Rho-associated kinase (ROCK) function is essential for cell cycle progression, senescence and tumorigenesis

  1. Sandra Kümper  Is a corresponding author
  2. Faraz K Mardakheh
  3. Afshan McCarthy
  4. Maggie Yeo
  5. Gordon W Stamp
  6. Angela Paul
  7. Jonathan Worboys
  8. Amine Sadok
  9. Claus Jørgensen
  10. Sabrina Guichard
  11. Christopher J Marshall
  1. Institute of Cancer Research, United Kingdom
  2. Cancer Research UK London Research Institute, United Kingdom
  3. Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute, United Kingdom

Abstract

Rho-associated kinases 1 and 2 (ROCK1/2) are Rho-GTPase effectors that control key aspects of the actin cytoskeleton, but their role in proliferation and cancer initiation or progression is not known. Here we provide evidence that ROCK1 and ROCK2 act redundantly to maintain actomyosin contractility and cell proliferation and that their loss leads to cell-cycle arrest and cellular senescence. This phenotype arises from down-regulation of the essential cell-cycle proteins CyclinA, CKS1 and CDK1. Accordingly, while loss of either Rock1 or Rock2 had no negative impact on tumorigenesis in mouse models of non-small cell lung cancer and melanoma, loss of both blocked tumor formation, as no tumors arise in which both Rock1 and Rock2 have been genetically deleted. Our results reveal an indispensable role for ROCK, yet redundant role for isoforms 1 and 2, in cell cycle progression and tumorigenesis, possibly through the maintenance of cellular contractility.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Sandra Kümper

    Division of Cancer Biology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    sandra.kuemper@icr.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Faraz K Mardakheh

    Division of Cancer Biology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Afshan McCarthy

    Division of Cancer Biology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Maggie Yeo

    Division of Cancer Biology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Gordon W Stamp

    Experimental Pathology Laboratory, Cancer Research UK London Research Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Angela Paul

    Division of Cancer Biology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Jonathan Worboys

    Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute, Manchester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Amine Sadok

    Division of Cancer Biology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Claus Jørgensen

    Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute, Manchester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Sabrina Guichard

    Division of Cancer Biology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Christopher J Marshall

    Division of Cancer Biology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All animal procedures were approved by the Animal Ethics Committee of the Institute of Cancer Research in accordance with National Home Office regulations under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. The date of approval of the current project license under which this work was carried out was the 07/09/13.

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 7,976
    views
  • 1,709
    downloads
  • 125
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Sandra Kümper
  2. Faraz K Mardakheh
  3. Afshan McCarthy
  4. Maggie Yeo
  5. Gordon W Stamp
  6. Angela Paul
  7. Jonathan Worboys
  8. Amine Sadok
  9. Claus Jørgensen
  10. Sabrina Guichard
  11. Christopher J Marshall
(2016)
Rho-associated kinase (ROCK) function is essential for cell cycle progression, senescence and tumorigenesis
eLife 5:e12203.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12203

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12203

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Arman Angaji, Michel Owusu ... Johannes Berg
    Research Article

    In growing cell populations such as tumours, mutations can serve as markers that allow tracking the past evolution from current samples. The genomic analyses of bulk samples and samples from multiple regions have shed light on the evolutionary forces acting on tumours. However, little is known empirically on the spatio-temporal dynamics of tumour evolution. Here, we leverage published data from resected hepatocellular carcinomas, each with several hundred samples taken in two and three dimensions. Using spatial metrics of evolution, we find that tumour cells grow predominantly uniformly within the tumour volume instead of at the surface. We determine how mutations and cells are dispersed throughout the tumour and how cell death contributes to the overall tumour growth. Our methods shed light on the early evolution of tumours in vivo and can be applied to high-resolution data in the emerging field of spatial biology.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Susanne Tilk, Judith Frydman ... Dmitri A Petrov
    Research Article

    In asexual populations that don’t undergo recombination, such as cancer, deleterious mutations are expected to accrue readily due to genome-wide linkage between mutations. Despite this mutational load of often thousands of deleterious mutations, many tumors thrive. How tumors survive the damaging consequences of this mutational load is not well understood. Here, we investigate the functional consequences of mutational load in 10,295 human tumors by quantifying their phenotypic response through changes in gene expression. Using a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM), we find that high mutational load tumors up-regulate proteostasis machinery related to the mitigation and prevention of protein misfolding. We replicate these expression responses in cancer cell lines and show that the viability in high mutational load cancer cells is strongly dependent on complexes that degrade and refold proteins. This indicates that the upregulation of proteostasis machinery is causally important for high mutational burden tumors and uncovers new therapeutic vulnerabilities.