![[Feedback]](/icons/banner/feedbackACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[For Subscribers]](/icons/banner/subscriberACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Archive]](/icons/banner/archiveACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Search]](/icons/banner/searchACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Contents]](/icons/banner/tocACT.gif){kind=icon}
|
|
|
|
|
||
Vol. 14, Issue 8, 3389-3399, August 2003
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Laboratory of Cellular Biophysics, The Rockefeller University, New York, New York 10021
Submitted November 1, 2002;
Revised March 15, 2003;
Accepted March 16, 2003
Monitoring Editor: Jennifer Lippincott-Schwartz
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
; Cole
et al., 1992; Doyle
et al., 1998;
Maliepaard et al.,
2001). Although some reports have suggested subcellular
localizations for these proteins
(Marquardt et al.,
1990; Shapiro et al.,
1998; Van Luyn et
al., 1998; Meschini
et al., 2000), these drug transporters are generally
considered to be cell surface localized and to mediate drug resistance by
lowering total intracellular drug concentrations
(Stride et al.,
1999). In some instances, however, the expression of these drug
efflux pumps has no effect on the total cellular accumulation of multidrug
resistance substrates. The net intracellular accumulation of the anthracycline
doxorubicin, for example, is unaltered by the expression of either MRP1 or
Pgp, even if the cellular toxicity of the drug is mitigated by the presence of
these transport proteins (Rajagopal et
al., 2002). Indeed, MRP1 was first cloned from a
doxorubicin-resistant lung cancer line that accumulated as much of the drug as
its sensitive parental line (Cole et
al., 1991; Cole et
al., 1992). The method by which these plasma membrane
transporters confer resistance to doxorubicin is still not known.
We have previously studied the in vivo activity of Pgp, MRP1, and BCRP, by
transiently transfecting cells with plasmids encoding enhanced cyan
fluorescent protein (ECFP) conjugates of each protein and then quantifying
drug transport activities as a function of cyan fluorescence
(Chen and Simon, 2000;
Rajagopal et al.,
2002). Most drug transport studies are done in cell lines that
have been selected for stable expression of one of these drug-resistance
proteins. The alternative approach of transient transfection offered a number
of advantages. We could study the short-term effects of protein expression and
avoid the effects of long-term drug selection, a process that is known to
up-regulate other proteins involved in cellular detoxification
(Chen et al., 1999)
and that could thereby lead to the creation of many different cell lines. In
addition, transient transfection creates populations of cells that express the
protein of interest to varying degrees, from very high levels to nondetectable
ones, and we could thereby study drug transport as a function of protein
level. Because the transfection procedure leaves a cell population that does
not express the protein at all, we could easily ascertain the phenotypes
conferred by the protein of interest, because nonexpressing cells were present
alongside cells expressing the protein and exposed to identical culture
conditions.
The ECFP tag on each protein permitted easy identification of those cells
that expressed a drug transporter, and we used fluorescence microscopy to
monitor the localization patterns of each protein in living cells. Moreover,
because some MDR substrates are naturally fluorescent, we could also monitor
the cellular accumulation and subcellular distribution of MDR drugs as a
function of drug transporter expression. Finally, when we transiently
expressed fluorescent conjugates of MRP1
(Rajagopal et al.,
2002), Pgp (Chen and Simon,
2000), and BCRP (our unpublished data) in cells, we saw
protein-dependent exclusion of many MDR substrates, both in
fluorescence-activated cell sorting and under fluorescent microscopy.
Moreover, when MRP1-cyan fluorescent protein (CFP) was examined for its
subcellular distribution, we found that under confocal microscopy, the protein
localized primarily to the plasma membrane and to a juxtanuclear region
(Rajagopal et al.,
2002), a distribution pattern previously reported for cells
expressing MRP1 (Chang et al.,
1997). We therefore have reason to believe that ECFP conjugates of
drug transporters are functional and have activity profiles analogous to their
wild-type counterparts.
Transiently transfected cells were used to examine the patterns of doxorubicin accumulation in cells expressing MDR transporters. Our data suggests that Pgp, MRP1, and BCRP each promote doxorubicin resistance by actively sequestering the drug from the nucleus, its cellular target, into intracellular vesicles. We find that Pgp, MRP1, and BCRP each localize to intracellular membranes that are frequently positive for lysosomal markers such as cathepsin D and synaptotagmin VII. Moreover, our data indicate that these proteins promote doxorubicin accumulation into these lysosomal vesicles. Finally, by inhibiting drug transport selectively at the plasma membrane, we are able to show that this intracellular activity alone is sufficient to confer a multidrug-resistant phenotype. Thus, MRP1, Pgp, and BCRP, all previously thought to be active primarily at the plasma membrane, also act on internal organelles to sequester an MDR substrate from the nucleus.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
DNA Constructs
The plasmid encoding synaptotagminVII-ECFP was a gift from Norma Andrews
(Yale University, New Haven, CT) (Martinez
et al., 2000). The plasmid encoding ECFP-cystic fibrosis
transmembrane conductance regulator was a gift of David Gadsby (Rockefeller
University, New York, NY). The pEYFP-endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and the
pEYFP-Golgi vectors were purchased from BD Biosciences Clontech (Palo Alto,
CA). The construction of both the pMDR1-ECFP and the pMRP1-ECFP plasmids has
been described previously (Chen and Simon,
2000; Rajagopal et
al., 2002). The BCRP cDNA was a generous gift of Doug Ross
(University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD)
(Doyle et al., 1998);
it was subcloned into the EGFPc1 plasmid (BD Biosciences Clontech) between the
EcoRI and XhoI sites. The pECFP-BCRP plasmid was made by
replacing the EGFP coding sequence with the sequence of ECFP.
Cross-Linking
BM[PEO]4 stock was prepared at 28 mM in water and used at a
hundredfold dilution in Hanks' buffered saline solution with 10 mM HEPES, pH
7.3 (HHBSS). Cells were exposed to the reagent at 37°C for10 min. The
cross-linking reaction was quenched with 50 mM L-cysteine in HHBSS
(quenching buffer) for 5 min at room temperature. Cells were subsequently
washed with HHBSS and then assayed for MRP1 activity. Cross-linking with
bismaleimidohexane (BMH) was performed with a 90 mM dimethyl sulfoxide stock
used at 1000x. Once again, cells were exposed to BMH for 10 min at
37°C and then resuspended in quenching buffer for 5 min at room
temperature, washed in HHBSS, and assayed for MRP1 activity.
Activity Assays and Fluorescence Quantification
MRP1, BCRP, and Pgp activity assays were conducted similarly. Twenty-four
to 48 h after transfection, cells expressing fluorescent conjugates of the
transporter of interest were washed in HHBSS, incubated in either 50 nM
tetramethyl rhodamine ester (TMRE) (Molecular Probes, Eugene, OR) or 10 µM
doxorubicin (Calbiochem, La Jolla, CA) for 15 min in a 5% pCO2
incubator, and observed by fluorescent microscopy. Doxorubicin was washed out
before observation; TMRE was not.
Fluorescence Microscopy
Fluorescent images were collected on an IX-70 Olympus microscope, with a
1.4 numerical aperture oil-immersion objective and an ORCA 2 or ORCA ER
charge-coupled device-cooled camera (Hamamatsu Photonics, Hamamatsu City,
Japan), as described previously (Rajagopal
et al., 2002). Deconvolution was performed using a
DeltaVision deconvolution microscope, by using a 1.4 numerical aperture
oil-immersion, 60x objective. Fluorescent images were analyzed using
MetaMorph software (Universal Imaging, Downingtown, PA), and correlation
coefficients were acquired directly from this software. To quantify
fluorescence intensities on a cell-by-cell basis, bright field images were
used to acquire the cell boundary, and MetaMorph software was used to
calculate the average intensity within the cell boundary for each fluorophore.
The mean of these averages was calculated, along with the SE.
Immunocytochemistry
For fixation, cells were washed with chilled phosphate-buffered saline
(PBS), permeabilized with ice-cold methanol for 10 min at 20°C, and rinsed
twice with cold PBS. To detect MRP1 or cathepsin D, fixed cells were then
incubated with the anti-MRP1 antibody MRP1r1 at 1:200 or with the
anti-cathepsin D antibody cathepsin D (antibody-2) (Oncogene Research
Products, San Diego, CA) at 1:20 for 1 h. Cells were subsequently washed and
incubated for 1 h in anti-rat Alexa594 (Molecular Probes) at 1:1000 for MRP1
or anti-rabbit fluorescein for cathepsin D imaging.
Western Blot Analysis
After treatment with cross-linker or PBS, MRP1-ECFP–transfected cells
were dissociated with Cell Stripper (Cellgro), solubilized with 1% Triton
X-100, spun on a low-speed centrifuge to remove nuclear debris, and then
resolved on a 4–20% gradient gel, by using SDS-PAGE. After
electrotransfer onto a membrane (Amersham Biosciences, Piscataway, NJ) by
using a semidry electro-blotter, proteins were immunoblotted with the MRPr1
anti-MRP1 rat monoclonal antibody (Alexis Biochemicals, San Diego, CA) and an
alkaline phosphatase-conjugated anti-rat IgG antibody (Sigma-Aldrich).
Fluorescent Labeling of Subcellular Compartments
To label the recycling endosome, cells were incubated with cy3-transferrin,
as described previously (Lampson et
al., 2001). To label the lysosomes, cells were transfected
with synaptotagmin VII-ECFP or were probed with an anti-cathepsin D antibody.
Additionally, Texas Red dextrans were chased into the lysosome as follows:
cells were incubated in dextrans for 1 h at 37°C, washed in culture
medium, washed again 1 h later, and then allowed to remain in culture medium
for 8–12 h as described previously
(Jaiswal et al.,
2002).
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
; Cole et al.,
1994; Doyle et al.,
1998). Cells transiently transfected with each one of these
MDR-ECFP fusion proteins were exposed to doxorubicin, and then the
fluorescence levels of doxorubicin and ECFP were quantified on a cell-by-cell
basis. As reported previously, expression of neither MRP1 nor Pgp had any
effect on total doxorubicin accumulation by fluorescence-activated cell
sorting analysis (Rajagopal et
al., 2002); cells expressing either MDR-ECFP fusion protein
accumulated as much of the drug as cells that had not been transfected.
Expression of BCRP-ECFP only marginally decreased total doxorubicin
accumulation (our unpublished data). However, in all cases, the expression of
a multidrug resistance transporter did change the pattern of drug
distribution. In the absence of a drug transporter, cells accumulated
doxorubicin in the nucleus, but when cells expressed either MRP1, Pgp, or
BCRP, they showed substantially decreased nuclear drug accumulation.
Expression of MRP1-ECFP (Figure
1A), for example, resulted in the redistribution of doxorubicin
from the nucleus into a region that is peripheral to the nucleus
(Figure 1B). This perinuclear
region was positive for both MRP1-ECFP and doxorubicin, as seen when the
fluorescent images of MRP1-ECFP (green) and doxorubicin (red) are merged, and
yellow is taken as an indication of colocalization
(Figure 1C). A deconvolved
image of a transfected cell reveals that these intracellular regions of MRP1
fluorescence are composed of individual MRP1-containing vesicles
(Figure 1D) that colocalize
with vesicular doxorubicin fluorescence
(Figure 1E). In this case, the
merge of the two images (Figure
1F) did not always result in yellow where the vesicles
colocalized. Because these images represent living cells with rapidly moving
vesicles, 1-s time delays between the acquisition of the images sometimes
precluded absolute spatial colocalization. Additionally, the relative
intensities of the two fluorophores are not matched, and vesicles labeled with
more of one reporter than another do not look yellow.
|
Infrequently, MRP1-ECFP was localized anomalously in HeLa cells; that is, it was found in regions other than the plasma membrane and the perinuclear region. In extremely rare instances, for example, MRP1-ECFP accumulated in what seems to be large aggregates within the endo-membrane system (Figure 1G). In this same multi-nucleated MRP1-ECFP expressing cell, doxorubicin was also found distributed throughout the endo-membrane system (Figure 1H) in a pattern very similar to the distribution of MRP1-ECFP (Figure 1I). Doxorubicin only assumed this dispersed subcellular distribution when MRP1-ECFP was likewise dispersed, and never in a cell that was not transfected with an MDR protein. Although this anomalous distribution for MRP1-CFP was seen less than once per transfection, the observation that doxorubicin also assumed analogous subcellular distributions in these anomalous cells is suggestive of MRP1-mediated transport.
In instances when the MRP1-ECFP plasmid was poorly expressed, the protein was found only in intracellular vesicles, and not at the plasma membrane at all (Figure 1J). This result suggests that intracellular localization of the protein is not an artifact of an overexpression system. Although cells like this one weakly express the protein, and exposure times have to be increased to visualize these cells, nevertheless, even in these cells, MRP1-ECFP–expressing vesicles accumulated doxorubicin. Expression of the protein in this case was, however, not sufficient to exclude the drug from the nucleus (Figure 1, K and L).
Therefore, in addition to the plasma membrane (Figures 1A, 2, and 3), MRP1-ECFP localized to intracellular compartments that were peripheral to the nucleus. Within these vesicles, MRP1-ECFP fluorescence was coincident with doxorubicin fluorescence, a finding that would be consistent with MRP1-mediated sequestration of the drug away from the nucleus. In rare instances, when a cell exhibited an altered pattern of intracellular MRP1 distribution, doxorubicin also assumed this altered pattern, arguing strongly that intracellular MRP1 actively transports doxorubicin.
|
|
Cross-Linking Distinguishes the Activity of Two MRP1 Pools
Because MRP1 is expressed both at the plasma membrane and in intracellular
vesicles, altered patterns of doxorubicin distribution in MRP1-expressing
cells could be the result of the activity of either pool of MRP1. To
distinguish the activity of the two pools, we compared the effects of two
cysteine based cross-linking reagents on MRP1-mediated transport, the
cell-impermeable BM[PEO]4, and the cell-permeable BMH. If MRP1
activity were sensitive to these reagents, then selectively blocking MRP1
function at the cell membrane with the cell impermeable cross-linker would
allow us to assess the role of intracellular MRP1 in doxorubicin
sequestration. MRP1 sensitivity to these reagents was gauged with the compound
TMRE. TMRE is a positively charged, fluorescent MDR substrate that does not
accumulate inside MRP1-expressing cells, but instead, is effluxed from the
cell in an MRP1-dependent manner. TMRE is also a live stain dye; drug entry is
dependent on the maintenance of plasma membrane potential
(Farkas et al.,
1989). On cell entry, TMRE accumulates in the mitochondria
(Farkas et al.,
1989).
When cells were exposed to TMRE (Figure
2, A–C), the MRP1-expressing cell
(Figure 2A) accumulated little
to none of the drug, whereas cells that did not express detectable levels of
the MRP1-ECFP took up the drug in the mitochondria
(Figure 2, B and C). Treatment
with the MRP1 inhibitor verapamil rendered MRP1-ECFP cells incapable of
effluxing TMRE (Figure 2, D and
E); all cells accumulated the dye in the mitochondria comparably
(Figure 2F). These results
(Figure 2, A–E) are
consistent with previously published observations that TMRE exclusion from the
cell is mediated by MRP1(Rajagopal et
al., 2002).
Cross-linking with the cell-impermeable reagent BM[PEO]4 affected MRP1-ECFP–expressing cells much as verapamil did; all cells accumulated TMRE to the same extent, regardless of the degree to which they expressed MRP1 (Figure 2, G–I). Likewise, when cells were cross-linked with the cell-permeable reagent BMH, MRP1-dependent efflux of TMRE was also inhibited (Figure 2, J–L). The fact that cells accumulated TMRE after the addition of either BMH or BM[PEO]4 suggests that cross-linking did not compromise cell viability. The fact that addition of these reagents inhibited MRP1-dependent TMRE transport suggests that cross-linking is sufficient to block MRP1 activity. Moreover, if BM[PEO]4 is only reacting with MRP1-ECFP at the cell surface, then these results indicate that MRP1 activity at the plasma membrane is responsible for the absence of TMRE in cells. To determine whether BM[PEO]4 was inhibiting MRP1 selectively at the plasma membrane, we tested the effect of BM[PEO]4 addition on subcellular pools of MRP1-ECFP. Because doxorubicin accumulates in MRP1 containing vesicles (Figure 1, D–F), we tested the effect of BM[PEO]4 treatment on the intracellular distribution of the drug. Used in concert with BMH treatment, this experiment would determine whether BM[PEO]4 was inhibiting primarily plasma membrane MRP1 and what role, if any, intracellular MRP1 activity played in doxorubicin sequestration. As shown previously, when cells expressing various levels of MRP1-ECFP were exposed to doxorubicin alone, only the MRP1-expressing cell had substantially diminished drug accumulation in the nucleus; the nuclei of all other cells accumulated doxorubicin to the same degree (Figure 1, A–C). However, if we blocked MRP1 function with the MRP1 inhibitor verapamil before doxorubicin administration (Figure 3, A–C), the nuclei of all cells were equally fluorescent with the drug (Figure 3B), regardless of the levels of MRP1-ECFP fluorescence (Figure 3, A and C). The fact that doxorubicin sequestration away from the nucleus is sensitive to verapamil suggests MRP1 involvement. When BM[PEO]4-treated cells were exposed to doxorubicin (Figure 3, D–F), doxorubicin did not accumulate in the nucleus of a cell expressing MRP1-ECFP even though MRP1 activity against TMRE is blocked with this treatment. Indeed, the MRP1-ECFP–expressing cell (Figure 3D) continued to be characterized by perinuclear doxorubicin staining (Figure 3E), which corresponds to the localization of intracellular MRP1 (Figure 3F). In contrast, when cells were exposed to the cell permeable cross-linker BMH, before doxorubicin incubation (Figure 3, G–I), all cells accumulated the drug within the nucleus, much as they did when treated with verapamil. These results reveal that BM[PEO]4 is affecting the activity of MRP1-ECFP primarily at the plasma membrane, whereas BMH is inhibiting MRP1 throughout the cell. Moreover, these experiments suggest that intracellular MRP1 is responsible for intracellular doxorubicin sequestration, a drug resistance phenotype.
We next tested whether BMH and BM[PEO]4 are affecting MRP1 activity by directly cross-linking MRP1-ECFP; if so, the electrophoretic mobility of MRP1 should be altered by treatment with either reagent. When cell lysates of MRP1-ECFP–transfected cells were immunoblotted with the anti-MRP1 antibody MRPr1, the antibody recognized a doublet that migrated near a 250-kDa protein standard. However, when cell lysates of BM[PEO]4-treated cells were similarly probed, the antibody recognized a much more slowly migrating species of the protein, suggesting that the reagent was cross-linking MRP1 directly. Likewise, when cell lysates of BMH-treated cells were probed with the anti-MRP1 antibody, we saw similar changes in the electrophoretic mobility of the protein (Figure 4A). We have reason, therefore, to believe that cross-linking with either reagent inhibits MRP1 as a result of direct protein modification.
|
Even if MRP1 is being directly modified by these cross-linking reagents, it is possible that treatment with BM[PEO]4 or BMH is not inhibiting MRP1, but simply increasing cell permeability to TMRE. To investigate this possibility, we determined the average TMRE accumulation in a population of cells as a function of MRP1 expression, and we determined whether this average was altered by the addition of cross-linker (Figure 4B). When we calculated these averages, we found that neither BM[PEO]4 nor BMH had any effect on TMRE accumulation in cells that expressed MRP1-ECFP at background levels. We did find, however, that BM[PEO]4 was able to block MRP1 activity on TMRE almost entirely; all BM[PEO]4-treated cells accumulated TMRE equivalently, even at high levels of MRP1 expression. On the other hand, BMH inhibition of MRP1 activity was not complete at the concentration of BMH used (Figure 4B). However, because BMH enters cells and is free to interact with many intracellular cysteines, it might be more difficult to inhibit MRP1 activity with BMH at a concentration that would not at the same time be lethal to the cells.
When statistical analyses were next performed on BM[PEO]4-treated cells that were exposed to doxorubicin, we found that the concentration of the cell-impermeable cross-linker that was able to block MRP1 activity on TMRE had a marginal effect on doxorubicin distribution. After treatment with BM[PEO]4, MRP1-ECFP–expressing cells still showed a statistically significant reduction in nuclear drug accumulation, if not as much as untreated MRP1-ECFP cells (Figure 4C). In contrast, when cells were treated with BMH, the nuclear fluorescence of the drug was not reduced by the expression of MRP1-ECFP, as it was in untreated control cells (Figure 4C). Thus, at a concentration of BMH that was only partially able to block MRP1-mediated TMRE efflux, MRP1 activity against doxorubicin was inhibited. Because BM[PEO]4 treatment completely inhibited MRP1-ECFP activity at the plasma membrane, as assayed by loss of TMRE efflux, but had little effect on the subcellular localization of doxorubicin, we have reason to believe that the intracellular pool of MRP1-ECFP unaffected by BM[PEO]4 treatment is responsible for doxorubicin sequestration.
The observation that MRP1 activity can be blocked at the cell surface
without disrupting intracellular drug sequestration argues strongly for
active, subcellular pools of MRP1. However, many of these intracellular
compartments are acidified and acidification of organelles has been implicated
as a mechanism for resistance to weak-base chemotherapeutics such as
doxorubicin (Wadkins and Roepe,
1997; Altan et al.,
1998). For this reason, we also needed to determine whether
cellular pH played a role in the vesicular accumulation of doxorubicin. To
determine the involvement of cellular pH, we added concanamycin A, an agent
that disrupts organellar acidification
(Altan et al., 1998).
The addition of 100 nM concanamycin A before doxorubicin administration had no
effect on drug distribution in MRP1-expressing cells. In a field of cells
treated with concanamycin A and doxorubicin
(Figure 3, J–L), the
three MRP1-expressing cells (Figure
3J) still excluded the anthracycline from the nucleus, whereas
nonexpressing cells did not (Figure 3, K
and L). These results suggest that MRP1 activity is responsible
for doxorubicin sequestration and that changes in cellular pH do not make
significant contributions to this phenotype. Furthermore, it indicates that
concanamycin A does not affect the activity of MRP1-ECFP.
Intracellular MRP1 Localizes to Lysosomal Membranes
To characterize the subcellular MRP1-ECFP compartment, we simultaneously
transfected cells with fluorescent reporters for various organelles. For
example, we coexpressed the lysosomal marker synaptotagmin VII, with an ECFP
tag, and MRP1, with an EYFP tag, to determine whether MRP1 resides in the
lysosomes. In a deconvolved section of such a doubly transfected cell, we see
that MRP1 resides in vesicles (Figure
5A) that also express synaptotagmin VII
(Figure 5, B and C). MRP1 might
be localizing to the lysosomes not because it is functional there, but because
it is subject to protein degradation. However, immunoblots of both MRP1 and
MRP1-ECFP–transfected cells are not suggestive of degradation
(Rajagopal et al.,
2002). It is also possible that the ECFP tag might be directing
the fluorescent MRP1 conjugate to lysosomes in a manner that does not
represent the trafficking history of the wild-type protein.
Immunocytochemistry of cells transfected with wild-type MRP1, however,
suggests that even the protein in its unconjugated state localizes to vesicles
that are positive for synaptotagmin VII
(Figure 5, D–F). As an
added assurance, the lysosomal marker cathepsin D also colocalizes with
wild-type MRP1 (Figure 5,
G–I), an observation that is made especially clear in an
enlarged image of a cell probed for both proteins
(Figure 5, J–L).
Moreover, doxorubicin preferentially accumulates in the lysosmes of cells
expressing MRP1; nontransfected cells show markedly decreased doxorubcin
accumulation in the lysosomes (our unpublished data).
|
BCRP and Pgp Localize to Lysosomal Membranes and Doxorubicin-positive
Vesicles
We next tested whether other MDR transporters were also found in lysosomes.
Cells transfected with BCRP-ECFP, for example, revealed that, like MRP1, this
protein was found at the plasma membrane and in intracellular vesicles
(Figure 6A). As with MRP1,
these BCRP-positive vesicles localized to the lysosomes because they took up
fluorescent dextrans that had been chased into the lysosomes
(Figure 6, B and C), a method
of lysosomal detection that also labels synaptotagmin VII-positive vesicles
(our unpublished data). Moreover, as with MRP1, BCRP-containing vesicles were
to be found at the periphery of the nucleus
(Figure 6D) where they
accumulated doxorubicin (Figure 6, E and
F). This pattern of protein localization and activity is mirrored
by Pgp. Like MRP1, the expression of Pgp does not decrease the net cellular
accumulation of doxorubicin (Rajagopal
et al., 2002). Like MRP1, Pgp-ECFP localized to
intracellular vesicles around the periphery of the nucleus
(Figure 6G), and these vesicles
took up fluorescent dextrans chased into the lysosomes
(Figure 6, H and I). Finally,
when Pgp-ECFP–expressing cells were exposed to doxorubicin, Pgp-positive
vesicles accumulated the drug (Figure 6,
J–L). Therefore, we have reason to believe that BCRP and Pgp
confer resistance to doxorubicin in a manner similar to MRP1.
|
The colocalization data presented thus far is primarily based on the visual inspection of two fluorescent signals, and it is for this reason difficult to discuss the relative degrees of correlation between different experiments. To quantify the information presented in a fluorescent image, we calculated correlation coefficients for regions of the cell in which two fluorescent signals both localize. The r represents the degree to which distinct fluorophores vary their intensities through space in a coordinated manner. Correlation coefficients are expressed on a scale of 0–1, with 0 representing no correlation whatsoever. When correlation coefficients were calculated for the micrographs presented in this study, we plotted them on a line graph and could then see under what conditions vesicular MRP1 accumulated doxorubicin (Figure 7A), for example, or colocalized with a lysosomal marker (Figure 7, B and C). Using the r of vesicular MRP1-YFP and MRP1-ECFP (0.7677) as an indication of a strong colocalization, we then saw how likely it would be to find MRP1 in vesicles of the Golgi or the ER (Figure 7B). When correlation coefficients for other ATP-binding cassette (ABC) proteins are similarly represented, lysosomal localization and activity were found for only MDR-conferring transporters. The activity of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator, for example, did not show this intracellular localization pattern (Figure 7D).
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
The demonstration of a lysosomal distribution for MRP1, Pgp, and BCRP does
not preclude subcellular activity elsewhere. Indeed, this intracellular
distribution may be a factor of cell cycle or trafficking history, and these
proteins may present themselves in other locations under different conditions.
MRP2, for example, has been found in a novel subcellular organelle in
nonpolarized hepatic cells (Tuma et
al., 2002). However, it would not be unprecedented to propose
that MRP1, BCRP, and Pgp all confer doxorubicin resistance primarily from
lysosomes. ABC proteins are known to be expressed in the vacuole of
nonmammalian systems (Li et al.,
1996; Lu et al.,
1997), and in mammals, proteins that are not part of the ABC
family do confer doxorubicin resistance from lysosomes
(Cabrita et al.,
1999). Moreover, lysosomes may promote the detoxification of the
drug and in this way provide a link between two distinct multidrug-resistance
pathways. Whether this subcellular localization pattern of these MDR
transporters is a result of overexpression is not known. Insofar as
multidrug-resistant cancer cells are known to overexpress ABC transporters
such as MRP1, the overexpression system used in this study models itself after
a pathophysiological state. However, predominantly intracellular localization
patterns for MRP1 have been reported for many normal tissues
(Flens et al., 1996;
Wioland et al.,
2000). Moreover, the finding that cells expressing low levels of
MRP1-CFP are characterized by primarily intracellular versions of the protein
suggests that vesicular MRP1 is not the result of overexpression
(Figure 1, J–L).
Of course, MRP1 activity does not stem entirely from the intracellular organelles; TMRE, for example, is effluxed by MRP1 before it can enter the cell, presumably by plasma membrane localized versions of the transporter. Strangely, the dominant activity of the protein on doxorubicin is on intracellular membranes. Our results suggest that MRP1 may have different activity profiles at different membranes, a difference that could be a function of environment (lipids and cholesterol) or posttranslational modifications (e.g., phosphorylation) that occur at some subcellular compartments. Alternatively, these subcellular compartments may contain other transport mechanisms that act synergistically with MRP1 activity.
Intracellular localization and activity for MRP1 and for other members of the MDR transporter family may suggest different strategies for chemotherapeutic regimens in a clinical setting. To date, inhibitors for these MDR transporters have been selected presumably on the assumption of plasma membrane based efflux mechanisms. MRP1-mediated intracellular drug sequestration may necessitate alternate strategies in the search for MDR inhibitors.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
|
Footnotes |
|---|
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: simon{at}mail.rockefeller.edu.
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Cabrita, M.A., Hobman, T.C., Hogue, D.L., King, K.M., and Cass,
C.E. (1999). Mouse transporter protein, a membrane protein that
regulates cellular multidrug resistance, is localized to lysosomes.
Cancer Res. 59,
4890–4897.
Chang, X.B., Hou, Y.X., and Riordan, J.R. (1997).
ATPase activity of purified multidrug resistance-associated protein. J.
Biol. Chem. 272,
30962–30968.
Chen, Y., Schindler, M., and Simon, S.M. (1999). A
mechanism for tamoxifen-mediated inhibition of acidification. J. Biol.
Chem. 274,
18364–18373.
Chen, Y., and Simon, S.M. (2000). In situ biochemical
demonstration that P-glycoprotein is a drug efflux pump with broad
specificity. J. Cell Biol. 148,
863–870.
Cole, S.P., Chanda, E.R., Dicke, F.P., Gerlach, J.H., and Mirski,
S.E. (1991). Non-P-glycoprotein-mediated multidrug resistance in
a small cell lung cancer cell line: evidence for decreased susceptibility to
drug-induced DNA damage and reduced levels of topoisomerase II. Cancer
Res. 51,
3345–3352.
Cole, S.P.C., Bhardwaj, G., Gerlach, J.H., Mackie, J.E., Grant,
C.E., Almquist, K.C., Stewart, A.J., Kurz, E.U., Duncan, A.M.V., and Deeley,
R.G. (1992). Overexpression of a transporter gene in a
multidrug-resistant human lung cancer cell line. Science
258,
1650–1654.
Cole, S.P.C., Sparks, K.E., Fraser, K., Loe, D.W., Grant, C.E.,
Wilson, G.M., and Deeley, R.G. (1994). Pharmacological
characterization of multidrug resistant MRP-transfected human tumor cells.
Cancer Res. 54,
5902–5910.
Doyle, L.A., Yang, W., Abruzzo, L.V., Krogmann, T., Gao, Y., Rishi,
A.K., and Ross, D.D. (1998). A multidrug resistance transporter
from human MCF-7 breast cancer cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA 95,
15665–15670.
Farkas, D.L., Wei, M., Febbroriello, P., Carson, J.H., and Loew,
L.M. (1989). Simultaneous imaging of cell and mitochondrial
membrane potentials. Biophys. J.
56,
1053–1069.
Flens, M.J., Zaman, G.J., van der Valk, P., Izquierdo, M.A., Schroeijers, A.B., Scheffer, G.L., van der Groep, P., de Haas, M., Meijer, C.J., and Scheper, R.J. (1996). Tissue distribution of the multidrug resistance protein. Am. J. Pathol. 148, 1237–1247.[Abstract]
Jaiswal, J.K., Andrews, N.W., and Simon, S.M. (2002).
Membrane proximal lysosomes are the major vesicles responsible for
calcium-dependent exocytosis in nonsecretory cells. J. Cell
Biol. 159,
625–635.
Kartner, N., Riordan, J.R., and Ling, V. (1983). Cell
surface P-glycoprotein associated with multidrug resistance in mammalian cell
lines. Science 221,
1285–1288.
Lampson, M.A., Schmoranzer, J., Zeigerer, A., Simon, S.M., and
McGraw, T.E. (2001). Insulin-regulated release from the endosomal
recycling compartment is regulated by budding of specialized vesicles.
Mol. Biol. Cell 12,
3489–3501.
Li, Z.S., Szczypka, M., Lu, Y.P., Thiele, D.J., and Rea, P.A.
(1996). The yeast cadmium factor protein (YCF1) is a vacuolar
glutathione S-conjugate pump. J. Biol. Chem.
271,
6509–6517.
Lu, Y.P., Li, Z.S., and Rea, P.A. (1997). AtMRP1 gene
of Arabidopsis encodes a glutathione S-conjugate pump: isolation and
functional definition of a plant ATP-binding cassette transporter gene.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94,
8243–8248.
Maliepaard, M., Scheffer, G.L., Faneyte, I.F., van Gastelen, M.A.,
Pijnenborg, A.C., Schinkel, A.H., Van de Vijver, M.J., Scheper, R.J., and
Schellens, J.H. (2001). Subcellular localization and distribution
of the breast cancer resistance protein transporter in normal human tissues.
Cancer Res. 61,
3458–3464.
Marquardt, D., McCrone, S., and Center, M.S. (1990).
Mechanisms of multidrug resistance in HL60 cells: detection of
resistance-associated proteins with antibodies against synthetic peptides that
correspond to the deduced sequence of P-glycoprotein. Cancer
Res. 50,
1426–1430.
Martinez, I., Chakrabarti, S., Hellevik, T., Morehead, J., Fowler,
K., and Andrews, N.W. (2000). Synaptotagmin VII regulates
Ca(2+)-dependent exocytosis of lysosomes in fibroblasts. J. Cell
Biol. 148,
1141–1150.
Meschini, S., Calcabrini, A., Monti, E., Del Bufalo, D., Stringaro, A., Dolfini, E., and Arancia, G. (2000). Intracellular P-glycoprotein expression is associated with the intrinsic multidrug resistance phenotype in human colon adenocarcinoma cells. Int. J. Cancer 87, 615–628.[CrossRef][Medline]
Rajagopal, A., Pant, A.C., Simon, S.M., and Chen, Y.
(2002). In vivo analysis of human multidrug resistance protein 1
(MRP1) activity using transient expression of fluorescently tagged MRP1.
Cancer Res. 62,
391–396.
Shapiro, A.B., Fox, K., Lee, P., Yang, Y.D., and Ling, V. (1998). Functional intracellular P-glycoprotein. Int. J. Cancer 76, 857–864.[CrossRef][Medline]
Stride, B.D., Cole, S.P., and Deeley, R.G. (1999).
Localization of a substrate specificity domain in the multidrug resistance
protein. J. Biol. Chem. 274,
22877–22883.
Tuma, P.L., Nyasae, L.K., and Hubbard, A.L. (2002).
Nonpolarized cells selectively sort apical proteins from cell surface to a
novel compartment, but lack apical retention mechanisms. Mol. Biol.
Cell 13,
3400–3415.
Ueda, K., Cardarelli, C., Gottesman, M.M., and Pastan, I.
(1987). Expression of a full-length cDNA for the human
"MDR1"gene confers resistance to colchicine, doxorubicin, and
vinblastine. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
84,
3004–3008.
Van Luyn, M.J., Muller, M., Renes, J., Meijer, C., Scheper, R.J., Nienhuis, E.F., Mulder, N.H., Jansen, P.L., and de Vries, E.G. (1998). Transport of glutathione conjugates into secretory vesicles is mediated by the multidrug-resistance protein 1. Int. J. Cancer 76, 55–62.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wadkins, R.M., and Roepe, P.D. (1997). Biophysical aspects of P-glycoprotein-mediated multidrug resistance. Int. Rev. Cytol. 171, 121–165.[Medline]
Wioland, M.A., Fleury-Feith, J., Corlieu, P., Commo, F., Monceaux,
G., Lacau-St-Guily, J., and Bernaudin, J.F. (2000). CFTR, MDR1,
and MRP1 immunolocalization in normal human nasal respiratory mucosa.
J. Histochem. Cytochem. 48,
1215–1222.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. Chevallier, Z. Chamoun, G. Jiang, G. Prestwich, N. Sakai, S. Matile, R. G. Parton, and J. Gruenberg Lysobisphosphatidic Acid Controls Endosomal Cholesterol Levels J. Biol. Chem., October 10, 2008; 283(41): 27871 - 27880. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. E. Hillenmeyer, E. Fung, J. Wildenhain, S. E. Pierce, S. Hoon, W. Lee, M. Proctor, R. P. St.Onge, M. Tyers, D. Koller, et al. The Chemical Genomic Portrait of Yeast: Uncovering a Phenotype for All Genes Science, April 18, 2008; 320(5874): 362 - 365. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Herlevsen, G. Oxford, C. R. Owens, M. Conaway, and D. Theodorescu Depletion of major vault protein increases doxorubicin sensitivity and nuclear accumulation and disrupts its sequestration in lysosomes Mol. Cancer Ther., June 1, 2007; 6(6): 1804 - 1813. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. L. Hammond, R. Marchan, S. M. Krance, and N. Ballatori Glutathione Export during Apoptosis Requires Functional Multidrug Resistance-associated Proteins J. Biol. Chem., May 11, 2007; 282(19): 14337 - 14347. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. H. Weylandt, M. Nebrig, N. Jansen-Rosseck, J. S. Amey, D. Carmena, B. Wiedenmann, C. F. Higgins, and A. Sardini ClC-3 expression enhances etoposide resistance by increasing acidification of the late endocytic compartment Mol. Cancer Ther., March 1, 2007; 6(3): 979 - 986. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. K. Schroeder, S. Kremer, M. J. Kramer, E. Currie, E. Kwan, J. L. Watts, A. L. Lawrenson, and G. J. Hermann Function of the Caenorhabditis elegans ABC Transporter PGP-2 in the Biogenesis of a Lysosome-related Fat Storage Organelle Mol. Biol. Cell, March 1, 2007; 18(3): 995 - 1008. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Wakabayashi, H. Kipp, and I. M. Arias Transporters on Demand: Intracellular Reservoirs and Cycling of Bile Canalicular ABC Transporters J. Biol. Chem., September 22, 2006; 281(38): 27669 - 27673. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. G. Deeley, C. Westlake, and S. P. C. Cole Transmembrane Transport of Endo- and Xenobiotics by Mammalian ATP-Binding Cassette Multidrug Resistance Proteins. Physiol Rev, July 1, 2006; 86(3): 849 - 899. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Salvatorelli, S. Guarnieri, P. Menna, G. Liberi, A. M. Calafiore, M. A. Mariggio, A. Mordente, L. Gianni, and G. Minotti Defective One- or Two-electron Reduction of the Anticancer Anthracycline Epirubicin in Human Heart: RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF VESICULAR SEQUESTRATION AND IMPAIRED EFFICIENCY OF ELECTRON ADDITION J. Biol. Chem., April 21, 2006; 281(16): 10990 - 11001. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. Wojnowski, B. Kulle, M. Schirmer, G. Schluter, A. Schmidt, A. Rosenberger, S. Vonhof, H. Bickeboller, M. R. Toliat, E.-K. Suk, et al. NAD(P)H Oxidase and Multidrug Resistance Protein Genetic Polymorphisms Are Associated With Doxorubicin-Induced Cardiotoxicity Circulation, December 13, 2005; 112(24): 3754 - 3762. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Volk, H. Potschka, and W. Loscher Immunohistochemical Localization of P-glycoprotein in Rat Brain and Detection of Its Increased Expression by Seizures Are Sensitive to Fixation and Staining Variables J. Histochem. Cytochem., April 1, 2005; 53(4): 517 - 531. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. B. Neufeld, J. A. Stonik, S. J. Demosky Jr., C. L. Knapper, C. A. Combs, A. Cooney, M. Comly, N. Dwyer, J. Blanchette-Mackie, A. T. Remaley, et al. The ABCA1 Transporter Modulates Late Endocytic Trafficking: INSIGHTS FROM THE CORRECTION OF THE GENETIC DEFECT IN TANGIER DISEASE J. Biol. Chem., April 9, 2004; 279(15): 15571 - 15578. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
