Cavin3 released from caveolae interacts with BRCA1 to regulate the cellular stress response

  1. Kerrie-Ann McMahon
  2. David A Stroud
  3. Yann Gambin
  4. Vikas Tillu
  5. Michele Bastiani
  6. Emma Sierecki
  7. Mark E Polinkovsky
  8. Thomas E Hall
  9. Guillermo A Gomez
  10. Yeping Wu
  11. Marie-Odile Parat
  12. Nick Martel
  13. Harriet P Lo
  14. Kum Kum Khanna
  15. Kirill Alexandrov
  16. Roger Daly
  17. Alpha Yap
  18. Michael T Ryan
  19. Robert G Parton  Is a corresponding author
  1. Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, Australia
  2. The University of Melbourne, Australia
  3. University of New South Wales, Australia
  4. University of Queensland, Australia
  5. The University of Queensland, Australia
  6. Institute for Molecular Bioscience, Australia
  7. HMRI, United States
  8. Monash University, Australia

Abstract

Caveolae-associated protein 3 (cavin3) is inactivated in most cancers. We characterized how cavin3 affects the cellular proteome using genome-edited cells together with label-free quantitative proteomics. These studies revealed a prominent role for cavin3 in DNA repair, with BRCA1 and BRCA1 A-complex components being downregulated on cavin3 deletion. Cellular and cell-free expression assays revealed a direct interaction between BRCA1 and cavin3 that occurs when cavin3 is released from caveolae that are disassembled in response to UV and mechanical stress. Overexpression and RNAi-depletion revealed that cavin3 sensitized various cancer cells to UV-induced apoptosis. Supporting a role in DNA repair, cavin3-deficient cells were sensitive to PARP inhibition, where concomitant depletion of 53BP1 restored BRCA1-dependent sensitivity to PARP inhibition. We conclude that cavin3 functions together with BRCA1 in multiple cancer-related pathways. The loss of cavin3 function may provide tumor cell survival by attenuating apoptotic sensitivity and hindering DNA repair under chronic stress conditions.

Data availability

All reagents are available from the corresponding author upon request. Proteomics data that supports the findings of this study is presented in Supplementary File 1 and 2. Raw western blots with molecular weight markers are presented in source data files.The raw mass spectrometry proteomics data for this manuscript comparing HeLa WT and HeLa cavin3 KO cells has been deposited to the ProteomeXchange Consortium via the PRIDE partner repository with the dataset identifier PXD026724.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Kerrie-Ann McMahon

    Cell Biology and Molecular Medicine, Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. David A Stroud

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Yann Gambin

    EMBL Australia Node in Single Molecule Sciences, University of New South Wales, sydney, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7378-8976
  4. Vikas Tillu

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1034-9543
  5. Michele Bastiani

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Emma Sierecki

    EMBL Australia Node in Single Molecule Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Mark E Polinkovsky

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, Brsbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Thomas E Hall

    Cell Biology and Molecular Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7718-7614
  9. Guillermo A Gomez

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Institute for Molecular Bioscience, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Yeping Wu

    Cell Biology and Molecular Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Marie-Odile Parat

    School of Pharmacy, University of Queensland, Queensland, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Nick Martel

    Cell Biology and Molecular Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Harriet P Lo

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Kum Kum Khanna

    Radiation Oncology, HMRI, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Kirill Alexandrov

    Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Institute for Molecular Bioscience, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Roger Daly

    Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5739-8027
  17. Alpha Yap

    School of Pharmacy, University of Queensland, Queensland, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Michael T Ryan

    Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Robert G Parton

    Cell Biology and Molecular Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    For correspondence
    r.parton@imb.uq.edu.au
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7494-5248

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1140064)

  • Robert G Parton

National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1150083)

  • Robert G Parton

National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1156489)

  • Robert G Parton

National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1037320)

  • Robert G Parton

National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1044041)

  • Alpha Yap

National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1125390)

  • Michael T Ryan

National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1070916)

  • David A Stroud

National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1140851)

  • David A Stroud

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2021, McMahon et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,617
    views
  • 242
    downloads
  • 13
    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. Kerrie-Ann McMahon
  2. David A Stroud
  3. Yann Gambin
  4. Vikas Tillu
  5. Michele Bastiani
  6. Emma Sierecki
  7. Mark E Polinkovsky
  8. Thomas E Hall
  9. Guillermo A Gomez
  10. Yeping Wu
  11. Marie-Odile Parat
  12. Nick Martel
  13. Harriet P Lo
  14. Kum Kum Khanna
  15. Kirill Alexandrov
  16. Roger Daly
  17. Alpha Yap
  18. Michael T Ryan
  19. Robert G Parton
(2021)
Cavin3 released from caveolae interacts with BRCA1 to regulate the cellular stress response
eLife 10:e61407.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61407

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61407

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Immunology and Inflammation
    Sofia V Krasik, Ekaterina A Bryushkova ... Ekaterina O Serebrovskaya
    Research Article

    The current understanding of humoral immune response in cancer patients suggests that tumors may be infiltrated with diffuse B cells of extra-tumoral origin or may develop organized lymphoid structures, where somatic hypermutation and antigen-driven selection occur locally. These processes are believed to be significantly influenced by the tumor microenvironment through secretory factors and biased cell-cell interactions. To explore the manifestation of this influence, we used deep unbiased immunoglobulin profiling and systematically characterized the relationships between B cells in circulation, draining lymph nodes (draining LNs), and tumors in 14 patients with three human cancers. We demonstrated that draining LNs are differentially involved in the interaction with the tumor site, and that significant heterogeneity exists even between different parts of a single lymph node (LN). Next, we confirmed and elaborated upon previous observations regarding intratumoral immunoglobulin heterogeneity. We identified B cell receptor (BCR) clonotypes that were expanded in tumors relative to draining LNs and blood and observed that these tumor-expanded clonotypes were less hypermutated than non-expanded (ubiquitous) clonotypes. Furthermore, we observed a shift in the properties of complementarity-determining region 3 of the BCR heavy chain (CDR-H3) towards less mature and less specific BCR repertoire in tumor-infiltrating B-cells compared to circulating B-cells, which may indicate less stringent control for antibody-producing B cell development in tumor microenvironment (TME). In addition, we found repertoire-level evidence that B-cells may be selected according to their CDR-H3 physicochemical properties before they activate somatic hypermutation (SHM). Altogether, our work outlines a broad picture of the differences in the tumor BCR repertoire relative to non-tumor tissues and points to the unexpected features of the SHM process.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Computational and Systems Biology
    Rosalyn W Sayaman, Masaru Miyano ... Mark A LaBarge
    Research Article Updated

    Effects from aging in single cells are heterogenous, whereas at the organ- and tissue-levels aging phenotypes tend to appear as stereotypical changes. The mammary epithelium is a bilayer of two major phenotypically and functionally distinct cell lineages: luminal epithelial and myoepithelial cells. Mammary luminal epithelia exhibit substantial stereotypical changes with age that merit attention because these cells are the putative cells-of-origin for breast cancers. We hypothesize that effects from aging that impinge upon maintenance of lineage fidelity increase susceptibility to cancer initiation. We generated and analyzed transcriptomes from primary luminal epithelial and myoepithelial cells from younger <30 (y)ears old and older >55 y women. In addition to age-dependent directional changes in gene expression, we observed increased transcriptional variance with age that contributed to genome-wide loss of lineage fidelity. Age-dependent variant responses were common to both lineages, whereas directional changes were almost exclusively detected in luminal epithelia and involved altered regulation of chromatin and genome organizers such as SATB1. Epithelial expression variance of gap junction protein GJB6 increased with age, and modulation of GJB6 expression in heterochronous co-cultures revealed that it provided a communication conduit from myoepithelial cells that drove directional change in luminal cells. Age-dependent luminal transcriptomes comprised a prominent signal that could be detected in bulk tissue during aging and transition into cancers. A machine learning classifier based on luminal-specific aging distinguished normal from cancer tissue and was highly predictive of breast cancer subtype. We speculate that luminal epithelia are the ultimate site of integration of the variant responses to aging in their surrounding tissue, and that their emergent phenotype both endows cells with the ability to become cancer-cells-of-origin and represents a biosensor that presages cancer susceptibility.