|
|
|
|||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
First published online 24 October 2007
doi: 10.1242/dev.011171
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Matrix and Morphogenesis Unit, Laboratory of Cell and Developmental Biology,
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, National Institutes of
Health, 30 Convent Drive, Bethesda, MD, USA.
2 Howard Hughes Medical Institute-National Institutes of Health Research
Scholars Program, Bethesda, MD, USA.
3 School of Biomedical Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney,
Australia.
4 Department of Oncology, Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem,
Israel.
5 Cancer and Vascular Biology Research Center, The Bruce Rappaport Faculty of
Medicine, Technion, Haifa, Israel.
* Author for correspondence (e-mail: mhoffman{at}mail.nih.gov)
Accepted 5 September 2007
| SUMMARY |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Key words: Heparanase, FGF10, Heparan sulfate, Perlecan, Salivary gland development
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Heparanase, an endoglycosidase that requires proteolytic activation, has
been extensively studied for its role in angiogenesis and tumor metastasis
(Bame, 2001
;
Elkin et al., 2001
;
Sanderson et al., 2004
;
Vlodavsky et al., 2002
;
Zcharia et al., 2005b
).
Heparanase releases HS fragments that are more bioactive than the native HS
chains from which they are derived (Kato
et al., 1998
; Sanderson et
al., 2005
; Sanderson et al.,
2004
; Vlodavsky and Friedmann,
2001
). Heparanase also cleaves perlecan HS in the basement
membrane and releases FGF2, making it available for growth factor-dependent
signaling during angiogenesis, wound healing and tumor formation
(Elkin et al., 2001
;
Ishai-Michaeli et al., 1990
;
Reiland et al., 2006
;
Vlodavsky et al., 2001
;
Whitelock et al., 1996
). The
bioactivity of an FGF may be modulated by its release from the ECM as a
complex with a fragment of HS (Bame,
2001
; Reiland et al.,
2006
), and the high-affinity activation of FGF receptors (FGFRs)
and FGFs requires the formation of a ternary complex with HS
(Kan et al., 1999
;
Pantoliano et al., 1994
). The
role of heparanase during early embryo development and particularly
FGF10-dependent organogenesis is unknown.
FGF10-FGFR2b signaling is critical for mouse submandibular gland (SMG)
development, and embryos lacking either FGFR2b or FGF10 have salivary gland
agenesis, as well as other severe developmental problems
(De Moerlooze et al., 2000
;
Ohuchi, 2000
;
Sekine et al., 1999
). However,
mice heterozygous for either Fgf10 or Fgfr2b only have
hypoplastic salivary and lacrimal glands, whereas other major organ systems
develop normally (Entesarian et al.,
2005
; Jaskoll et al.,
2005
). In humans, mutations in either FGF10 or
FGFR2b cause aplasia of lacrimal and salivary glands (ALSG)
(Entesarian et al., 2005
) and
lacrimo-auriculo-dento-digital (LADD) syndrome, characterized by aplasia or
hypoplasia of the salivary and lacrimal systems
(Entesarian et al., 2007
;
Milunsky et al., 2006
).
Therefore, salivary gland development in both humans and mice is particularly
sensitive to levels of FGF10-FGFR2b signaling, and defining how the biological
activity of FGF10 is regulated is necessary to understand SMG development.
Branching morphogenesis of embryonic mouse SMGs in organ culture is
particularly sensitive to levels of FGF10
(Hoffman et al., 2002
;
Steinberg et al., 2005
) and is
thus a useful model to investigate the regulation of FGF10 bioactivity.
FGF10-FGFR2b signaling activates the MAPK cascade, regulating epithelial FGFR
gene expression as well as the expression of ECM proteins in the basement
membrane (Rebustini et al.,
2007
). HS is critical for SMG branching morphogenesis, as the
addition of b-D-xyloside, bacterial heparitinase or exogenous heparin,
inhibits ex vivo SMG branching (Mori, 1994; Nakanishi, 1993;
Thompson and Spooner, 1982
;
Thompson and Spooner, 1983
).
Importantly, HS biosynthesis and accumulation in the basement membrane is
coordinated with epithelial cell proliferation and end bud expansion.
Pulse-chase experiments with radiolabeled sulfate showed that newly
synthesized BM HSPGs initially accumulated at the tip of the end bud,
associated with areas of epithelial proliferation. However, the basement
membrane HSPG involved in epithelial proliferation was not identified.
We hypothesized that the activity of FGF10 was influenced by its binding to, and release from, an HSPG in the ECM or on the cell surface. FGF10 secreted by the mesenchyme must traverse the basement membrane to bind FGFR2b, its epithelial receptor. Therefore, modifications of HS chains that affect FGF10 binding, storage and release from the ECM are likely to be important during SMG development. Here, we show that heparanase colocalized with perlecan in the SMG epithelial basement membrane and that exogenous heparanase increased SMG branching, while inhibiting heparanase decreased branching. This inhibition was rescued specifically by exogenous FGF10. Furthermore, we demonstrate that heparanase released the FGF10-FGFR2b complex from purified perlecan as well as from perlecan in the endogenous SMG basement membrane. Our results show that heparanase plays an important role during SMG development by cleaving perlecan HS and releasing FGF10 from the basement membrane to modulate FGFR2b-dependent branching morphogenesis.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Mesenchyme-free epithelial rudiments were cultured as described previously
(Steinberg et al., 2005
). SMGs
were incubated in 1.6 U/ml of Dispase (Roche, IN, USA) in medium at 37°C
for 20 minutes. Epithelia were separated from the mesenchyme in medium
containing 10% BSA and then washed in medium. The epithelia were placed in 15
µl of laminin-111 (Trevigen, MD, USA) on top of a filter, as described
above. FGF10 (200 ng/ml) or FGF7 (200 ng/ml; R&D Systems, MN, USA) was
added to the media.
Heparanase reagents
Function-blocking rabbit anti-heparanase Ab733, an affinity purified IgG
fraction of this antiserum IgG733 (1 mg/ml), and anti-heparanase Ab1453 have
been previously described (Schubert et
al., 2004
; Zetser et al.,
2004
). Preimmune rabbit serum was used as a control. Laminaran
sulfate (LMS) (Miao et al.,
1999
) and unsulfated laminarin (Sigma, MO, USA) were added at the
beginning of the experiment (10 or 50 µg/ml). In control experiments the
LMS or Ab733 were washed out at 24 hours and the SMGs cultured for a further
24 hours to show that neither were toxic, since the SMG resumed branching (not
shown). E12 SMGs were cultured for 48 hours with 1 µl of Ab733 and a range
of concentrations of exogenous recombinant FGFs and heparin-binding EGF-like
growth factor (HB-EGF: all from R&D Systems, MN, USA). FGF1 and FGF2 were
added at 1, 10, 20, 100 and 200 ng/ml (FGF1=0.065, 0.65, 1.3, 6.5 and 13 nM;
FGF2=0.058, 0.58, 1.2, 5.8 and 12 nM); higher concentrations inhibit branching
(not shown). FGF7 and FGF10 were added at 10, 50, 100, 200, 750 and 1000 ng/ml
(FGF7 and FGF10=0.053, 1.1, 5.3, 10.5, 39.8 and 53 nM); higher concentrations
are without additional effects (not shown). HB-EGF was added 1, 10, 20 and 200
ng/ml (0.083, 0.83, 1.7 and 17 nM). The preparation of active, inactive, and
unprocessed forms of the human recombinant heparanase enzymes has been
described previously (Abboud-Jarrous et
al., 2005
; Vlodavsky et al.,
1999
). The enzymes were added to the culture media at the
beginning of an experiment at doses of 2.5, 5, 10, 20 and 30 µg/ml.
Immunofluorescence analysis
SMGs were fixed with either 4% PFA-PBS for 1 hour or with ice-cold
methanol:acetone (1:1) for 10 minutes and washed with PBS. They were blocked
overnight at 4°C in 10% heat-inactivated donkey serum, 1% BSA, MOM IgG
blocking reagent (Vector Laboratories, CA, USA), and 0.1% Tween-20-PBS, then
incubated for 3 hours with anti-heparanase Ab1453 (1:200), SYBR-green
(Molecular Probes; 1:5000), and anti-perlecan mAb1948 (Chemicon, CA, USA),
washed, and incubated with Cy3 and Cy5-conjugated secondary Fab fragment
antibodies (Jackson Laboratories, PA, USA).
Perlecan ELISA assay
Purified perlecan was isolated as described previously
(Knox et al., 2002
) from human
arterial endothelial cell (HUAEC)-conditioned medium by DEAE-Sepharose
chromatography with elution in 1 M NaCl, and purified using an anti-perlecan
affinity column. Perlecan was monitored in column fractions using antibodies
to the protein core or to HS in an ELISA.
The three-dimensional (3D) laminin-111 ECM (Cultrex Laminin-1, Trevigen, MD, USA), is purified from EHS tumor extract and is >90% pure by SDS-PAGE. Round-bottom 96-well plates were coated overnight at 4°C with Laminin-111, collagen type IV, or growth factor reduced-Matrigel (Trevigen, MD, USA). The wells were blocked with 5% BSA for 1 hour at 37°C, incubated with anti-perlecan mAb 1948 (1:5000), washed three times and then incubated with anti-rat IgG-HRP (1:10000). The HRP binding was detected with TMB substrate (Antigenix America, NY), and stopped with 1 M sulfuric acid. Absorbance was read at 445 nm.
Solid-phase assay of FGF10-FGFR2 complex binding and release from ECM
Laminin-111 ECM (0.05 µg/ml) was used to coat round-bottom, 96-well
plates overnight at 4°C. The wells were incubated with 0.5 µg/ml
recombinant heparanase, 10 mU/ml heparitinase, 10 mU/ml chondroitinase ABC,
0.1 µg/ml heparin, or a carrier control (0.01% BSA in PBS) for 1 hour at
37°C. Wells were blocked with 5% BSA for 1 hour at room temperature,
incubated with 1 nM recombinant mouse FGFR2b-human Fc chimera (referred to as
FGFR2b) with or without 1 nM recombinant FGF10 or FGF1 diluted in 0.05%
Tween-20-PBS (wash buffer) for 1 hour at 37°C, washed four times,
incubated with 0.15 µg/ml biotinylated anti-human-Fc antibody (Jackson
Laboratories) for 1 hour at 37°C, washed four times, incubated for 1 hour
at 37°C with streptavidin-HRP, and then developed with TMB substrate
solution as described above.
Ligand and carbohydrate engagement (LACE) assay
A modification of the LACE assay (Allen
and Rapraeger, 2003
) was performed using a recombinant mouse
FGFR2b-human Fc chimera (referred to as FGFR2b) and FGF10 (all from R&D
Systems, MN, USA). SMG cultures were treated with 100 µg/ml heparin for 30
minutes at 37°C, washed, fixed with 4% PFA-PBS for 15 minutes at RT,
washed, and permeabilized with 0.5% Triton X-100-PBS for 10 minutes. Some
glands were treated for 3 hours with 10 µg/ml active heparanase or 0.005
U/ml heparitinase I (Seikagaku, USA) at 37°C and then washed with PBST.
The glands were blocked overnight at 4°C with 10% BSA in 0.1% Tween-20-PBS
(PBST), incubated for 3 hours with either 50 nM of FGFR2b, with or without 50
nM FGF10, anti-heparanase Ab1453, anti-perlecan (rat mAb1948; Chemicon, CA,
USA), or anti-syndecan 1 (mouse mAb281-2; Pharmingen, CA, USA). After washing,
Cy dye-conjugated secondary antibodies were added for 1.5 hours. The FGFR2b
was detected with anti-human Fc using a Zeiss LSM 510 microscope.
|
Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) analysis
Perlecan was immunopurified as described above and analyzed using a BIAcore
2000 (Amersham Biosciences). Biotinylated perlecan (10 µg/ml) in PBS was
coupled to each flow cell of a streptavidin-derivatized sensor chip at a flow
rate of 5 µl/min (
RU
1000). HS chains of immobilized perlecan
in one flow cell were treated with heparanase (5 µg/ml in PBS) for 10
minutes at 5 µl/minute at 25°C and the surface washed with three
1-minute pulses of 2 M NaCl. An untreated flow cell was used as a reference.
Binding experiments were performed at a flow rate of 30 µl/minute at
25°C. The injected volume was 50 or 55 µl, and the kinject function was
used with a programmed dissociation time of 150 seconds. All growth factors
and growth factor-receptor complexes were diluted in HBS-P [0.01 M Hepes, 0.15
M NaCl, 0.005% (v/v) polysorbate 20, pH 7.4; BIAcore] running buffer to a
final concentration of 50 nM with or without 0.1 µg/ml heparin (Celsus, OH,
USA). FGFR2b was incubated with FGF10 for 5 minutes prior to injection. In
some experiments, 50 nM FGF-FGFR2b was injected at 30 µl/minute, the flow
rate was changed to 5 µl/minute, and heparanase (5 µg/ml in PBS) was
injected. The perlecan surface was regenerated with a 30 second pulse of 2 M
NaCl or 100 µg/ml heparin. Sensograms were analyzed using the BIAcore 2000
Evaluation Software 3.0.
Statistical analysis
Values are reported as means and standard errors for each group from two or
more experiments. The data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Inhibition of heparanase function decreases SMG branching and is rescued by exogenous FGF10
Heparanase function was decreased using laminaran sulfate
(Fig. 2A), a potent inhibitor
of heparanase that binds and inhibits its hydrolytic activity
(Miao et al., 1999
), a
function-blocking heparanase antiserum
(Fig. 2B)
(Schubert et al., 2004
;
Zetser et al., 2004
). Both
treatments significantly inhibited branching in a dose-dependent manner,
(Fig. 2) compared to laminarin,
an unsulfated polysaccharide control, or control rabbit serum. Additionally,
an affinity purified IgG fraction of Ab733 (25 µg/ml) also inhibited
branching by
50%, in a similar manner to 1 µl of Ab733 antiserum (data
not shown). SMGs were then treated with a dose of Ab733 that decreased the
number of buds by
50% (Fig.
3), and a range of concentrations of exogenous FGFs or HB-EGF were
added (see Materials and methods) to the culture medium. FGF10, above 100
ng/ml, was able to rescue the glands from the inhibitory effects of Ab733
(Fig. 3A,B). However, FGF1,
FGF2 (both 10 ng/ml shown), FGF7 (100 ng/ml shown) or HB-EGF (20 ng/ml, data
not shown) were unable to rescue the SMGs. Higher concentrations (>200
ng/ml) of FGF1 and FGF2 inhibit SMG morphogenesis and higher concentrations of
FGF7 or HB-EGF were without additional effect. The morphogenesis of SMGs
treated with Ab733 and FGF10 resembled that of the control glands, whereas
those treated with other FGFs, did not continue to cleft and branch, but did
increase in size. We hypothesized that heparanase functions to release the
endogenous HS-bound FGF10, which is required for branching.
|
|
3-fold increase) and unprocessed (
2-fold increase) forms of
heparanase. Thus, heparanase releases endogenous growth factors from the ECM
reservoir that activate MAPK signaling.
We added recombinant heparanase isoforms to isolated salivary epithelium
cultured in a 3D laminin ECM supplemented with FGF10. Exogenous active
heparanase has a dramatic effect on epithelial morphogenesis in FGF10-cultured
epithelia, increasing lateral branching, duct elongation and end bud clefting
(Fig. 4D). We added less FGF10
(200 ng/ml) to these assays than previously described
(Steinberg et al., 2005
) to
avoid maximal FGF10 stimulation. Unprocessed heparanase also increased
branching compared to the epithelial rudiments treated with the inactive
enzyme (Fig. 4D), implying that
the epithelium activates heparanase, although we have no direct evidence that
this occurs in the intracellular or extracellular compartment. The inactive
enzyme had no effect on morphogenesis and appears the same as the carrier
control (not shown). The increased lateral branching and end bud clefting was
not simply due to heparanase releasing FGF10 and increasing its
bioavailability, because when we added more FGF10 (500 ng/ml;
Fig. 4D) without heparanase, we
observed increased duct elongation, similar to what we previously reported
(Steinberg et al., 2005
), but
not increased lateral branching. These results indicate that the salivary
epithelium can process heparanase to its active form, but importantly suggest
that heparanase cleavage of ECM HS increases FGF10 bioactivity to induce
lateral branching and end bud clefting.
|
|
2% perlecan by weight (data not shown). In
addition, basement membrane Matrigel contained
4% perlecan, and purified
collagen IV had undetectable perlecan, as determined by ELISA (data not
shown).
We developed a solid-phase binding assay using laminin ECM-coated plates to
measure FGF10-FGFR2b binding to, and heparanase-mediated release from, the ECM
using an anti-human-Fc-biotinylated antibody and streptavidin-HRP to detect
the FGFR2b-Fc. As expected, the combination of FGF10-FGFR2b showed increased
binding to the ECM compared with that of FGFR2b alone
(Fig. 5A), supporting previous
biochemical data that the ternary complex of FGF10-FGFR2b and HS has greater
affinity than either FGFR or FGF alone
(Ibrahimi et al., 2004
;
Mohammadi et al., 2005a
).
FGF10-FGFR2b complex binding to the ECM after inactive heparanase treatment
(control) was reported as 100% binding
(Fig. 5A). The addition of
active heparanase after FGF10-FGFR2b complex binding to the ECM resulted in
release of about 40% of the complex from the ECM
(Fig. 5A, first set of bars).
FGFR2b also has a heparin-binding site, independent of its ligand binding
site, but binds to the ECM
44% less than the FGF10-FGFR2b complex
(Fig. 5A, second set of bars),
and FGFR2b could also be partly released from the ECM by treatment with
heparanase. Alternatively, the ECM was pretreated with either inactive
(control) or active heparanase before adding the FGF10-FGFR2b complex or the
receptor alone (Fig. 5A, third
and fourth set of bars). There was a decrease of
75% in FGF10-FGFR2b
complex binding to the ECM when it was pretreated with heparanase and
50%
decrease in FGFR2b binding to the ECM. These results show that FGF10-FGFR2b
binding to the ECM is mediated by HS and can be released by heparanase.
Pretreatment of the ECM with heparitinase, but not chondroitinase ABC, also
decreased the binding of the FGF10-FGFR2b complex
(Fig. 5B); as did co-incubation
of the complex with heparin (data not shown), further demonstrating that the
complex binding is HS dependent. We also compared FGF1-FGFR2b binding to the
ECM; interestingly, binding increased
150% compared with that of the
FGF10-FGFR2b complex, suggesting the FGF1 complex binds to more HS epitopes
than the FGF10 complex. Surprisingly, treatment of the ECM with heparanase did
not decrease FGF1-FGFR2b complex binding, in contrast to both heparitinase
(Fig. 5B) and heparin (data not
shown), suggesting that although interaction of FGF1 with FGFR2b is HS
dependent, there are differences in the HS bound by the FGF1-FGFR2b compared
with the FGF10-FGFR2b.
|
Heparanase treatment decreases binding of FGF10-FGFR2b to endogenous SMG HSPGs
The biochemical data suggested that the FGF10-FGFR2b complex bound to
perlecan HS and was released by heparanase. Therefore, we confirmed that this
also occurs with endogenous SMG HSPGs, using a whole-mount, modified ligand
and carbohydrate engagement (LACE) assay. SMGs were treated with heparitinase
or heparanase, then probed with the FGFR2b alone
(Fig. 7A) or with an
FGF10-FGFR2b complex (Fig.
7B,C), which was detected with anti-human-Fc antibodies and also
immunostained for perlecan and syndecan 1. Single confocal sections through an
epithelial bud reveal that FGFR2b bound to the basement membrane, where it
colocalized with perlecan, and also bound to epithelial cell membranes. This
suggests that HS on perlecan as well as other cell surface HSPGs bind FGFR2b.
Increased binding was detected in both the basement membrane and the
epithelial cell membranes when glands were incubated with the FGF10-FGFR2b
complex. In addition, the complex colocalized with perlecan in the basement
membrane (Fig. 7B), and partly
colocalized with syndecan 1 in the epithelium
(Fig. 7C). Importantly,
heparanase pretreatment decreased the binding of FGFR2b and the FGF10-FGFR2b
complex, indicating that both the receptor and the complex required
heparanase-sensitive HS for binding (Fig.
7A,B), and that they both colocalized with perlecan in the
basement membrane. Additionally, there was more syndecan 1 in the mesenchyme
than in the epithelium that did not colocalize with FGF10-FGFR2b, suggesting
that syndecan 1 in the mesenchyme may have different HS chains. Staining with
the syndecan antibody, which recognizes the syndecan core protein, was not
decreased by pretreatment with either heparanase or heparitinase (data not
shown). The partial colocalization in the epithelium also suggests that other
epithelial HSPGs bind the FGF10-FGFR2b complex.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Genetic knockouts of heparanase have not been reported, but transgenic mice
overexpressing heparanase are viable and fertile but have abnormal mammary,
hair, kidney and implantation phenotypes. In particular, the mammary gland has
excess branching, widening of the ducts, increased neovascularization and
disruption of the epithelial basement membrane
(Zcharia et al., 2001
;
Zcharia et al., 2005a
). Thus,
we investigated the role of heparanase in SMGs where it is expressed
throughout development (Fig.
1A). The localization of heparanase in the basement membrane and
epithelial clefts (Fig. 1C),
and its colocalization with perlecan, suggested that it might be involved in
ECM regulation of morphogenesis. In support of this hypothesis, branching
morphogenesis of SMGs was blocked by a function-blocking heparanase antiserum.
Importantly, only FGF10 was able to rescue the morphogenesis
(Fig. 3), suggesting that
FGF10-FGFR2b signaling was specifically required during epithelial
morphogenesis. Surprisingly, FGF1 and FGF7, which bind to FGFR2b, were unable
to rescue branching. The level of FGF10-FGFR2b signaling is critical for SMG
development, and simply stimulating FGFR2b does not restore normal branching
morphogenesis, suggesting that endogenous HS specifies FGF10 function and that
the release of FGF10 is required for branching morphogenesis. It is probable
that heparanase releases other heparin binding growth factors that promote
branching morphogenesis, such as HB-EGF. However, while HB-EGF stimulates SMG
proliferation (Umeda et al.,
2001
), it was unable to rescue the growth of Ab733-treated glands
(Fig. 3), demonstrating
specific modulation of FGF10 function in SMGs by heparanase.
|
In contrast to heparanase, both exogenous heparitinase and heparin inhibit
branching [our data, not shown, which reproduces a previous report
(Nakanishi et al., 1993
)].
Heparitinase cleaves the HS chains into di- and tetrasaccharides that are too
small to facilitate biological activity, such as growth factor binding
(Reiland et al., 2004
).
Heparanase, however, cleaves the glycosidic bonds of HS chains at only a few
sites, producing fragments that are reported to be 10-20 sugar residues long,
or
5-7 kDa, and there is evidence that these fragments are more
biologically active than the native HS chain from which they are derived
(Elkin et al., 2001
;
Kato et al., 1998
;
Sanderson et al., 2004
;
Vlodavsky and Friedmann,
2001
). Additionally, the spacing of the glycosaminoglycan
S-domains (regions of HS rich in N- and O-sulfate groups and iduronate
residues) is critical for the cleavage and for the substrate specificity of
the resulting fragments (Bame,
2001
). Our data suggest that the heparanase-derived HS fragments
increase the bioactivity of FGF10. Firstly, the addition of heparanase allowed
us to use less FGF10 in our assays (200 versus 1500 ng/ml,
Fig. 4D) compared to our
previous work (Steinberg et al.,
2005
). However, the increased bioactivity of FGF10 was not simply
due to increased bioavailability; if we added more FGF10, the epithelium grew
larger with longer ducts, and there was no increase in end bud number (see 500
ng/ml FGF10, Fig. 4D).
Secondly, the FGF10 and HS fragments initiate lateral bud formation along the
duct; however, there does not appear to be increased localization of FGFR2b at
potential sites of lateral branching along the duct; our previous
immunostaining and in situ analysis showed that FGFR2b is expressed evenly
along the ducts (Patel et al.,
2006
; Steinberg et al.,
2005
). This suggests that a cofactor on the ductal epithelium may
localize the FGF10 or the FGF10-HS fragment to a specific region to initiate
FGFR2b signaling, leading to lateral bud formation. Our data suggest that
heparanase-derived HS fragments influence the location and specificity of an
FGF10-FGFR2b-HS signaling complex, possibly with other unidentified cofactors
(see model in Fig. 8). Future
studies will explore the hypothesis that defined HS structures in specific
regions of the epithelium influence FGF10-dependent epithelial
morphogenesis.
|
During embryonic development, tissue-specific differences in HS regulate
different FGF-FGFR interactions, suggesting that developmental changes in HS
specifically modulate FGF signaling (Allen
et al., 2001
; Allen and
Rapraeger, 2003
). Little is known about how HSPGs modulate FGF10
biological activity during development, although HS-FGF10 interactions are
important for lung morphogenesis, and influenced by developmentally regulated
regional patterns of HS sulfation
(Izvolsky et al., 2003a
;
Izvolsky et al., 2003b
). The
enzymes that synthesize and modify HS have unique spatiotemporal expression
patterns during development and are likely to be important for FGF10 function
during SMG morphogenesis. We have used the FGF10-FGFR2b complex in solid-phase
binding assays with the 3D laminin ECM to demonstrate that heparanase cleaves
the HS that binds the FGF10-FGFR2b complex
(Fig. 5A). Using this assay to
compare binding of FGF1-FGFR2b with FGF10-FGFR2b, we demonstrated that
heparanase cleavage of HS leaves an HS stub that can still bind FGF1-FGFR2b,
but does not bind FGF10-FGFR2b (Fig.
5B). In addition, heparitinase cleavage of the HS showed that
FGF1-FGFR2b binding was HS dependent. These data provide evidence that
different FGFs binding the same receptor bind different HS structures, to
potentially mediate different signaling responses.
We used SPR analysis to show that heparanase released FGF10-FGFR2b from
purified, intact, HUAEC perlecan HS. Previously it was shown that FGF7-FGFR2b
binds to endothelial cell-derived perlecan HS chains
(Knox and Whitelock, 2006
) and
that perlecan HS purified from adenocarcinoma WiDr cells was degraded by
heparanase (Reiland et al.,
2004
). Specific HS structures on perlecan, at different stages of
development and in different tissues, may affect the localization of specific
FGFs in the local cell environment, controlling processes such as cell
differentiation and proliferation during tissue morphogenesis
(Knox et al., 2002
;
Knox and Whitelock, 2006
;
Melrose et al., 2006
).
Perlecan binds FGF1, FGF2 and the FGFR1-FGF2 complex via HS chains
(Aviezer et al., 1994
;
Knox et al., 2002
). We
confirmed the previous SPR findings that FGFR2b binds to perlecan
(Knox and Whitelock, 2006
;
Mongiat et al., 2000
) and, for
the first time, report that heparanase releases FGF10 bound to purified
perlecan HS chains (see model in Fig.
8). Interestingly, perlecan null mice have major developmental
anomalies, involving cartilage and heart development, problems with basement
membrane integrity under mechanical stress, and as a result up to 40% of
embryos dies before SMG organogenesis occurs
(Arikawa-Hirasawa et al., 1999
;
Costell et al., 1999
).
Additionally, those that survive have not been reported to have defects with
branching morphogenesis, however, expression levels of other HSPGs or analysis
of heparanase function were not reported. We speculate that other HSPGs in the
basement membrane functionally compensate in the absence of perlecan, but this
requires further investigation.
The LACE assay showed that FGF10-FGFR2b-binding HS is present on HSPGs in
both the epithelial basement membrane and cell surface. Surprisingly, there
was very little binding to mesenchymal cells, suggesting that epithelial
basement membrane and epithelial HS is different from the mesenchymal HS. The
FGF10-FGFR2b complex colocalized with perlecan in the BM, and partly
colocalized with syndecan-1 in the epithelium. Syndecans are transmembrane
HSPGs that act as coreceptors for multiple growth factor receptors
(Iozzo, 2001
). Heparanase
cleavage of syndecan 1 HS (Reiland et al.,
2004
) also increases FGF2 activity
(Kato et al., 1998
) and
increases syndecan 1 expression and shedding
(Yang et al., 2007
).
Epithelial HSPGs may specify the location of lateral buds or end bud clefting,
syndecan 1 binds FGF10-FGFR2b, and we speculate that other epithelial HSPGs
are involved in FGF10-FGFR2b signaling
(Fig. 8).
In summary, we have identified a role for heparanase during normal development, specifically during SMG branching morphogenesis. Heparanase releases FGF10 from perlecan HS chains in the basement membrane and modulates the biological activity of FGF10 by increasing MAPK phosphorylation, end bud clefting, and lateral branch formation. We conclude that a heparanase-derived HS fragment released from perlecan influences not only the bioavailability but also the bioactivity of FGF10 during SMG branching morphogenesis. Identifying the HS structures required for FGF10 bioactivity will further our understanding of the regulation of growth factor activity during development.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Abboud-Jarrous, G., Rangini-Guetta, Z., Aingorn, H., Atzmon, R.,
Elgavish, S., Peretz, T. and Vlodavsky, I. (2005).
Site-directed mutagenesis, proteolytic cleavage, and activation of human
proheparanase. J. Biol. Chem.
280,13568
-13575.
Allen, B. L. and Rapraeger, A. C. (2003).
Spatial and temporal expression of heparan sulfate in mouse development
regulates FGF and FGF receptor assembly. J. Cell Biol.
163,637
-648.
Allen, B. L., Filla, M. S. and Rapraeger, A. C.
(2001). Role of heparan sulfate as a tissue-specific regulator of
FGF-4 and FGF receptor recognition. J. Cell Biol.
155,845
-858.
Arikawa-Hirasawa, E., Watanabe, H., Takami, H., Hassell, J. R. and Yamada, Y. (1999). Perlecan is essential for cartilage and cephalic development. Nat. Genet. 23,354 -358.[CrossRef][Medline]
Aviezer, D., Hecht, D., Safran, M., Eisinger, M., David, G. and Yayon, A. (1994). Perlecan, basal lamina proteoglycan, promotes basic fibroblast growth factor-receptor binding, mitogenesis, and angiogenesis. Cell 79,1005 -1013.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bame, K. J. (2001). Heparanases:
endoglycosidases that degrade heparan sulfate proteoglycans.
Glycobiology 11,91R
-98R.
Bishop, J. R., Schuksz, M. and Esko, J. D. (2007). Heparan sulphate proteoglycans fine-tune mammalian physiology. Nature 446,1030 -1037.[CrossRef][Medline]
Cohen, E., Atzmon, R., Vlodavsky, I. and Ilan, N. (2005). Heparanase processing by lysosomal/endosomal protein preparation. FEBS Lett. 579,2334 -2338.[CrossRef][Medline]
Costell, M., Gustafsson, E., Aszodi, A., Morgelin, M., Bloch,
W., Hunziker, E., Addicks, K., Timpl, R. and Fassler, R.
(1999). Perlecan maintains the integrity of cartilage and some
basement membranes. J. Cell Biol.
147,1109
-1122.
De Moerlooze, L., Spencer-Dene, B., Revest, J., Hajihosseini, M., Rosewell, I. and Dickson, C. (2000). An important role for the IIIb isoform of fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) in mesenchymal-epithelial signalling during mouse organogenesis. Development 127,483 -492.[Abstract]
Elkin, M., Ilan, N., Ishai-Michaeli, R., Friedmann, Y., Papo,
O., Pecker, I. and Vlodavsky, I. (2001). Heparanase as
mediator of angiogenesis: mode of action. FASEB J.
15,1661
-1663.
Entesarian, M., Matsson, H., Klar, J., Bergendal, B., Olson, L., Arakaki, R., Hayashi, Y., Ohuchi, H., Falahat, B., Bolstad, A. I. et al. (2005). Mutations in the gene encoding fibroblast growth factor 10 are associated with aplasia of lacrimal and salivary glands. Nat. Genet. 37,125 -127.[CrossRef][Medline]
Entesarian, M., Dahlqvist, J., Shashi, V., Stanley, C. S., Falahat, B., Reardon, W. and Dahl, N. (2007). FGF10 missense mutations in aplasia of lacrimal and salivary glands (ALSG). Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 15,379 -382.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gingis-Velitski, S., Zetser, A., Kaplan, V., Ben-Zaken, O.,
Cohen, E., Levy-Adam, F., Bashenko, Y., Flugelman, M. Y., Vlodavsky, I. and
Ilan, N. (2004). Heparanase uptake is mediated by cell
membrane heparan sulfate proteoglycans. J. Biol. Chem.
279,44084
-44092.
Hirata, A. and Nakamura, H. (2006).
Localization of perlecan and heparanase in Hertwig's epithelial root sheath
during root formation in mouse molars. J. Histochem.
Cytochem. 54,1105
-1113.
Hoffman, M. P., Kidder, B. L., Steinberg, Z. L., Lakhani, S., Ho, S., Kleinman, H. K. and Larsen, M. (2002). Gene expression profiles of mouse submandibular gland development: FGFR1 regulates branching morphogenesis in vitro through BMP- and FGF-dependent mechanisms. Development 129,5767 -5778.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ibrahimi, O. A., Zhang, F., Hrstka, S. C., Mohammadi, M. and Linhardt, R. J. (2004). Kinetic model for FGF, FGFR, and proteoglycan signal transduction complex assembly. Biochemistry 43,4724 -4730.[CrossRef][Medline]
Iozzo, R. V. (2001). Heparan sulfate proteoglycans: intricate molecules with intriguing functions. J. Clin. Invest. 108,165 -167.[CrossRef][Medline]
Iozzo, R. V. (2005). Basement membrane proteoglycans: from cellar to ceiling. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 6,646 -656.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ishai-Michaeli, R., Eldor, A. and Vlodavsky, I. (1990). Heparanase activity expressed by platelets, neutrophils, and lymphoma cells releases active fibroblast growth factor from extracellular matrix. Cell Regul. 1,833 -842.[Medline]
Izvolsky, K. I., Shoykhet, D., Yang, Y., Yu, Q., Nugent, M. A. and Cardoso, W. V. (2003a). Heparan sulfate-FGF10 interactions during lung morphogenesis. Dev. Biol. 258,185 -200.[CrossRef][Medline]
Izvolsky, K. I., Zhong, L., Wei, L., Yu, Q., Nugent, M. A. and Cardoso, W. V. (2003b). Heparan sulfates expressed in the distal lung are required for Fgf10 binding to the epithelium and for airway branching. Am. J. Physiol. 285,L838 -L846.
Jakobsson, L., Kreuger, J., Holmborn, K., Lundin, L., Eriksson, I., Kjellen, L. and Claesson-Welsh, L. (2006). Heparan sulfate in trans potentiates VEGFR-mediated angiogenesis. Dev. Cell 10,625 -634.[CrossRef][Medline]
Jaskoll, T., Abichaker, G., Witcher, D., Sala, F. G., Bellusci, S., Hajihosseini, M. K. and Melnick, M. (2005). FGF10/FGFR2b signaling plays essential roles during in vivo embryonic submandibular salivary gland morphogenesis. BMC Dev. Biol. 5, 11.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kan, M., Wu, X., Wang, F. and McKeehan, W. L.
(1999). Specificity for fibroblast growth factors determined by
heparan sulfate in a binary complex with the receptor kinase. J.
Biol. Chem. 274,15947
-15952.
Kato, M., Wang, H., Kainulainen, V., Fitzgerald, M. L., Ledbetter, S., Ornitz, D. M. and Bernfield, M. (1998). Physiological degradation converts the soluble syndecan-1 ectodomain from an inhibitor to a potent activator of FGF-2. Nat. Med. 4, 691-697.[CrossRef][Medline]
Knox, S. M. and Whitelock, J. M. (2006). Perlecan: how does one molecule do so many things? Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 63,2435 -2445.[CrossRef][Medline]
Knox, S., Merry, C., Stringer, S., Melrose, J. and Whitelock,
J. (2002). Not all perlecans are created equal: interactions
with fibroblast growth factor (FGF) 2 and FGF receptors. J. Biol.
Chem. 277,14657
-14665.
Levy-Adam, F., Abboud-Jarrous, G., Guerrini, M., Beccati, D.,
Vlodavsky, I. and Ilan, N. (2005). Identification and
characterization of heparin/heparan sulfate binding domains of the
endoglycosidase heparanase. J. Biol. Chem.
280,20457
-20466.
Melrose, J., Roughley, P., Knox, S., Smith, S., Lord, M. and
Whitelock, J. (2006). The structure, location, and function
of perlecan, a prominent pericellular proteoglycan of fetal, postnatal, and
mature hyaline cartilages. J. Biol. Chem.
281,36905
-36914.
Miao, H. Q., Elkin, M., Aingorn, E., Ishai-Michaeli, R., Stein, C. A. and Vlodavsky, I. (1999). Inhibition of heparanase activity and tumor metastasis by laminarin sulfate and synthetic phosphorothioate oligodeoxynucleotides. Int. J. Cancer 83,424 -431.[CrossRef][Medline]
Milunsky, J. M., Zhao, G., Maher, T. A., Colby, R. and Everman, D. B. (2006). LADD syndrome is caused by FGF10 mutations. Clin. Genet. 69,349 -354.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mohammadi, M., Olsen, S. K. and Goetz, R. (2005a). A protein canyon in the FGF-FGF receptor dimer selects from an a la carte menu of heparan sulfate motifs. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 15,506 -516.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mohammadi, M., Olsen, S. K. and Ibrahimi, O. A. (2005b). Structural basis for fibroblast growth factor receptor activation. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 16,107 -137.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mongiat, M., Taylor, K., Otto, J., Aho, S., Uitto, J.,
Whitelock, J. M. and Iozzo, R. V. (2000). The protein core of
the proteoglycan perlecan binds specifically to fibroblast growth factor-7.
J. Biol. Chem. 275,7095
-7100.
Mori, Y., Yoshida, K., Morita, T. and Nakanishi, Y. (1994). Branching morphogenesis of mouse embryonic submandibular epithelia cultured under three different conditions. Dev. Growth Differ. 36,529 -539.[CrossRef]
Nadav, L., Eldor, A., Yacoby-Zeevi, O., Zamir, E., Pecker, I.,
Ilan, N., Geiger, B., Vlodavsky, I. and Katz, B. Z. (2002).
Activation, processing and trafficking of extracellular heparanase by primary
human fibroblasts. J. Cell Sci.
115,2179
-2187.
Nakanishi, Y., Uematsu, J., Takamatsu, H., Fukuda, T. and Yoshida, K. (1993). Removal of heparan sulfate chains halted epithelial branching morphogenesis of the developing mouse submandibular gland in vitro. Dev. Growth Differ. 35,371 -384.[CrossRef]
Ohuchi, H. (2000). Roles for FGF-FGFR signaling during vertebrate development. Hum. Cell 13,169 -175.[Medline]
Pantoliano, M. W., Horlick, R. A., Springer, B. A., Van Dyk, D. E., Tobery, T., Wetmore, D. R., Lear, J. D., Nahapetian, A. T., Bradley, J. D. and Sisk, W. P. (1994). Multivalent ligand-receptor binding interactions in the fibroblast growth factor system produce a cooperative growth factor and heparin mechanism for receptor dimerization. Biochemistry 33,10229 -10248.[CrossRef][Medline]
Patel, V. N., Rebustini, I. T. and Hoffman, M. P. (2006). Salivary gland branching morphogenesis. Differentiation 74,349 -364.[CrossRef][Medline]
Rebustini, I. T., Patel, V. N., Stewart, J. S., Layvey, A.,
Georges-Labouesse, E., Miner, J. H. and Hoffman, M. P.
(2007). Laminin
5 is necessary for submandibular gland
epithelial morphogenesis and influences FGFR expression through ß1
integrin signaling. Dev. Biol.
308, 15-29.[CrossRef][Medline]
Reiland, J., Sanderson, R. D., Waguespack, M., Barker, S. A.,
Long, R., Carson, D. D. and Marchetti, D. (2004). Heparanase
degrades syndecan-1 and perlecan heparan sulfate: functional implications for
tumor cell invasion. J. Biol. Chem.
279,8047
-8055.
Reiland, J., Kempf, D., Roy, M., Denkins, Y. and Marchetti, D. (2006). FGF2 binding, signaling, and angiogenesis are modulated by heparanase in metastatic melanoma cells. Neoplasia 8,596 -606.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sanderson, R. D., Yang, Y., Suva, L. J. and Kelly, T. (2004). Heparan sulfate proteoglycans and heparanase - partners in osteolytic tumor growth and metastasis. Matrix Biol. 23,341 -352.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sanderson, R. D., Yang, Y., Kelly, T., MacLeod, V., Dai, Y. and Theus, A. (2005). Enzymatic remodeling of heparan sulfate proteoglycans within the tumor microenvironment: growth regulation and the prospect of new cancer therapies. J. Cell. Biochem. 96,897 -905.[CrossRef][Medline]
Schubert, S. Y., Ilan, N., Shushy, M., Ben-Izhak, O., Vlodavsky, I. and Goldshmidt, O. (2004). Human heparanase nuclear localization and enzymatic activity. Lab. Invest. 84,535 -544.[CrossRef]
Sekine, K., Ohuchi, H., Fujiwara, M., Yamasaki, M., Yoshizawa, T., Sato, T., Yagishita, N., Matsui, D., Koga, Y., Itoh, N. et al. (1999). Fgf10 is essential for limb and lung formation. Nat. Genet. 21,138 -141.[CrossRef][Medline]
Steinberg, Z., Myers, C., Heim, V. M., Lathrop, C. A.,
Rebustini, I. T., Stewart, J. S., Larsen, M. and Hoffman, M. P.
(2005). FGFR2b signaling regulates ex vivo submandibular gland
epithelial cell proliferation and branching morphogenesis.
Development 132,1223
-1234.
Thompson, H. A. and Spooner, B. S. (1982). Inhibition of branching morphogenesis and alteration of glycosaminoglycan biosynthesis in salivary glands treated with beta-D-xyloside. Dev. Biol. 89,417 -424.[CrossRef][Medline]
Thompson, H. A. and Spooner, B. S. (1983).
Proteoglycan and glycosaminoglycan synthesis in embryonic mouse salivary
glands: effects of beta-D-xyloside, an inhibitor of branching morphogenesis.
J. Cell Biol. 96,1443
-1450.
Umeda, Y., Miyazaki, Y., Shiinoki, H., Higashiyama, S., Nakanishi, Y. and Hieda, Y. (2001). Involvement of heparin-binding EGF-like growth factor and its processing by metalloproteinases in early epithelial morphogenesis of the submandibular gland. Dev. Biol. 237,202 -211.[CrossRef][Medline]
Vlodavsky, I. and Friedmann, Y. (2001). Molecular properties and involvement of heparanase in cancer metastasis and angiogenesis. J. Clin. Invest. 108,341 -347.[CrossRef][Medline]
Vlodavsky, I., Miao, H. Q., Medalion, B., Danagher, P. and Ron, D. (1996). Involvement of heparan sulfate and related molecules in sequestration and growth promoting activity of fibroblast growth factor. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 15,177 -186.[CrossRef][Medline]
Vlodavsky, I., Friedmann, Y., Elkin, M., Aingorn, H., Atzmon, R., Ishai-Michaeli, R., Bitan, M., Pappo, O., Peretz, T., Michal, I. et al. (1999). Mammalian heparanase: gene cloning, expression and function in tumor progression and metastasis. Nat. Med. 5,793 -802.[CrossRef][Medline]
Vlodavsky, I., Goldshmidt, O., Zcharia, E., Metzger, S., Chajek-Shaul, T., Atzmon, R., Guatta-Rangini, Z. and Friedmann, Y. (2001). Molecular properties and involvement of hepara