70
Views
12
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Research

Asparaginyl endopeptidase improves the resistance of microtubule-targeting drugs in gastric cancer through IQGAP1 modulating the EGFR/JNK/ERK signaling pathway

, , , , , , , & show all
Pages 627-643 | Published online: 03 Feb 2017

Figures & data

Table 1 Clinical characteristics of patients

Figure 1 The analysis of survival time.

Notes: (A) The median PFS was 5.0 months (95% CI: 4.61–5.39 months). (B) The median OS was 12.0 months (95% CI: 11.10–12.89 months).
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; PFS, progression-free survival time; OS, overall survival time.
Figure 1 The analysis of survival time.

Figure 2 The analysis of survival time according to AEP expression.

Notes: PFS (A) and OS (B) were longer in AEP low-expression patients than in AEP high-expression patients (P<0.01).
Abbreviations: AEP, asparaginyl endopeptidase; PFS, progression-free survival time; OS, overall survival time.
Figure 2 The analysis of survival time according to AEP expression.

Table 2 The expression level of AEP in the serum of gastric cancer patients’ peripheral blood with different clinical response

Table 3 The expression of AEP in the serum of peripheral blood at baseline and the survival time

Figure 3 Construction of stable AEP knockout and overexpressive gastric cancer cell lines and the sensitivity to different chemotherapeutic drugs.

Notes: (A and B) AEP was suppressed in AEP knockout cells and increased in AEP overexpressive cells by Western blot assay. (C and D) The cell viability was investigated when oxaliplatin, irinotecan, 5-FU, paclitaxel, docetaxel, and T-DM1 treated NC and AEP-KO gastric cancer cells. **P<0.01.
Abbreviations: AEP-KO, asparaginyl endopeptidase knockout; AEP-OE, AEP overexpression; NC, negative control; 5-FU, 5-fluorouracil.
Figure 3 Construction of stable AEP knockout and overexpressive gastric cancer cell lines and the sensitivity to different chemotherapeutic drugs.
Figure 3 Construction of stable AEP knockout and overexpressive gastric cancer cell lines and the sensitivity to different chemotherapeutic drugs.
Figure 3 Construction of stable AEP knockout and overexpressive gastric cancer cell lines and the sensitivity to different chemotherapeutic drugs.

Figure 4 Analysis of AEP interacting proteins.

Notes: (A) The pathways were associated with AEP by KEGG_pathway analysis. (B) The interacting proteins including >10 peptides were shown in the Venn diagram, and the overlapping proteins were listed.
Abbreviations: AEP, asparaginyl endopeptidase; MAPK, mitogen-activated protein kinase.
Figure 4 Analysis of AEP interacting proteins.

Figure 5 IQGAP1 could interact with AEP in gastric cancer cells.

Notes: (A and D) IQGAP1 was one of the interacting proteins when used M2-FLAG beads to pull down the proteins. Five percent of the total lysate purified FLAG-tagged proteins were loaded as input. (B and E) IQGAP1 could be detected when AEP monoclonal antibody was used to extract the endogenous interacting proteins. (C and F) IQGAP1 was increased when AEP was knocked out.
Abbreviations: AEP, asparaginyl endopeptidase; KO, AEP knockout.
Figure 5 IQGAP1 could interact with AEP in gastric cancer cells.

Figure 6 AEP and MDR1 were decreased at mRNA level when AEP was knocked out, both in SGC7901 (A) and MKN45 (B) gastric cancer cell lines.

Notes: Glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase was used for an endogenous reference to standardize the mRNA expressive level. **P<0.01.
Abbreviations: AEP, asparaginyl endopeptidase; NC, negative control; KO, AEP knockout.
Figure 6 AEP and MDR1 were decreased at mRNA level when AEP was knocked out, both in SGC7901 (A) and MKN45 (B) gastric cancer cell lines.

Figure 7 JNK and ERK signaling pathways and MDR1 were inhibited in AEP knockout gastric cancer cell lines, and vice versa.

Notes: (A) The expression of MDR-1, p-EGFR, p-JNK, p-ERK and p-Rac1/cdc42 were decreased in AEP-KO cells, but the expression of p-p38 and total EGFR, JNK, ERK, Rac1/cdc42 and p38 did not change. (B) The expressions of MDR1, p-EGFR, p-JNK, p-ERK, and p-Rac1/cdc42 were increased in AEP-OE cells. Vinculin and tubulin were used as an internal control. (C) The AEP-OE cells were treated with varying concentrations of SP600125 or PD98059, and both could inhibit the expressions of MDR1, p-JNK, and p-ERK. (DF) The IC50 of docetaxel, paclitaxel, and T-DM1 in AEP-OE cells was calculated with the treatment of SP600125 or PD98059 for 24 h. *P<0.05; **P<0.01.
Abbreviations: AEP-KO, asparaginyl endopeptidase knockout; AEP-OE, AEP overexpression; IC50, half maximal inhibitory concentration.
Figure 7 JNK and ERK signaling pathways and MDR1 were inhibited in AEP knockout gastric cancer cell lines, and vice versa.
Figure 7 JNK and ERK signaling pathways and MDR1 were inhibited in AEP knockout gastric cancer cell lines, and vice versa.

Figure S1 Expression of genes in EGFR/mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling pathway at mRNA level. There was no change in these genes when AEP was knocked out.

Abbreviations: AEP, asparaginyl endopeptidase; NC, negative control; KO, AEP knockout.

Figure S1 Expression of genes in EGFR/mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling pathway at mRNA level. There was no change in these genes when AEP was knocked out.Abbreviations: AEP, asparaginyl endopeptidase; NC, negative control; KO, AEP knockout.

Table S1 The concentration of chemotherapeutic agents and targeting drugs

Table S2 The primer sequence of real-time polymerase chain reaction

Table S3 The interacting proteins involving >10 peptides in SGC7901 gastric cancer cell line

Table S4 The interacting proteins involving >10 peptides in MKN45 gastric cancer cell line

Table S5 Resensitizing AEP-OE MKN45 cells to taxanes and T-DM1 using inhibitors of JNK or ERK signaling pathway