis but contributes to chemoresistance. Nature 527, 472–476 (2015).

  40. 40.

    et al. miRNA-205 targets VEGFA and FGF2 and regulates resistance to chemotherapeutics in breast cancer. Cell Death Dis. 7, e2291 (2016).

  41. 41.

    , , & Chemoresistance to doxorubicin induces epithelial-mesenchymal transition via upregulation of transforming growth factor β signaling in HCT116 colon cancer cells. Mol. Med. Rep. 12, 192–198 (2015).

  42. 42.

    et al. Twist1-mediated adriamycin-induced epithelial-mesenchymal transition relates to multidrug resistance and invasive potential in breast cancer cells. Clin. Cancer Res. 15, 2657–2665 (2009).

  43. 43.

    , , , & Biological basis for restriction of microRNA targets to the 3′ untranslated region in mammalian mRNAs. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 16, 144–150 (2009).

  44. 44.

    & Origins of metastatic traits. Cancer Cell 24, 410–421 (2013).

  45. 45.

    , & Tumor metastasis: moving new biological insights into the clinic. Nat. Med. 19, 1450–1464 (2013).

  46. 46.

    & ELDA: extreme limiting dilution analysis for comparing depleted and enriched populations in stem cell and other assays. J. Immunol. Methods 347, 70–78 (2009).

Download references


The authors are grateful to M. Gooz for help with the microscopic analysis. We also thank Y. Shao for histopathological analysis and K. Gibbs (Charleston, South Carolina USA—Biorepository & Tissue Analysis Shared Resource at Medical University of South Carolina) for providing the human tumour samples. We thank M. Bidyut for his assistance with the cloning and K. Noguchi for his help with hnRNP E1 plasmid constructs and J. Isaacs for her precious help concerning hypoxia experiments. This work was supported in part by the Cell & Molecular Imaging, Small Animal Imaging, and the Biorepository & Tissue Analysis Shared Resources, Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina (P30 CA138313), and the Shared Instrumentation Grant S10 OD018113. This work was also supported by grants CA555536 and CA154664 from the National Cancer Institute to P.H.H.

Author information


  1. Department of Biochemistry, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina 29425, USA

    • Simon Grelet
    • , Laura A. Link
    • , Breege Howley
    • , Clémence Obellianne
    • , Vamsi K. Gangaraju
    • , J. Alan Diehl
    •  & Philip H. Howe
  2. Department of Oral Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina 29425, USA

    • Viswanathan Palanisamy
  3. Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina 29425, USA

    • Viswanathan Palanisamy
    • , Vamsi K. Gangaraju
    • , J. Alan Diehl
    •  & Philip H. Howe


  1. Search for Simon Grelet in:

  2. Search for Laura A. Link in:

  3. Search for Breege Howley in:

  4. Search for Clémence Obellianne in:

  5. Search for Viswanathan Palanisamy in:

  6. Search for Vamsi K. Gangaraju in:

  7. Search for J. Alan Diehl in:

  8. Search for Philip H. Howe in:


The study was supervised by P.H.H. The conception and design were made by S.G. and P.H.H. The methodology was developed by S.G. and P.H.H. Acquisition and interpretation of the data was carried out by S.G. and P.H.H. The Affymetrix experiment and care of the mice was provided by B.H. Mice injections and dissection were performed by S.G., L.A.L. and C.O. The manuscript was written by S.G. and P.H.H. and all the authors contributed to its reviewing. V.P., V.K.G. and J.A.D. provided critical discussion.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philip H. Howe.

Integrated supplementary information

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Information

  2. 2.

    Life Sciences Reporting Summary

Excel files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Table 1

    Supplementary Information

  2. 2.

    Supplementary Table 2

    Supplementary Information

About this article

Publication history





Further reading