This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Herlevsen, M. Articles by Theodorescu, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Herlevsen, M. Articles by Theodorescu, D.

Research Articles: Therapeutics, Targets, and Development

Depletion of major vault protein increases doxorubicin sensitivity and nuclear accumulation and disrupts its sequestration in lysosomes

Department of Molecular Physiology and Biological Physics, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia

Requests for reprints: Dan Theodorescu, Department of Molecular Physiology and Biological Physics, University of Virginia Health Sciences Center, Box 800422, Charlottesville, VA 22908. Phone: 434-924-0042; Fax: 434-982-3652. E-mail: dt9d{at}virginia.edu

Abstract

The major vault protein (MVP) is the major constituent of the vault particle, the largest known ribonuclear protein complex. To date, vaults have no clear function, although their low expression levels in de novo chemosensitive and curable tumors, such as testicular cancer, make them attractive candidates as contributors to intrinsic drug resistance. Here, we show that MVP knockdown in human bladder cancer cells via small interfering RNA results in sensitization toward doxorubicin in two distinct exposure protocols. The drug was detected in the nucleus immediately following addition and was subsequently sequestered to lysosomes, predominantly located adjacent to the nucleus. MVP knockdown leads to increased sensitivity toward doxorubicin and an enhanced nuclear accumulation of the drug as well as a loss of its perinuclear sequestration. Not only doxorubicin subcellular distribution was perturbed by MVP knockdown but lysosomal markers, such as pH-sensitive LysoSensor, pinocytosed dextran conjugates after 24-h chase period, and the lysosomal specific antigen Lamp-1, also showed a markedly different staining compared with controls. Lysosomes appeared dispersed through the cytoplasm without a clear organization adjacent to the nucleus. Microtubules, however, appeared unperturbed in cells with reduced MVP expression. Based on these data, we hypothesize that MVP and, by extension, vault complexes are important for lysosomal function and may influence cellular drug resistance by virtue of this role. [Mol Cancer Ther 2007;6(6):1804–13]

Introduction

Vaults are the largest cellular ribonuclear protein complexes and have been associated with the multidrug resistance phenotype (1–3). However, this association is based mainly on correlative data, and the exact mechanism of action, if any, of vaults in this process is unclear. Therefore, functional clues from the intricate structure of the vault particle have been sought. The complex consists of three protein components, namely major vault protein (MVP), v-PARP, and TEP1; the latter is present in the end structures, or the "caps," where it associates with vault-specific structural RNA (3–5). The major body of the riboprotein complex consists of 96 copies of the MVP organized in radial symmetry to form a barrel-shaped structure (4, 6). Because MVP is only found in vaults, knockdown of MVP in cells is regarded as equivalent to vault knockdown. The first evidence of a connection between drug resistance and the vault particle was provided when Scheffer et al. (7) showed that MVP is identical to the lung resistance protein, which previously had been associated with multidrug resistance (8) in cancer cells of varied histologic origin. Subsequent reports have shown a correlation between overexpression of MVP and poor initial response to chemotherapy or intrinsic de novo drug resistance in acute myelogenous leukemia and other tumors (9–14). For example, low MVP expression levels were seen in metastatic testicular cancer (15), neuroblastoma, and childhood acute myelogenous leukemia, tumors that are often curable with conventional chemotherapy (16). In contrast, MVP expression was high in metastatic colon, renal, and pancreatic carcinomas, which are incurable with current chemotherapy (16). Furthermore, the expression of MVP was also predictive of drug response in bladder carcinomas (17), the tumor used in the present study.

In studies where a colon carcinoma cell line was chemically induced to differentiate, Kitazono et al. (18, 19) have shown a direct correlation between MVP levels and progressive resistance to doxorubicin. In this model, MVP-dependent resistance did not increase cellular efflux of doxorubicin but was associated with a subcellular redistribution of the drug away from the nucleus. Such subcellular redistribution, or sequestration, of drugs has recently emerged as an important drug resistance mechanism (20, 21). The sequestration of membrane-permeable drugs, such as doxorubicin, in low pH compartments is thought to depend on protonation (22). Protonation renders the compound membrane impermeable and its sequestration in low pH subcellular compartments, generally labeled or thought to be lysosomes, ultimately leads to its removal from the cell (23). Blockage of this process through vacuolar proton pump inhibitors reverses acquired drug resistance (24), and the drugs remain intracellular and there exert their biological activity. Recently, the ATP-binding cassette transporter family member proteins that are strongly connected to the drug resistance phenotype, such as P-glycoprotein, MRP1, and BCRP, have been localized to intracellular membranes. Such findings further highlight the relevance and importance of the sequestration mechanism in drug resistance (25, 26).

Intrinsic drug resistance is the main reason for therapeutic failure in advanced cancer treatment. Although several studies have shown a correlation between drug resistance and MVP expression, there is also a considerable amount of studies failing to show this correlation (2). It is likely that vault-dependent drug resistance is dependent on other variables, and a greater understanding of the mechanisms behind the correlative data is desirable. Here, we present a study aimed at understanding the underlying functions of vaults in de novo drug resistance by evaluating the role of MVP in doxorubicin sensitivity in a human bladder cancer cell line.

Materials and Methods

Cell Culture, Constructs, and Transfection Procedures
UMUC-3 is a human urothelial bladder cancer cell line obtained from the American Type Culture Collection and grown in MEM supplemented with 1 mmol/L sodium pyruvate and 10% FCS. MVP and MVP-green fluorescent protein (GFP) cDNA expression constructs were described elsewhere (27). Transfections were done as described previously (28). The MVP sequence 5'-ATCATTCGCACTGCTGTCTT-3' was targeted by small interfering RNA (siRNA). Control transfections were carried out using siRNA-targeting luciferase. MVP-GFP that has previously been rigorously evaluated (29) was mutated in four silent positions to destroy the siRNA target site using the QuikChange Site-Directed Mutagenesis kit from Stratagene. The following primers were used: MVP3MUTF, 5'-CTCAGCCCGCATCATACGGACAGCAGTCTTTGGCTTTGAGACC-3' and MVP3MUTR, 5'-GGTCTCAAAGCCAAAGACTGCTGTCCGTATGATGCGGGCTGAG-3'. MVP-GFP and MVP-GFPmut expression vectors were linearized with AseI before transfection with FuGENE according to the manufacturer's instructions (Roche). Cells were treated with 600 µg/mL G418 for 2 weeks before fluorescence-activated cell sorting for GFP-positive cells (Becton Dickinson FACSVantage SE Turbo).

Western Blots
For siRNA MVP experiments, cells prepared in parallel wells were routinely examined by Western blot to verify protein knockdown. Cells were harvested in lysis buffer [1% Triton X-100, 100 mmol/L NaCl, 1 mmol/L CaCl₂, 1 mmol/L MgCl₂, 25 mmol/L Tris-HCl (pH 7.4)] and lysed for 20 min before undissolved residues were spun down. Lysates were normalized by bicinchoninic acid before SDS-PAGE analysis. Equal loading was further controlled by anti--tubulin (OncoGene). MVP antibody (PharMingen) and other primary antibodies were used 1:1,000 in TBS containing 5% fat-free milk and 0.1% Tween 20 (Sigma). Protein expression was measured by digital fluorescence imaging using AlphaEaseFC and an Alpha Innotech FluorChem 8800 digital imager.

Cytotoxicity Assays
Two days after transfection with siRNA, cells were challenged with different concentrations of doxorubicin (Sigma) in complete medium. Five days after addition of doxorubicin, cells were washed once in PBS and lysed in 200 µL CyQuant lysis buffer (Molecular Probes). The lysates were homogenized and prepared for DNA measurement by CyQuant assay according to the manufacturer's instructions. Wells were analyzed for DNA content as a surrogate measure of cell numbers with a Molecular Dynamics BioLumin 960 plate reader.

Cellular Concentration of Doxorubicin
Twenty-four hours after siRNA transfection, cells were incubated for 20 min with 10 µmol/L doxorubicin. Cells were then washed, fresh medium was added, and cells were left to recover for 1 or 24 h. At the end of incubation, cells were harvested with trypsin/EDTA, washed once in complete medium, and analyzed with a Becton Dickinson FACSCalibur at the indicated times. Doxorubicin was excited at 488 nm, and a 670-nm long pass emission filter was used. Nuclear concentration was estimated through measuring the fluorescent signal of doxorubicin on confocal images (acquired as described below) by ImageJ analysis.

Immunofluorescence Staining
Cells were grown on glass coverslips, washed once in PBS, and fixed for 10 min in 3.7% paraformaldehyde, blocked 20 min in 200 mmol/L glycine, permeabilized in 0.1% Triton X-100 for 10 min, and blocked in PBG (0.1% cold water fish skin gelatin, 0.5% bovine serum albumin in PBS). -Tubulin was purchased from OncoGene. Primary antibodies were diluted in PBG, incubated for 2 h at room temperature, washed six times in PBG, and incubated with secondary antibody (goat anti-mouse Alexa Fluor 488 conjugated) 1:250 (Molecular Probes) for 30 min at 37°C. Cells were washed thrice in PBS and thrice in water before they were mounted in Elvanol [20% Mowiol in 2:1 PBS (pH 8.0)/glycerol] and analyzed as described below.

Microscopy
Cells were seeded on 24-well glass bottom plates (Greiner) and transfected with siRNA constructs. Two days after transfection, cells were incubated 20 min with 10 µmol/L doxorubicin, washed once, and incubated for an additional 24 h. A Zeiss Axiovert M135 microscope was used for image capture at 37°C under 5% CO₂ atmosphere. To visualize endocytic compartments, cells were incubated with 1 µmol/L LysoSensor DND-189 (Molecular Probes) for 1 min before analysis. Alternatively, the cells were loaded with dextran (10,000 molecular weight) labeled with Alexa Fluor 488 at a final concentration of 1 mg/mL and incubated for 20 min, which was followed by a 24-h chase period at normal cell culture conditions. Hoechst 33342 and dextran conjugates were purchased from Molecular Probes. For confocal experiments, cells were grown on 30-mm glass bottom plates, switched to DMEM without phenol red, and sealed for the duration of the microscopic analysis. Images were captured with a Zeiss 510 LSM.

Statistical Methods
F tests were used to compare doxorubicin fluorescent intensity in MVP knockdown cells to the intensity in luciferase-transfected controls. Regression methods were used to pool the data from two separate experiments, allowing for differences in absolute numbers across experiments. The regression analyses were done after transforming the intensities to the log scale to stabilize the variability between the MVP knockdown cells and the luciferase-transfected controls.

Results

MVP Is Necessary But Not Sufficient for Doxorubicin Resistance in UMUC-3 Cells
To study the relationship of baseline MVP expression levels to the intrinsic drug sensitivity of UMUC-3 human bladder cancer cells, we generated a siRNA construct against MVP. The construct was able to knock down protein expression to 15% compared with luciferase control-transfected or nontransfected cells (Fig. 1A ). To determine if cells were sensitized to doxorubicin following MVP siRNA knockdown, cells were exposed to doxorubicin and analyzed for DNA content as a surrogate measure of cell number. Identical results were obtained using AlamarBlue, measuring cellular metabolic activity (data not shown). Parallel wells were harvested and analyzed by Western blotting for MVP expression to ascertain that cells examined for doxorubicin sensitivity had the expected suppression of MVP protein levels. Knockdown of MVP protein expression leads to a significantly increased sensitivity toward doxorubicin (Fig. 1B). This showed that MVP is necessary for intrinsic or de novo drug resistance in UMUC-3 bladder cancer cells.

View larger version (29K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. A, Western blot of UMUC-3 cells transfected with siRNA targeted to MVP or luciferase (Luc), analyzed for MVP and -tubulin expression. B, UMUC-3 cells were incubated for 5 d after siRNA transfection with luciferase or MVP siRNA and indicated concentrations of doxorubicin. Wells were analyzed for DNA content by CyQuant assay as a surrogate measure of cell numbers. a.u., arbitrary units. Two aliquots per well were analyzed from two replicate wells. Columns, mean of four measurements; bars, SD. Results are representative of seven independent experiments. C, to show specificity of the MVP siRNA oligo, polyclonal UMUC-3 pools stably expressing MVP-GFPmut (a MVP-GFP fusion protein where the siRNA target site has been destroyed by four silent mutations), or vector only, transfectants were generated as described in Materials and Methods. Cells were transfected with MVP, or luciferase siRNA, and incubated with 40 nmol/L doxorubicin (Doxo) for 5 d. Cells were evaluated as described in A. D, protein expression of experimental groups in C was evaluated by Western blotting. Total MVP, relative protein expression of MVP (endogenous + transfected), normalized to tubulin loading control and MVP levels of luciferase-transfected UMUC-3 cells (Vector lane). Band intensity was measured by digital fluorescence imaging as described in Materials and Methods.

MVP Does Not Influence Cellular Drug Efflux
To investigate whether the cellular concentration of doxorubicin is altered by MVP knockdown, we used the intrinsic fluorescence properties of doxorubicin and invoked the commonly held assumption that fluorescence level is proportional to concentration. As doxorubicin was not detectable in the nanomolar range previously used (Fig. 1B and C), a novel exposure protocol was developed. Briefly, UMUC-3 cells were transfected with either luciferase or MVP siRNA and allowed to recover for 24 h before they were exposed to 10 µmol/L doxorubicin for 20 min, after which the drug was washed off. Cell proliferation was assessed after a 48-h chase period. Although this represents a 250-fold increase in drug concentration previously used, the same drug response difference between MVP siRNA-treated cells and control was observed (Fig. 2A ). To measure the cellular concentration of doxorubicin, cells were harvested at various time points after drug exposure and subsequently analyzed for fluorescence by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (Fig. 2B). These data indicate that there is no difference in initial doxorubicin uptake between MVP siRNA-transfected and control-transfected cells. More interesting, equal doxorubicin fluorescence levels was also observed after 24-h incubation in cells expressing MVP compared with MVP-depleted cells. These data suggest that MVP does not influence drug efflux but instead might function through other mechanisms, such as intracellular sequestration.

View larger version (19K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 2. A, 24 h after siRNA transfections (luciferase or MVP), UMUC-3 cells were loaded with 10 µmol/L doxorubicin for 20 min, washed with complete medium, and incubated for 24 h. At the end of incubation, wells were washed once in PBS and DNA content was measured. Replicates and calculations were carried out as in Fig. 1B. B, 24 h after siRNA transfections (luciferase or MVP), UMUC-3 cells were loaded with 10 µmol/L doxorubicin for 20 min, washed with complete medium, and incubated for 1 or 24 h. Cellular concentration of doxorubicin was analyzed by fluorescence-activated cell sorting. No significant difference between MVP- and control-transfected cells could be detected at 1 or 24 h.

View larger version (17K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 3. A, UMUC-3 cells were seeded on a 24-well glass bottom plate, transfected with siRNA as indicated, and loaded with 10 µmol/L doxorubicin for 20 min. Cells were imaged by live fluorescent microscopy 1 and 24 h after addition of doxorubicin. Bar, 20 µm. B, parallel wells from experiment in A were labeled with the pH-dependent lysosomal marker LysoSensor DND-189 and imaged at 37°C, 5% CO2, after 24-h incubation. Bar, 20 µm. C, the fluorescence of doxorubicin was measured as an estimate of doxorubicin concentrations in cells transfected with siRNA toward MVP or a control duplex against luciferase. A smaller area within each nucleus was selected, and the mean fluorescent signal was recorded. Circle, one nuclei measured. For quantitation, 72 luciferase and 67 MVP cells were evaluated and plotted. Two separate experiments were done, each showing a statistically significant difference in fluorescent signal between MVP- and luciferase-transfected cells. F tests were used to compare fluorescent intensity. Values displayed are log mean fluorescence.

To verify that lysosomal sequestration in cells lacking MVP was perturbed, we measured the concentration of nuclear doxorubicin 24 h after drug exposure. Cells were imaged by live confocal microscopy, and the images were analyzed by ImageJ (32) for doxorubicin fluorescent intensity in the nucleus as a measure of concentration. The MVP knockdown cells showed a qualitatively higher doxorubicin concentration in the nucleus after overnight incubation (Fig. 3C). In two separate experiments, the nuclear doxorubicin concentration was measured to be 1.20-fold (shown in Fig. 3C) and 1.34-fold higher (data not shown), respectively, in cells lacking MVP compared with control-transfected cells. Pooling the data, adjusting for the differences in absolute numbers between the experiments, indicates that doxorubicin fluorescent intensity in MVP knockdown cells is significantly greater than luciferase-treated controls (P < 0.001).

Both doxorubicin and LysoSensor are depending on a low pH for their intracellular distribution. To evaluate the morphology of the lysosomal compartment in a pH-independent manner, cells were incubated at 37°C with 1 mg/mL fluorescent dextran conjugates for 20 min after which the cells were washed and placed in complete medium for 24 h (chase). Dextrans are taken up by the cells through pinocytosis and label the lysosomes on prolonged incubations (33). The lysosomal compartments labeled with dextrans and doxorubicin showed a remarkable overlap after 24-h incubation. This overlap was poor in MVP knockdown cells (Fig. 4A ). To verify that this phenotype is indeed due to a lack of expressed MVP protein, cells stably expressing MVP-GFPmut were transfected with the siRNA construct. These cells express a MVP transgene that is not targeted by our siRNA and exhibit a clustered lysosomal compartment as labeled with fluorescent dextran (Fig. 4B). This also indicates that the lysosomal disruption is not doxorubicin induced in MVP knockdown cells. From these data, we conclude that doxorubicin is initially exclusively located to the nucleus but is sequestered to the lysosomal compartment in UMUC-3 cells on prolonged incubation. Redistribution of the drug from the nucleus to lysosomes is perturbed in MVP knockdown cells.

View larger version (31K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 4. A, UMUC-3 cells were transfected with MVP or luciferase siRNA as described in Materials and Methods. Twenty-four hours after transfection, cells were loaded with a mixture of fluorescent dextran conjugates (green) and 10 µmol/L doxorubicin (red) for 20 min and then washed off following additional 24-h incubation. A near complete colocalization (Merge, yellow) of both fluorescent signals to the lysosomes is observed in the luciferase-transfected cells. Bottom, cells that had a blocked MVP protein expression did not exhibit this colocalization. Cells were imaged with a Zeiss 510 META confocal microscope at 37°C. Bar, 20 µm. B, cells stably expressing MVP-GFPmut (not a target of MVP siRNA) were transfected with MVP siRNA and labeled with fluorescent dextran for 20 min followed by a 24-h chase period. Bar, 20 µm.

View larger version (31K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 5. A, UMUC-3 cells were seeded on a 24-well glass bottom plate, transfected with siRNA as indicated, and labeled with dextran followed by a 24-h chase period or labeled with LysoSensor before imaging or fixed and stained with Lamp-1 antibodies, respectively. Blue, nucleus is visualized by Hoechst 33342 DNA marker. Two top stains, cells were imaged on a Zeiss Axiovert M135 at 37°C, 5% CO2. Bar, 20 µm. B, UMUC-3 cells grown on glass coverslips were transfected with siRNA duplexes as indicated, fixed, and imaged for polymerized actin with phalloidin conjugates (red), tubulin with -tubulin antibody-directed immunofluorescence (green), and DNA marker (blue). Bar, 20 µm.

The disrupted lysosomal positioning observed in our study suggests a functional interplay between the vault complex and a vesicular compartment. The colocalization of MVP and secretory vesicles in neuron-like PC-12 cells (38) as well as the lysosomal marker CD63 in dendritic cells (40) has been published. Taken together, this motivated us to investigate the localization of MVP with respect to lysosomes and in response to doxorubicin. We used the same MVP-GFP constructs as described above and investigated MVP localization before and after doxorubicin treatment. As shown in Fig. 6A , no colocalization could be observed, and the MVP seemed in this nonconfocal, whole-cell image, to be less concentrated at the perinuclear position where most lysosomes are found. In a confocal picture, the perinuclear exclusion of MVP is less evident, and again, no colocalization between doxorubicin and MVP-GFP could be detected (Fig. 6B). No apparent overlap in distribution was observed at higher concentrations of doxorubicin or lower MVP-GFP expression levels (data not shown). The same GFP construct was evaluated before and after doxorubicin treatment. Both short-term and long-term doxorubicin treatments were evaluated. We were not able to detect any gross redistributions or local enrichments of our reporter construct in these studies (Fig. 6C).

View larger version (30K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 6. A, MVP-GFP–expressing cells were exposed to 10 µmol/L doxorubicin for 20 min and allowed to recover for 24 h. Intrinsic fluorescence of doxorubicin (red) and MVP-GFP (green). B, cells that were treated as described in A were imaged with a Zeiss 510 META confocal microscope at 37°C. No apparent spatial overlap in the signals was observed. C, MVP-GFP–expressing cells were generated as described in Materials and Methods and exposed to 80 nmol/L doxorubicin overnight. Cells were fixed and imaged on a Zeiss 510 META confocal microscope.

Discussion

In this study, we used siRNA and microscopic techniques to examine the cellular functions of the largest ribonuclear protein known to date, the vault complex. We show two consequences of MVP depletion in the bladder tumor cell line UMUC-3. First, cells become more sensitive to a commonly used antineoplastic drug in cancer therapy (i.e., doxorubicin), which is particularly relevant because this drug is used in bladder cancer patients (41). Second, we show a disruption of lysosome positioning in these cells. We hypothesize that these two phenotypes are connected and that the loss of MVP in UMUC-3 cells leads to a dysfunctional lysosomal compartment and that this in turn leads to an impaired lysosomal sequestration of the drug.

Although the sensitization of cell lines to antineoplastic drugs through MVP depletion has been shown (18, 19) and large amount of patient data point to a vital role for MVP in drug resistance (2, 3, 16), it is far from certain that this protein plays an essential role in chemosensitivity of human cancer. Indeed, it has been reported that MVP overexpression, or depletion, does not affect drug sensitivity nor intracellular sequestration (7, 42–44). There might be several explanations for these discrepancies that potentially could influence MVP-dependent drug response, including, but not limited to, cellular context and culture conditions. Ferguson et al. suggest from patient data that, in renal cell carcinomas, MVP expression might be a more important indicator of drug resistance than ATP-binding cassette transporter pumps. Surprisingly, in a panel of cell lines from the same tumor origin, the opposite is true, and the expression levels of ATP-binding cassette transporter pumps is most indicative of the sensitivity to the antineoplastic drugs (45). This not only indicates what has been reported at many separate occasions previously, that MVP protein expression is indeed important for drug response in vivo, but also indicates that this phenotype translates poorly to the in vitro situation. As we understand the vault complexes better, we might be able to control for essential factors in our systems that determine the dependence on MVP and we will be able to answer these questions. Further, as we understand the biological role of vaults, we will be able to measure end points more proximal to its molecular function than we currently do when we measure cellular viability after drug exposure. This will hopefully lead to that more viable in vitro systems are developed.

In an effort to further understand the MVP resistance mechanism, we investigated the cellular response to doxorubicin by microscopy. Directly after drug exposure, cells showed a nuclear staining, although an additional perinuclear vesicle staining was noted at later time points. We here provide data that suggest that the doxorubicin observed in the lysosomes was exported from the nucleus. Cells transfected with MVP duplexes show a higher nuclear doxorubicin concentration than those transfected with control siRNA. This argues that doxorubicin is exported from the nucleus and that MVP is necessary for this transport. Indeed, high levels of MVP expression have previously been shown to be essential for nuclear exclusion of drugs (18). Further, vaults are reported to partly reside within the nucleus (46) and are known to associate and be recruited to the nuclear envelope (39, 47). The association of vaults to the estrogen, progesterone, and glucocorticoid receptors and most recently PTEN, and specifically their nuclear localization domain, also argues for a nuclear-cytoplasmic transport function (48, 49). These data together with its hollow structure (6) have led to a theory that vaults play an active role in the cytoplasm-nucleus translocation process perhaps as a direct carrier of drugs or drug complexes (3). We therefore initially hypothesized that vaults were essential for the nuclear exclusion mechanisms of doxorubicin. However, instead of "empty," doxorubicin-free, lysosomal compartments in MVP siRNA-treated cells, we did not see the same lysosomal distribution as in control-transfected cells. This leads us to question our hypothesis that MVP facilitates nuclear export and intracellular translocation of the drug. Instead, it does not seem to be the transport per se but rather the destination of the transport that seems to be dependent on vaults.

The endosomal network of vesicles, including lysosomes, depends largely on microtubules and microtubule-associated motor proteins for their transport (36). In UMUC-3 bladder tumor cells, there is a clear organization of the lysosomal compartments to one side of the nucleus and this level of higher organization is clearly disrupted by MVP siRNA. As mentioned earlier, there are several observations that would argue that the vault complex is associated with the microtubular network, and perhaps vesicles along it, such as colocalization of MVP and secretory vesicles in neuron-like PC-12 cells (38) and the lysosomal marker CD63 (Lamp-3) in dendritic cells (40). An interesting finding by Eichenmuller et al. (37) shows that vaults not only colocalize to microtubules but seem to directly interact with these structures via their structurally more complex cap regions. Two recent reports show the transport of MVP along microtubules (39, 50). It is, however, important to note that all these studies have in common that it is just a smaller fraction of vaults that is found in these associations, and indeed, most vaults seem to freely diffuse in the cytoplasm at a rate that is consistent with their large size (27). We fail to see any gross disruptions of the microtubular network on MVP depletion, which argues that MVP does not influence its overall integrity. We therefore hypothesize that the vault regulates the association of the vesicular cargo transported on this network, possibly through direct associations with the membrane-bound vesicle, the microtubules, or both.

In summary, we here report a novel connection between two cellular components well known to be pivotal to drug resistance (i.e., MVP and lysosomes). We hypothesize that the loss of MVP in UMUC-3 cells leads to a dysfunctional lysosomal compartment and that this in turn leads to an impaired lysosomal sequestration of the drug. Further investigation is needed to examine whether this is a direct effect of vault facilitating lysosomal transport along the microtubule or an indirect effect, such as vault-mediated regulation of cytoplasmic pH, lipid transport, or signaling through protein kinases.

Acknowledgments

We thank Jennifer Bryant for her expert technical assistance, Joanne Lannigan for assistance with the fluorescence-activated cell sorting, Erik Wiemer for the MVP and MVP-GFP constructs, and Mike Harding and all members of the Theodorescu lab for helpful discussions.

Footnotes

Grant support: NIH grant CA075115 (D. Theodorescu).

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

Received 6/26/06; revised 1/26/07; accepted 4/20/07.

References

1. Kickhoefer VA, Rajavel KS, Scheffer GL, et al. Vaults are up-regulated in multidrug-resistant cancer cell lines. J Biol Chem 1998;273:8971–4.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
2. Mossink MH, van Zon A, Scheper RJ, Sonneveld P, Wiemer EA, Vaults: a ribonucleoprotein particle involved in drug resistance? Oncogene 2003;22:7458–67.[CrossRef][Medline]
3. Scheffer GL, Schroeijers AB, Izquierdo MA, Wiemer EA, Scheper RJ. Lung resistance-related protein/major vault protein and vaults in multidrug-resistant cancer. Curr Opin Oncol 2000;12:550–6.[CrossRef][Medline]
4. Mikyas Y, Makabi M, Raval-Fernandes S, et al. Cryoelectron microscopy imaging of recombinant and tissue derived vaults: localization of the MVP N termini and VPARP. J Mol Biol 2004;344:91–105.[CrossRef][Medline]
5. Kickhoefer VA, Vasu SK, Rome LH. Vaults are the answer, what is the question? Trends Cell Biol 1996;6:174–8.[CrossRef][Medline]
6. Kong LB, Siva AC, Rome LH, Stewart PL. Structure of the vault, a ubiquitous cellular component. Structure Fold Des 1999;7:371–9.[Medline]
7. Scheffer GL, Wijngaard PL, Flens MJ, et al. The drug resistance-related protein LRP is the human major vault protein. Nat Med 1995;1:578–82.[CrossRef][Medline]
8. Scheper RJ, Broxterman HJ, Scheffer GL, et al. Overexpression of a M(r) 110,000 vesicular protein in non-P-glycoprotein-mediated multidrug resistance. Cancer Res 1993;53:1475–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9. Hart SM, Ganeshaguru K, Scheper RJ, et al. Expression of the human major vault protein LRP in acute myeloid leukemia. Exp Hematol 1997;25:1227–32.[Medline]
10. Filipits M, Stranzl T, Pohl G, et al. Drug resistance factors in acute myeloid leukemia: a comparative analysis. Leukemia 2000;14:68–76.[CrossRef][Medline]
11. Pirker R, Pohl G, Stranzl T, et al. The lung resistance protein (LRP) predicts poor outcome in acute myeloid leukemia. Adv Exp Med Biol 1999;457:133–9.[Medline]
12. Filipits M, Pohl G, Stranzl T, et al. Expression of the lung resistance protein predicts poor outcome in de novo acute myeloid leukemia. Blood 1998;91:1508–13.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Borg AG, Burgess R, Green LM, Scheper RJ, Yin JA. Overexpression of lung-resistance protein and increased P-glycoprotein function in acute myeloid leukaemia cells predict a poor response to chemotherapy and reduced patient survival. Br J Haematol 1998;103:1083–91.[CrossRef][Medline]
14. Goasguen JE, Lamy T, Bergeron C, et al. Multifactorial drug-resistance phenomenon in acute leukemias: impact of P170-MDR1, LRP56 protein, glutathione-transferases and metallothionein systems on clinical outcome. Leuk Lymphoma 1996;23:567–76.[Medline]
15. Zurita AJ, Diestra JE, Condom E, et al. Lung resistance-related protein as a predictor of clinical outcome in advanced testicular germ-cell tumours. Br J Cancer 2003;88:879–86.[CrossRef][Medline]
16. Izquierdo MA, Scheffer GL, Flens MJ, et al. Relationship of LRP-human major vault protein to in vitro and clinical resistance to anticancer drugs. Cytotechnology 1996;19:191–7.[Medline]
17. Diestra JE, Condom E, Del Muro XG, et al. Expression of multidrug resistance proteins P-glycoprotein, multidrug resistance protein 1, breast cancer resistance protein and lung resistance related protein in locally advanced bladder cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: biological and clinical implications. J Urol 2003;170:1383–7.[CrossRef][Medline]
18. Kitazono M, Sumizawa T, Takebayashi Y, et al. Multidrug resistance and the lung resistance-related protein in human colon carcinoma SW-620 cells. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91:1647–53.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
19. Kitazono M, Okumura H, Ikeda R, et al. Reversal of LRP-associated drug resistance in colon carcinoma SW-620 cells. Int J Cancer 2001;91:126–31.[CrossRef][Medline]
20. Ouar Z, Lacave R, Bens M, Vandewalle A. Mechanisms of altered sequestration and efflux of chemotherapeutic drugs by multidrug-resistant cells. Cell Biol Toxicol 1999;15:91–100.[Medline]
21. Larsen AK, Escargueil AE, Skladanowski A. Resistance mechanisms associated with altered intracellular distribution of anticancer agents. Pharmacol Ther 2000;85:217–29.[CrossRef][Medline]
22. Mayer LD, Bally MB, Cullis PR. Uptake of adriamycin into large unilamellar vesicles in response to a pH gradient. Biochim Biophys Acta 1986;857:123–6.[Medline]
23. Schindler M, Grabski S, Hoff E, Simon SM. Defective pH regulation of acidic compartments in human breast cancer cells (MCF-7) is normalized in adriamycin-resistant cells (MCF-7adr). Biochemistry 1996;35:2811–7.[CrossRef][Medline]
24. Ouar Z, Bens M, Vignes C, et al. Inhibitors of vacuolar H⁺-ATPase impair the preferential accumulation of daunomycin in lysosomes and reverse the resistance to anthracyclines in drug-resistant renal epithelial cells. Biochem J 2003;370:185–93.[CrossRef][Medline]
25. Molinari A, Calcabrini A, Meschini S, et al. Subcellular detection and localization of the drug transporter P-glycoprotein in cultured tumor cells. Curr Protein Pept Sci 2002;3:653–70.[CrossRef][Medline]
26. Rajagopal A, Simon SM. Subcellular localization and activity of multidrug resistance proteins. Mol Biol Cell 2003;14:3389–99.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
27. van Zon A, Mossink MH, Schoester M, et al. The formation of vault-tubes: a dynamic interaction between vaults and vault PARP. J Cell Sci 2003;116:4391–400.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
28. Oxford G, Owens CR, Titus BJ, et al. RalA and RalB: antagonistic relatives in cancer cell migration. Cancer Res 2005;65:7111–20.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
29. van Zon A, Mossink MH, Schoester M, et al. Efflux kinetics and intracellular distribution of daunorubicin are not affected by major vault protein/lung resistance-related protein (vault) expression. Cancer Res 2004;64:4887–92.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
30. Simon S, Roy D, Schindler M. Intracellular pH and the control of multidrug resistance. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1994;91:1128–32.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
31. Gong Y, Duvvuri M, Krise JP. Separate roles for the Golgi apparatus and lysosomes in the sequestration of drugs in the multidrug-resistant human leukemic cell line HL-60. J Biol Chem 2003;278:50234–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
32. Abramoff MD, Magelhaes PJ, Ram SJ. Image processing with ImageJ. Biophotonics Int 2004;11:36–42.
33. Duzgunes N, Majumdar S, Goren MB. Fluorescence methods for monitoring phagosome-lysosome fusion in human macrophages. Methods Enzymol 1993;221:234–8.[Medline]
34. Viitala J, Carlsson SR, Siebert PD, Fukuda M. Molecular cloning of cDNAs encoding lamp A, a human lysosomal membrane glycoprotein with apparent M_r approximately equal to 120,000. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1988;85:3743–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
35. Matteoni R, Kreis TE. Translocation and clustering of endosomes and lysosomes depends on microtubules. J Cell Biol 1987;105:1253–65.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
36. Cole NB, Lippincott-Schwartz J. Organization of organelles and membrane traffic by microtubules. Curr Opin Cell Biol 1995;7:55–64.[CrossRef][Medline]
37. Eichenmuller B, Kedersha N, Solovyeva E, et al. Vaults bind directly to microtubules via their caps and not their barrels. Cell Motil Cytoskeleton 2003;56:225–36.[CrossRef][Medline]
38. Herrmann C, Golkaramnay E, Inman E, Rome L, Volknandt W. Recombinant major vault protein is targeted to neuritic tips of PC12 cells. J Cell Biol 1999;144:1163–72.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
39. van Zon A, Mossink MH, Houtsmuller AB, et al. Vault mobility depends in part on microtubules and vaults can be recruited to the nuclear envelope. Exp Cell Res 2006;312:245–55.[Medline]
40. Schroeijers AB, Reurs AW, Scheffer GL, et al. Up-regulation of drug resistance-related vaults during dendritic cell development. J Immunol 2002;168:1572–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
41. Vogelzang NJ. Neoadjuvant MVAC: the long and winding road is getting shorter and straighter. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:4003–4.[Free Full Text]
42. Mossink MH, van Zon A, Franzel-Luiten E, et al. Disruption of the murine major vault protein (MVP/LRP) gene does not induce hypersensitivity to cytostatics. Cancer Res 2002;62:7298–304.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
43. Huffman KE, Corey DR. Major vault protein does not play a role in chemoresistance or drug localization in a non-small cell lung cancer cell line. Biochemistry 2005;44:2253–61.[CrossRef][Medline]
44. Siva AC, Raval-Fernandes S, Stephen AG, et al. Up-regulation of vaults may be necessary but not sufficient for multidrug resistance. Int J Cancer 2001;92:195–202.[CrossRef][Medline]
45. Ferguson RE, Jackson SM, Stanley AJ, et al. Intrinsic chemotherapy resistance to the tubulin-binding antimitotic agents in renal cell carcinoma. Int J Cancer 2005;115:155–63.[CrossRef][Medline]
46. Slesina M, Inman EM, Rome LH, Volknandt W. Nuclear localization of the major vault protein in U373 cells. Cell Tissue Res 2005;321:97–104.[CrossRef][Medline]
47. Chugani DC, Rome LH, Kedersha NL. Evidence that vault ribonucleoprotein particles localize to the nuclear pore complex. J Cell Sci 1993;106:23–9.[Abstract]
48. Chung JH, Ginn-Pease ME, Eng C. Phosphatase and tensin homologue deleted on chromosome 10 (PTEN) has nuclear localization signal-like sequences for nuclear import mediated by major vault protein. Cancer Res 2005;65:4108–16.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
49. Abbondanza C, Rossi V, Roscigno A, et al. Interaction of vault particles with estrogen receptor in the MCF-7 breast cancer cell. J Cell Biol 1998;141:1301–10.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
50. Slesina M, Inman EM, Moore AE, et al. Movement of vault particles visualized by GFP-tagged major vault protein. Cell Tissue Res 2006;324:403–10.[CrossRef][Medline]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Herlevsen, M. Articles by Theodorescu, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Herlevsen, M. Articles by Theodorescu, D.