Human Immunology 73 (2012) 448–455 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect MUC1 is a novel costimulatory molecule of human T cells and functions in an AP-1-dependent manner Jeffrey D. Konowalchuk, Babita Agrawal* Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2S2, Canada A R T I C L E I N F O Article history: Received 13 October 2011 Accepted 27 February 2012 Available online 6 March 2012 Keywords: T cells Costimulatory molecules MUC1 mucin A B S T R A C T MUC1 mucin, primarily known as an epithelial antigen, has been demonstrated to be expressed on activated human T cells. In the present study, we first examined the expression of MUC1 on different subsets of T cells (naive, effector, effector/memory). MUC1 appears to be strongly upregulated on activated CD4⫹ T cells in comparison with CD8⫹ T cells. The cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 contains both immune tyrosine– based activation and inhibitory motifs; therefore, we investigated whether MUC1 can also act as a costimulatory molecule on human T cells. Nonpurified T-cell cultures from human peripheral blood exhibited enhanced proliferation and an increase in cytokine production when CD3 and MUC1 were cross-linked and coligated. The intracellular mechanism of MUC1-mediated costimulation was determined to be mediated by the calcium-dependent NF-AT pathway. We further demonstrated that the cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 binds to the AP-1 transcription factors c-Fos and c-Jun, with c-Fos binding constitutively and c-Jun binding only after MUC1 stimulation. Their nuclear migration is then facilitated in a CD3-dependent manner. Our findings clearly demonstrate that MUC1 is a novel T-cell costimulatory molecule involved in immune regulation. These studies delineate important mechanisms of T-cell activation and regulation. 䉷 2012 American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Mucin-1 (MUC1) is a large, ⬎200-kDa transmembrane glycoprotein expressed on the surface of most types of epithelial cells [1]. Its extracellular domain consists of a variable number of 20 amino acid tandem repeats that are heavily glycosylated with o-linked oligosaccharides, whereas its cytoplasmic domain contains many signaling motifs [2] and is noncovalently linked to the extracellular domain [3]. Recent studies have suggested that it migrates to the nucleus upon extracellular ligation in epithelial cells, acting as a shuttle protein for transcription factors such as -catenin [4], and can also generate both stimulatory and inhibitory responses [5]. MUC1, although most well characterized for its role on epithelial and tumor cells [6,7], has been demonstrated to also be expressed on activated T cells [8], dendritic cells [9], and monocytes [10], whereas noncancerous B cells have been reported to have extremely low expression [11–13] and natural killer cells [13] do not express it at all. Previous assays performed on purified T cells with anti-CD3 and anti-MUC1 antibodies have demonstrated that MUC1 may act as an inhibitory protein because cross-linking severely inhibited the proliferation of T cells normally caused by the anti-CD3 stimulus alone [8,14]. Further study has attributed this to a reduced number of antigen-presenting cells cocultured with the T cells [5]. * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (B. Agrawal). Analysis of MUC1’s cytoplasmic domain has resulted in 2 putative sequences of interest being identified—1 resembling an immunotyrosine inhibitory motif and 1 resembling an immunotyrosine activation motif (ITAM) [2], giving MUC1 a potential dual role in immune stimulation/inhibition. Coimmunoprecipitation has also revealed the binding of signal cascade proteins normally associated with stimulation, including Lck [15], Grb-2 [16], and ZAP-70 [15]. In lymphoma models, transfecting Jurkat T cells with a chimeric CD4 extracellular domain/MUC1 cytoplasmic protein, ERK1/2 can also bind the cytoplasmic tail [17], potentially progressing the cell cycle through phosphorylation of transcription factors [18]. In the original studies [8], it was demonstrated that MUC1 was only expressed on a fraction of activated T cells at a given time. Once matured with mitogens, MUC1 was determined to have coinhibitory capabilities in highly purified T-cell cultures [5,8,14], although whether this affected all T cells or a specific subset was never elucidated. With this knowledge, along with the presence of the ITAM motif in the cytoplasmic tail, we sought to investigate whether MUC1 can act as a costimulatory molecule on T cells in addition to being coinhibitory. 2. Subjects and methods 2.1. Isolation of nonadherent cells from human blood Blood samples were obtained from individuals of both sexes who were 30 – 60 years of age and had provided informed consent. The use of human blood samples was approved by the institutional 0198-8859/12/$36.00 - see front matter 䉷 2012 American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.humimm.2012.02.024 J.D. Konowalchuk and B. Agrawal / Human Immunology 73 (2012) 448–455 health research ethics board at the University of Alberta, Canada. The blood was layered on lymphocyte separation medium (Cellgro, Herndon, VA) and centrifuged at 1,500 –2,000g for 30 minutes at room temperature. The intermediate buffy layer containing the peripheral blood mononuclear cells was removed, washed twice in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), and resuspended in RPMI 1640 medium with 0.2% penicillin–streptomycin, 0.2% sodium pyruvate (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA), and 1% human AB serum (Sigma, St. Louis, MO). Cells were plated at 3 ⫻ 107 cells/well and placed in an incubator for 2 hours at 37oC and 5% CO2 (hereby just 37oC). The nonadherent T, B, and natural killer cells (consisting of approximately ⬎60% T cells, based on flow cytometric analysis [data not shown]; hereby termed T cells) were collected and resuspended in AIM-V medium (Invitrogen). T cells were stimulated with 1 g/mL of phytohemaglutinin A (PHA; Sigma) and incubated at 37oC for 3 days to induce optimal MUC1 expression. Cells used in all experiments were washed twice with PBS after PHA stimulation to remove the remaining PHA. 2.2. Flow cytometry Nonadherent T cells were seeded at approximately 1,000,000/ tube, resuspended into cold FACS buffer (PBS ⫹ 2% fetal bovine serum), and kept at 4oC for the remainder of the experiment. Cells were stained with fluorescent antibodies against CD4-QR, CD8-QR, MUC1 (B27.29 [Biomira, Edmonton, AB]; labeled with Alexa Fluor 647 protein-labeling kit [Invitrogen]), CD27–PE, CCR5–PE–Cy7, CCR5–PE–Cy7, and CD45RA–FITC (eBioscience, San Diego, CA). Cells were fixed (PBS ⫹ 2% paraformaldehyde) and analyzed on a FACSCanto (BD Biosciences, Franklin Lakes, NJ). Isotype control antibody was used for each fluorescent antibody and gates were set to exclude 95% of the isotype-stained cells. 2.3. Proliferation assays Nonadherent T cells from donors were incubated at 37oC for 3 days with 1 g/mL PHA. A 96-well plate was used for cell treatments, seeding 2 ⫻ 105 cells/well, along with 10 g/mL B27.29 (hereby antiMUC1), or 10 g/mL mouse IgG1 isotype, 1 g/mL goat antimouse cross-linking antibody (Sigma), and 20 g/mL OKT3 (anti-CD3 antibody). Plates were incubated at 37oC for 3 days, followed by the addition of 0.5 Ci/well [3H]thymidine (Amersham, Piscataway, NJ). The cells were harvested after 18 hours and read on a Microbeta liquid scintillation counter (PerkinElmer, Waltham, MA). 2.4. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for cytokines ELISA assays for interleukin (IL)-2, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor-␣ (TNF-␣, and interferon-␥ (IFN-␥ Biosource, Carlsbad, CA) were performed according to the manufacturer’s protocol. In brief, plates were coated with anticytokine antibodies and cell supernatants were added in duplicate before the addition of a biotinylated antibody. An enzyme–strepavidin conjugate was added along with substrate. Plates were washed using the ELx405 ELISA plate washer (Bio Tek, Winooski, VT) and analyzed on a Fluostar Optima fluorimeter (BMG Labtech, Offenburg, Germany). Standard curves were run between 15 and 2,000 pg/mL. 2.5. Microsphere preparation Latex microspheres measuring 1 m (Polysciences, Inc, Warrington, PA) were washed in 0.1 M borate buffer and coupled with 150 g total of anti-MUC1, mouse immunoglobulin G (IgG) isotype, and/or anti-CD3. The beads were left shaking overnight at room temperature and washed 3 times for 30 minutes each in borate buffer with 10 mg/mL bovine serum albumin. The beads were stored at 4oC in PBS ⫹ 10 mg/mL bovine serum albumin ⫹ 0.1% sodium azide ⫹ 5% glycerol. Beads were washed 3 times with PBS before use. 449 2.6. Microsphere-based proliferation assays Nonadherent T cells from donors were kept at 37oC for 3 days either without PHA or with 1 g/mL PHA to induce MUC1 expression [16]. Microspheres were resuspended in AIM-V to the required concentrations. Cells were plated at 2 ⫻ 105 cells/well, followed by microspheres at a ratio of 1,000 microspheres to 1 cell; for separately ligated beads, the ratio was 500 microspheres to 1 cell per bead type. Plates were incubated at 37oC for 3 days, followed by the addition of 0.5 Ci/well [3H]thymidine. The following day the cells were harvested and counted on a Microbeta liquid scintillation counter. 2.7. Inhibition assay Cyclosporine A, bisindolylmaleimide I, and SB203580 (Invitrogen) were purchased in solid form and resuspended in DMSO. Cyclosporine A, bisindolylmaleimide, and SB203580 were diluted in PBS and then AIM-V medium in each treatment well to a final concentration of 42 nM, 30 nM, and 1 M, respectively. Proliferation assays were then performed as described. 2.8. Confocal microscopy Glass slides were coated with poly-L-lysine (Sigma). T cells stimulated with PHA for 3 days were added to the slides at 1–2 ⫻ 107 cells per slide. Nonadherent T cells were adhered for 30 minutes and stimulated with 20 g anti-CD3 or no antibody. The slides were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde ⫹ 120 M glucose, followed by the addition of 0.1% Triton X in PBS. Slides were treated with 1 g of CT2 (a gift from Dr. Sandra Gendler, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ), an antibody against the cytoplasmic tail of MUC1, for 1 hour. Slides were washed and a Cy3 conjugate (Leinco Technologies, St. Louis, MO) was added at 1 g to each slide. Slides were washed and mounted with a 60:40 ratio of glycerol:PBS, 2% of the antifadant 1,4-diazabicyclo(2)octane (Sigma), and 1 l of DAPI dye (Invitrogen) per 500 L of solution. Slides were analyzed via confocal microscopy (Zeiss LSM-510 confocal microscope, Zeiss, Ontario, Canada). 2.9. Lysates T cells stimulated with PHA for 3 days were washed twice with PBS and stimulated with antibody-bound plates (20 g/mL antiCD3, 20 g/mL anti-CD3, and 10 g/mL anti-MUC1 or 20 g/mL anti-CD3 and 10 g/mL mouse IgG isotype) for 45 minutes at 37oC in AIM V medium. Cells were lysed to obtain cytoplasmic and nuclear fractions as previously described [19]. All lysates were stored at ⫺80oC until used. 2.10. Sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and western blotting Approximately 10 g of protein from each of the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions was run on a 10% resolving gel and transferred to nitrocellulose overnight. The membrane was blocked and incubated with anti-NFATc1, anti-c-Fos, or anti-c-Jun (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA) in 0.1% Tween 20 in PBS for 1 hour. After membranes were washed, a secondary horseradish peroxidase antibody (Novus Biologicals, Littleton, CO) was added for 2 hours. After another washing, an enhanced chemiluminescence substrate (Fisher, Pittsburgh, PA) was added, followed by imaging on X-ray film. 2.11. Statistical analyses Statistics were performed using 1-way analysis of variance with Tukey’s test for post hoc analysis or independent-sample t test using SPSS 16.0 software (SPSS, Inc, Chicago, IL). An asterisk in the figures represents a significant difference at the p ⬍ 0.05 level to the closest appropriate control group. All error bars are indicative of standard error. 3. Results + + 3.1. MUC1 expression increases on both CD4 and CD8 T cells after mitogen (PHA) stimulation To investigate MUC1 expression profiles, expression was analyzed on naive, memory, memory/effector, and effector CD4⫹ and CD8⫹ T cells before and after mitogen (PHA) stimulation. CD8⫹ T cells were gated for CD45RA⫹/CD27⫹CCR5⫺ (naive), CD45RA⫺/ CD27⫹/CCR5⫹ (memory), CD45RA⫺/CD27Low/CCR5⫺ (memory/effector), and CD45RA⫹/CD27⫺/CCR5⫺ (effector), whereas CD4⫹ T cells were gated for CD45RA⫹/CD27⫹/CCR7⫹ (naive), CD45RA⫺/ CD27⫹/⫺/CCR7⫹ (memory), CD45RA⫺/CD27⫺/CCR7⫺ (memory/effector), and CD45RA⫺/CD27⫹/CCR7⫺ (effector), as previously described [20,21]. It was determined that a low percentage of CD4⫹ T cells expressed MUC1 (⬃5%) after isolation (Fig. 1A). CD8⫹ T cells exhibited a higher percentage of MUC1⫹ cells (15– 40%), primarily in naive and memory subsets (Fig. 1B). Three days after PHA stimulation, MUC1 expression on both CD4⫹ and CD8⫹ T cells increased, primarily the CD4⫹ T cells (2- to 6-fold increase), with naive CD4⫹ T cells having the largest increase, likely demonstrating a progression of unstimulated cells into a matured phenotype. Expression on CD8⫹ T cells did not increase substantially (20 –30% increase across all groups), although no CD8⫹ memory cells were observed to express MUC1 postmitogenic stimulus. 3.2. CD3 and MUC1 coligation and cross-linking in T-cell cultures causes enhanced cellular proliferation To investigate whether MUC1 can act as a costimulatory molecule in addition to its purported coinhibitory properties, T cells were first stimulated with PHA for 72 hours to induce MUC1 expression. These T cells were then treated with antibodies against CD3/MUC1/IgG isotype control and a cross-linking antibody. After 3 days, the cells in the MUC1 costimulated group proliferated more 60 Non-Stimulated PHA-Stimulated 40 em or y M or ec t r ec to em or y/ Ef f M Ef f ve 0 B) Percentage of CD8+ T cell Subsets Expressing MUC1 250 200 * Anti-CD3 Anti-CD3 + Anti-MUC1 Anti-CD3 + IgG Isotype 150 100 50 0 Fig. 2. Proliferation was measured in 3-day phytohemaglutinin A (PHA)-stimulated T cells treated with 10 g/mL of soluble anti-CD3 antibody (black bar), 10 g/mL anti-CD3, and 10 g/mL of the anti-MUC1 (hatched bar) or 10 g/mL anti-CD3 and 10 g/mL of mouse immunoglobulin G (IgG) isotype control (dashed bar). A significant difference existed between the anti-CD3 plus anti-MUC1-treated group and the other treatment groups, with p ⬍ 0.05. Data are representative of ⬎10 experiments on ⬎10 different donors. than those in the anti-CD3 group and the isotype, with p ⬍ 0.01 (Fig. 2). A control test was also performed using anti-MUC1, anti-MUC1 with a cross-linking antibody, and isotype with a cross-linking antibody in the absence of anti-CD-3, with resultant counts per minute ⬍ 7,000 per treatment per experiment (data not shown). This experiment provides the first evidence that cross-linking MUC1 is able to provide costimulation to enhance the proliferation generated by the anti-CD3 stimulus. Cultures with anti-MUC1 and cross-linking antibody only did not demonstrate significant proliferation over background (data not shown). 3.3. CD3 and MUC1 costimulation leads to an increase in CD4+ memory, CD8+ memory, and memory/effector cells The apparent costimulatory effects of MUC1 stimulation on T cells in the presence of CD3 stimulation encouraged us to determine what T-cell subsets, within either CD4⫹ or CD8⫹ cells, were increased after anti-CD3 and anti-MUC1 costimulation. T cells costimulated with anti-CD3 and anti-MUC1 antibody were stained for markers of memory, memory/effector, and effector T cells in both CD4⫹ and CD8⫹ T-cell subsets. Analysis demonstrated that there was a significant increase in CD4⫹ memory cells (⬃70%) and CD8⫹ memory cells (⬃35%) after MUC1 costimulation compared with isotype (Fig. 3). All other subsets did not differ from 0% and, thus, did not demonstrate a significant change after MUC1 costimulation compared with isotype. 20 N aï Percentage of CD4+ T cell Subsets Expressing MUC1 A) Thymidine Incorporation (cpm x 103) J.D. Konowalchuk and B. Agrawal / Human Immunology 73 (2012) 448–455 3H 450 3.4. MUC1-mediated costimulation requires CD3 and MUC1 coligation ND Fig. 1. T cells were isolated from fresh human blood and either stained immediately or treated with 1 g/mL of phytohemaglutinin A (PHA) for 3 days and then stained afterward. A gate was set on the lymphocyte population for analysis. CD4⫹ and CD8⫹ T cells were analyzed for naive, memory, memory/effector, and effector phenotypes. The percentages of the gated T-cell phenotypes were then compared between non-stimulated (white) and 3-day PHA-stimulated (black) CD4⫹ T cells (A) and CD8⫹ T cells (B). Results are representative figures of 3 separate experiments on 3 different donors. ND, not detectable. Most costimulatory molecules of T cells require CD3 within close proximity because of the sharing of kinases and phosphatases [22]. We hypothesized that MUC1 may function in a similar manner. Using 1-m latex microspheres coligated with anti-CD3 and either anti-MUC1 or isotype or beads ligated separately with anti-CD3 and anti-MUC1 or anti-CD3 and isotype, it was determined that T cells exhibited enhanced proliferation with the anti-CD3 and anti-MUC1 coligated group compared with the other groups (p ⬍ 0.05; Fig. 4). There was no significant enhancement of proliferation when cells were treated with the separately ligated beads rather than the coligated beads (p ⬎ 0.05) compared with the isotype. J.D. Konowalchuk and B. Agrawal / Human Immunology 73 (2012) 448–455 A) CD3 + MUC1 Stimulus Donor 1 CD3 + Isotype Stimulus 2.65% 5.32% 4.41% 4.71% 3.02% Donor 2 CD27 PE 3.30% CD3 + MUC1 Stimulus * 451 CD3 + Isotype Stimulus 18.30% 13.06% 28.65% 11.56% 15.07% 12.98% Donor 3 CCR5 PE-Cy7 CD8+ Memory Cells B) CCR7 PE-Cy7 CD4+ Memory Cells 90% Percent Difference Between CD3/MUC1 Costimulated and CD3/Isotype-Treated Lymphocytes 80% CD4 Cells * CD8 Cells 70% 60% 50% 40% * 30% 20% 10% 0% Memory Memory/Effector Effector Fig. 3. T cells were stimulated with 1 g/mL of phytohemagultinin A (PHA) for 3 days to induce MUC1 expression before being stimulated for 3 more days with 10 g/mL anti-CD3, 10 g/mL anti-MUC1, and 1 g/mL goat antimouse immunoglobulin G (IgG) or 10 g/mL anti-CD3, 10 g/mL IgG isotype control, and 1 g/mL goat antimouse IgG. A gate was set on the lymphocyte population for analysis. CD8⫹ and CD4⫹ T cells were analyzed for memory, memory/effector, and effector phenotypes, first by gating for CD4/8 and CD45RA, followed by subsequent gating with CD27 and CCR7/CCR5, according to the subpopulation. Plots illustrating the CD4/CD8 memory cells gated are presented in (A). The percentages of cell phenotypes in the anti-MUC1-stimulated cells were then subtracted from the IgG isotype-stimulated results, divided by the IgG isotype-stimulated results, and graphed, demonstrating the percentage difference between anti-MUC1 and isotype stimulation in CD4⫹ and CD8⫹ T-cell subsets (B). Statistics were performed by comparing the values with a 0% change between the compared groups. Results are the average of 3 individual experiments on 3 different donors. 3H Thymidine Incorporation (cpm x 103) 452 J.D. Konowalchuk and B. Agrawal / Human Immunology 73 (2012) 448–455 functions independently of the p38 MAPK pathway but involves the nuclear factor of activated T cells (NF-AT) pathway. Anti-CD3 + Anti-MUC1 (Coligated) 120 Anti-CD3 + Anti-MUC1 (Separate) * 3.6. MUC1 costimulation is unaffected by an inhibitor of the nuclear factor B pathway, but not the NF-AT or p38 MAPK pathways Anti-CD3 + IgG Isotype (Coligated) Anti-CD3 + IgG Isotype (Separate) 90 60 30 0 Fig. 4. Three-day phytohemaglutinin A (PHA)-stimulated T cells were treated with microspheres ligated separately with anti-CD3 and either anti-MUC1 or isotype or, alternatively, coligated with anti-CD3 and either anti-MUC1 or isotype. Microspheres were added to a final amount of 2 ⫻ 108 per 2 ⫻ 105 cells; for beads with separate antibodies bound, 1 ⫻ 108 beads of both types were added to the culture to achieve the final amount of 2 ⫻ 108. The coligated anti-CD3 plus anti-MUC1-treated group exhibited a significant increase in proliferation over the other groups (p ⬍ 0.05). Data are representative of 2 separate experiments on 2 different donors. 3.5. MUC1-based costimulation increases the expression and release of TNF-␣, IFN-␥, and IL-2, but not IL-10 Activations of the calcineurin, PKC, and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways have been demonstrated to induce unique cytokine production profiles. To further delineate the pathway involved in MUC1 costimulation, supernatants were collected from MUC1 costimulation cultures (Fig. 2 and similar experiments) and analyzed via ELISA. The MUC1 costimulated group produced increased TNF-␣, IFN-␥, and IL-2 into the supernatant at a significant level compared with the controls (p ⬍ 0.05; Fig. 5). For IL-10, however, the MUC1 costimulated group and the control did not differ. This further suggests that MUC1 costimulation likely * pg/ml 8000 A) IL-2 To determine the pathway utilized by MUC1-mediated costimulation resulting in enhanced proliferation, intracellular inhibitors of different signaling pathways were added to MUC1-costimulated cultures. These inhibitors included cyclosporine A (inhibitor of calcineurin), bisindolylmaleimide I (inhibitor of the PKC family), and SB203580 (inhibitor of p38 MAPK). Optimal concentrations of inhibitors were determined (42 nM cyclosporine A, 30 nM bisinolylmaleimide I, 1 M SB203580), based on an amount that would inhibit proliferation but not result in cell death. The T cells were stimulated with PHA for 3 days to induce MUC1 and then washed and treated with inhibitors for 10 minutes. Afterward, they were treated with anti-CD3 alone, CD3 and MUC1, or CD3 and isotype, along with the cross-linking antibody. After 3 days, the MUC1costimulated group and the controls with cyclosporine A or SB203580 did not differ (Fig. 6). There was a significant difference between the MUC1-costimulated group compared with the controls with bisindolylmaleimide I (p ⬍ 0.01), indicating a reversal/negation of the inhibitory effect by MUC1 costimulation. The p38 MAPK inhibitor, however, had a high rate of proliferation regardless of the antibodies treated, likely as a result of inhibition of the IL-10 production by the p38 MAPK pathway. This demonstrates that MUC1-mediated costimulation functions independent of the PKC-dependent pathways, likely involving the calcineurin pathway. 3.7. The cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 migrates into the cytoplasm and nucleus upon CD3 stimulation in T cells In tumor cells, the cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 has been demonstrated to translocate into the nucleus with transcription factors, as well as the mitochondria [23]. We hypothesized that MUC1 on T cells may play a similar role. Cells stained for the nucleus and cytoplasmic tail were analyzed by confocal microscopy, with ap- 20000 6000 15000 4000 10000 2000 5000 ND ND * B) TNF-α 0 0 6000 * C) IFN-γ 300 4500 225 3000 150 1500 75 0 0 D) IL-10 Anti-CD3 Anti-CD3 + Anti-MUC1 Anti-CD3 + IgG Isotype Fig. 5. Supernatants taken at 3 days from Fig. 2 and similar experiments were analyzed via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the cytokines: (A) interleukin (IL)-2, (B) tumor necrosis factor-␣ (TNF-␣, (C) interferon-␥ (IFN-␥ and (D) IL-10. The anti-CD3 plus anti-MUC1 antibody treatment produced statistically higher amounts of the proliferation-inducing cytokine IL-2 as well as the proinflammatory cytokines TNF-␣ and IFN-␥ (p ⬍ 0.05). Amounts of the inhibitory cytokine IL-10, however, were not significant among the groups (p ⬎ 0.05). All cytokine amounts are in picograms per milliliter. IL-2 data are representative of 2 experiments performed on 2 different donors, whereas the other cytokines are representative of 3 experiments performed on 3 different donors. ND, not detectable. 453 could be seen translocating into both the cytoplasm and the nucleus. 3.8. The cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 binds to the transcription factors c-Jun and c-Fos ** ** 3H Thymidine Incorporation (cpm x 103) J.D. Konowalchuk and B. Agrawal / Human Immunology 73 (2012) 448–455 Controls Cyclosporine A Bisindolylmaleimide I SB203580 Anti-CD3 Anti-CD3 + Anti-MUC1 Anti-CD3 + IgG Isotype Fig. 6. T cells were stimulated with phytohemaglutinin A (PHA) for 3 days before being treated with intracellular inhibitors along with 10 g/mL anti-CD3 (white bars), 10 g/mL anti-CD, and 10 g/mL anti-MUC1 (black bars) or 10 g/mL anti-CD3 and 10 g/mL isotype (hatched bars). Each group was also given 1 g/mL of goat antimouse antibody to cross-link. There was no significant difference between groups in the data for the intracellular inhibitors cyclosporine A or SB203580. However, there was a significant increase in proliferation in the anti-CD3 plus anti-MUC1-treated group given the PKC inhibitor bisindolylmaleimide I (p ⬍ 0.05) compared with the inhibitor-treated control groups. Data are representative of 4 separate experiments on 4 different donors. Unstimulated cells provided ⬍5,000 counts per minute for all experiments. proximately 300 cells being analyzed per experimental group and representative pictures taken. Without CD3 stimulation, the cytoplasmic tail remained at the cell membrane and clustered in the staining profile of lipid rafts [24] (Fig. 7). However, with CD3 stimulation, regardless of MUC1 costimulation, the cytoplasmic tail CT – Cy3 The cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 migrated to the cytoplasm and nucleus after CD3 stimulation, leading us to believe the cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 would carry transcription factors into the nucleus of T cells. With earlier results supporting the calcineurin-dependent NF-AT pathway in MUC1 costimulation, we blotted the transcription factors NF-ATc1, c-Jun, and c-Fos after immunoprecipitation of the cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 from T-cell lysates. For NF-ATc1, only the positive control (whole nuclear lysate) exhibited a band at the appropriate molecular weight (data not shown). For c-Jun, bands of the appropriate molecular weight of 35–39 kDa were observed in both the control group (whole nuclear lysate) and the MUC1costimulated cytoplasmic and nuclear fractions. No other pretreatment had a band indicative of c-Jun coimmunoprecipitation with the cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 (Fig. 8A). For c-Fos, a band between 60 and 70 kDa representative of the 62-kDa weight of c-Fos was observed in the positive control group and all CD3-stimulated cytoplasmic and nuclear fractions, as well as small amounts in the unstimulated groups (Fig. 8B). However, there was a visible increase in c-Fos in the nuclear fraction of the MUC1-costimulated group. 4. Discussion The role of MUC1 in T-cell activation, regulation, and homeostasis as an activation-induced glycoprotein in T lymphocytes has been recognized recently [5,8,14,25]. In these studies, cross-linking MUC1 has been determined to inhibit the proliferation of T cells when given a CD3-based stimulation [8,14], in the absence of a sufficient number of antigen-presenting/accessory cells [5]. However, the presence of a putative ITAM domain and evidence of signaling proteins binding to its cytoplasmic tail suggest that MUC1 may have dual costimulatory and coinhibitory functions in T cells. DAPI Overlay No Stim Anti-CD3 Anti-CD3 + Anti-MUC1 Fig. 7. T cells stimulated with phytohemaglutinin A (PHA) for 3 days were given no treatment, 10 g/mL anti-CD3, or 10 g/mL anti-CD3, 10 g/mL anti-MUC1, and 1 g/mL goat antimouse IgG antibody for 30 minutes before being stained against the cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 (Cy3, in red) and the nucleus (DAPI, in blue). Images are presented in single colors and overlaid. Pictures are taken from a single illustrative slide each from the same donor, representative of 3 separate experiments on 3 individual donors. Approximately 300 cells were analyzed in each group and pictures are representative of those observations. A) CD3 + Isotype, Nucleus CD3 + Isotype, Cytoplasm CD3 + MUC1, Nucleus CD3 + MUC1, Cytoplasm CD3, Nucleus CD3, Cytoplasm No Stim, Nucleus kDa 50 Control J.D. Konowalchuk and B. Agrawal / Human Immunology 73 (2012) 448–455 No Stim, Cytoplasm 454 CT2 IP: c-Jun IB 22 B) 50 CT2 IP: c-Fos IB Fig. 8. Western blots using anti-MUC1 cytoplasmic tail (CT2) to precipitate and (A) anti-c-Jun or (B) anti-c-Fos to blot. For c-Jun, bands of the appropriate molecular weight (⬃39 kDa) appeared for the positive control (cellular lysate run without a precipitating antibody) and both anti-CD3 plus anti-MUC1 treatment’s cytoplasmic and nuclear fractions. For c-Fos, bands of the appropriate molecular weight (⬃62 kDa) appeared for the positive control (pure cellular lysate run without a precipitating antibody) and all treatment groups in both the cytoplasmic extracts and the nuclear extracts. In the untreated (nonstimulated) group, however, only a small amount of c-Fos was detected bound to MUC1 compared with the other groups. We determined that MUC1 expression increases significantly on CD4⫹ T cells after mitogen stimulation, with naive T cells having the largest increase. This supports the hypothesis that MUC1 plays a role in T-cell immunoregulation because naive T cells begin to express maturation markers after mitogen stimulation [20]. Treating T cells with antibodies against CD3 and MUC1, under crosslinking conditions, led to enhanced proliferation. This is the first evidence obtained in characterizing MUC1 as a costimulatory protein of T cells. Earlier studies had utilized purified T-cell populations (⬎80% CD3⫹ T cells) and demonstrated coinhibition mediated by MUC1 [5,8,14]. In the current study, a T-cell population consisting of ⬎60% CD3⫹ T cells was used to demonstrate costimulatory effects. However, in partially purified T-cell (⬃80 –95% CD3⫹ T cells) cultures, the addition of irradiated autologous CD3⫺ accessory cells resulted in a costimulatory effect proportional to the amount of accessory cells added [5]. These experiments suggest that for MUC1 to function as a costimulatory molecule, an additional signal/interaction is required. After determining the conditions that result in a costimulatory response, we examined its effects on different CD4⫹ and CD8⫹ T-cell subsets. With CD4⫹ T cells, the percentage of memory cells increased greatly, whereas with CD8⫹ T cells, the percentage of naive, memory, and memory/effector cells increased after CD3 and MUC1 costimulation. Interestingly, we observed that mitogen stimulation results in higher MUC1 expression on naive CD4⫹ T cells, whereas MUC1 costimulation encourages memory CD4⫹ Tcell expansion. In contrast, MUC1 costimulation allows the expansion of memory, memory/effector, and effector CD8⫹ T cells. This finding suggests that MUC1 costimulation causes a specific subset of cells to proliferate/generate, potentially allowing for regulation of T-cell responses. Like other costimulatory proteins, we discovered that MUC1 is required to be bound and cross-linked in close proximity to extracellular CD3, likely because of shared kinases/ phosphatases [26]. The intracellular interaction of these molecules will be characterized in the future. Three major intracellular signaling pathways used by T cells are the NF-AT, nuclear factor B, and p38 MAPK pathways. The calcium-dependent NF-AT pathway is activated by CD3 stimulation and results in an increase in IFN-␥, TNF-␣, and IL-2 [27]; the nuclear factor B pathway requires both CD3 and CD28 costimulation and produces the cytokine IL-2 [28]; and the p38 MAPK pathway results in, after T-cell activation, production of IL-4, IL-13, and IL-10 [29]. In our results, proliferation did not differ with MUC1-mediated costimulation compared with controls in p38 MAPK- and NF-ATinhibited groups, suggesting that either pathway could be used. By examining cytokines from T cells given MUC1 costimulation, it was determined that MUC1 functions through the calcium-dependent NF-AT pathway. These data are also supported by our observation that MUC1 costimulation increases the number of memory CD4⫹ T cells, which produce IFN-␥ and memory and memory/effector CD8⫹ T cells, which produce IFN-␥ and TNF-␣ [30]. Proliferation is enhanced at the nuclear level by transcription factors, several of which MUC1 binds to in tumor cells [3,4,31]. The primary factor, -catenin, is not expressed by mature T cells [26]. Thus, the most likely transcription factors were the NF-AT family members NF-ATc1, c-Fos, and c-Jun. Indeed, we determined that c-Jun and c-Fos bind to the cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 and enter the nucleus, whereas NF-ATc1 does not (data not shown). Both c-Fos and c-Jun are imperative in the NF-AT pathway, dimerizing together after phosphorylative activation to produce the transcription factor AP-1 [32]. However, our data indicate that c-Fos is constitutively bound to the cytoplasmic tail of MUC1, whereas c-Jun is only bound after MUC1 costimulation. Because we determined that CD3 stimulation alone is sufficient to translocate the cytoplasmic tail into the cytoplasm and nucleus, this provides a role for MUC1 stimulation: phosphorylation of c-Fos and/or c-Jun, allowing it to form the AP-1 dimer and be brought into the nucleus. This theory is supported by previous observations by Gendler and co-workers, who demonstrated that transfection of a tumor cell line with a MUC1 analogue resulted in an intracellular increase in AP-1 [33]. Additionally, mitochondrial costaining will be performed in the future to determine whether, like tumor cells [23], an association exists with the mitochondria based on the granularity of the staining pattern displayed by MUC1 in Fig. 7. AP-1 is vital in the early immune response, enhancing cytokine production, cellular activation, and proliferation [34]. Normally, c-Jun is expressed after the initial CD3 response, with c-Jun dimers leading to c-Fos production after CD28 costimulation [35]. AP-1 dimers then form and migrate into the nucleus, binding promoter regions and resulting in the production of proinflammatory and proliferation-inducing cytokines [36]. Without AP-1, anergyinducing genes are transcribed, resulting in T-cell nonresponse to stimuli [37]. Regarding the absence of NF-ATc1 on MUC1’s cytoplasmic tail, it is likely that the cytoplasmic tail dissociates from AP-1 before it binds to DNA, possibly because of size restriction, although future studies will be performed to determine whether this is correct. Previously, it has been demonstrated that c-Fos has a weaker nuclear localization sequence than c-Jun; small quantities of c-Fos migrate into the nucleus in the absence of c-Jun, meaning it is dependent on c-Jun to adequately enter the nucleus [38]. By binding the cytoplasmic tail of MUC1, c-Fos may circumvent this regulation because it is provided with an alternate pathway of nuclear translocation. One obstacle lies in the fact that PKC is required for c-Jun phosphorylation and subsequent dimerization [36]. Because we observed that MUC1 costimulation was unaffected by generalized PKC inhibition, the cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 either has phosphorylative abilities or is able to recruit other proteins that are able to phosphorylate c-Jun/c-Fos in a PKC-independent manner. ERK1/2, having been demonstrated to bind MUC1’s cytoplasmic domain in T cells [13], is able to phosphorylate these proteins [14], providing a potential mechanism that will be researched further. These results provide evidence that MUC1 is a novel costimulatory protein on T cells. With both CD3 and MUC1 costimulation, MUC1’s cytoplasmic tail binds c-Jun and c-Fos, followed by nuclear translocation. By enhancing the amount of AP-1 entering the nucleus in a PKC-independent manner, MUC1 costimulation is able to further activate genes that cause the production of proinflamma- J.D. Konowalchuk and B. Agrawal / Human Immunology 73 (2012) 448–455 tory and proliferation-inducing cytokines, resulting in an enhanced proliferative response. MUC1 could exist on T cells in the same manner as OX40, which maintains the immune response after a primary activation, allowing them to become active again when presented with their antigen [39]. Alternatively, it could enhance lower levels of CD3 stimulation, increasing nuclear AP-1 when normally the amount was too low. These are possibilities that will be tested in future research. In conclusion, our study establishes MUC1 as a novel T-cell activation molecule with a significant role as a costimulatory molecule. Our results point toward a novel paradigm by which MUC1 adopts a costimulatory function in T cells. Further characterization of the costimulatory abilities of MUC1 may prove useful in the treatment of diseases of immune inhibition, such as in many tumor microenvironments or in diseases of immune hyperactivity, such as autoimmune disorders. Acknowledgments The authors acknowledge Dorothy Kratochwii-Otto for her help with flow cytometry, Honey Chan for her aid regarding the confocal microscope, and Dr. Colin Anderson for his comments and criticisms regarding the manuscript. This work was supported by grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Canadian Foundation for Innovation. BA is a recipient of a senior scholar award from the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (now Alberta Innovates-Health Solutions). References [1] Gendler SJ. MUC1, the renaissance molecule. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 2001;6:339 –53. [2] Zrihan-Licht S, Baruch A, Elroy-Stein O, Keydar I, Wreschner DH. Tyrosine phosphorylation of the MUC1 breast cancer membrane proteins. Cytokine receptor-like molecules. FEBS Lett 1994;356:130 – 6. [3] Singh PK, Hollingsworth MA. Cell surface-associated mucins in signal transduction. Trends Cell Biol 2006;16:467–76. [4] Wen Y, Caffrey TC, Wheelock MJ, Johnson KR, Hollingsworth MA. Nuclear association of the cytoplasmic tail of MUC1 and beta-catenin. J Biol Chem 2003;278:38029 –39. [5] Konowalchuk JD, Agrawal B. MUC1 mucin is expressed on human T-regulatory cells: function in both co-stimulation and co-inhibition. Cell Immunol 2012; 272:193–9. [6] Samuel J, Longenecker BM. Development of active specific immunotherapeutic agents based on cancer-associated mucins. Pharm Biotechnol 1995;6:875–90. [7] Reis CA, David L, Seixas M, Burchell J, Sobrinho-SimÖes M. Expression of fully and under-glycosylated forms of MUC1 mucin in gastric carcinoma. Int J Cancer 1998;79:402–10. [8] Agrawal B, Krantz MJ, Parker J, Longenecker BM. Expression of MUC1 mucin on activated human T cells: implications for a role of MUC1 in normal immune regulation. Cancer Res 1998;58:4079 – 81. [9] Cloosen S, Thio M, VanclÊe A, van Leeuwen EBM, Senden-Gijsbers BLMG, Oving EBH, et al. Mucin-1 is expressed on dendritic cells, both in vitro and in vivo. Int Immunol 2004;16:1561–71. [10] Cheong SK, Leong CF, Raudhawati O, Sivagengei K, Hamidah HN. Epithelial membrane antigen (EMA) or MUC1 expression in monocytes and monoblasts. Pathology 2003;35:422–7. [11] Vasir B, Avigan D, Wu Z, Crawford K, Turnquist S, Ren J, et al. Dendritic cells induce MUC1 expression and polarization on human T cells by an IL-7dependent mechanism. J Immunol 2005;174:2376 – 86. [12] Correa I, Plunkett T, Vlad A, Mungul A, Candelora-Kettel J, Burchell JM, et al. Form and pattern of MUC1 expression on T cells activated in vivo or in vitro suggests a function in T-cell migration. Immunology 2003;108:32– 41. 455 [13] Wykes M, MacDonald KPA, Tran M, Quin RJ, Xing PX, Gendler SJ, et al. MUC1 epithelial mucin (CD227) is expressed by activated dendritic cells. J Leukoc Biol 2002;72:692–701. [14] Agrawal B, Longenecker BM. MUC1 mucin-mediated regulation of human T cells. Int Immunol 2005;17:391–9. [15] Mukherjee P, Tinder TL, Basu GD, Gendler SJ. MUC1 (CD227) interacts with lck tyrosine kinase in Jurkat lymphoma cells and normal T cells. J Leukoc Biol 2005;77:90 –9. [16] Pandey P, Kharbanda S, Kufe D. Association of the Df3/Muc1 breast-cancer antigen with Grb2 and the Sos/Ras exchange protein. Cancer Res 1995;55: 4000 –3. [17] Wang HH, Lillehoj EP, Kim KC. MUC1 tyrosine phosphorylation activates the extracellular signal-regulated kinase. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2004; 321:448 –54. [18] Turjanski AG, Vaque JP, Gutkind JS. MAP kinases and the control of nuclear events. Oncogene 2007;26:3240 –53. [19] Andrews NC, Faller DV. A rapid micropreparation technique for extraction of DNA-binding proteins from limiting numbers of mammalian cells. Nucleic Acids Res 1991;19:2499 –505. [20] Kurosawa K, Kobata T, Tachibana K, Agematsu K, Hirose T, Schlossman SF, et al. Differential regulation of Cd27 expression on subsets of Cd4 T-cells. Cell Immunol 1994;158:365–75. [21] Kobayashi N, Takata H, Yokota S, Takiguchi M. Down-regulation of CXCR4 expression on human CD8⫹ T cells during peripheral differentiation. Eur J Immunol 2004;34:3370 – 8. [22] Howie D, Simarro M, Sayos J, Guirado M, Sancho J, Terhorst C. Molecular dissection of the signaling and costimulatory functions of CD150 (SLAM): CD150/SAP binding and CD150-mediated costimulation. Blood 2002;99: 957– 65. [23] Benjamin JB, Jayanthi V, Devaraj H. MUC1 expression and its association with other aetiological factors and localization to mitochondria in preneoplastic and neoplastic gastric tissues. Clin Chim Acta 2010;411:2067–72. [24] Greene WC, Fenard D, Yonemoto W, de Noronha C, Cavrois M, Williams SA. Nef is physically recruited into the immunological synapse and potentiates T cell activation early after TCR engagement. J Immunol 2005;175:6050 –7. [25] Fattorossi A, Battaglia A, Malinconico P, Stoler AB, Andreocci L, Parente D, et al. Constitutive and inducible expression of the epithelial antigen MUC1 (CD227) in human T cells. Exp Cell Res 2002;280:107–18. [26] Trepel JB, Chung EJ, Hwang SG, Nguyen P, Lee S, Kim JW, et al. Regulation of leukemic cell adhesion, proliferation, and survival by beta-catenin. Blood 2002;100:982–90. [27] Im SH, Rao A. Activation and deactivation of gene expression by Ca2⫹/ calcineurin-NFAT-mediated signaling. Mol Cells 2004;18:1–9. [28] Schmitz ML, Bacher S, Dienz O. NF-kappaB activation pathways induced by T cell costimulation. FASEB J 2003;17:2187–93. [29] Cook R, Wu CC, Kang YJ, Han J. The role of the p38 pathway in adaptive immunity. Cell Mol Immunol 2007;4:253–9. [30] Seder RA, Ahmed R. Similarities and differences in CD4(⫹) and CD8(⫹) effector and memory T cell generation. Nat Immunol 2003;4:835– 42. [31] Singh PK, Behrens ME, Eggers JP, Cerny RL, Bailey JM, Shanmugam K, et al. Phosphorylation of MUC1 by Met modulates interaction with p53 and MMP1 expression. J Biol Chem 2008;283:26985–95. [32] Gentz R, Rauscher FJ, Abate C, Curran T. Parallel association of Fos and Jun leucine zippers juxtaposes DNA-binding domains. Science 1989;243:1695–9. [33] Thompson EJ, Shanmugam K, Hattrup CL, Kotlarczyk KL, Gutierrez A, Bradley JM, et al. Tyrosines in the MUC1 cytoplasmic tail modulate transcription via the extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 and nuclear factor-kappaB pathways. Mol Cancer Res 2006;4:489 –97. [34] Serfling E, Berberich-Siebelt F, Chuvpilo S, Jankevics E, Klein-Hessling S, Twardzik T, et al. The role of NF-AT transcription factors in T cell activation and differentiation. Biochim Biophys Acta 2000;1498:1–18. [35] Kiefer F, Vogel WF, Arnold R. Signal transduction and co-stimulatory pathways. Transpl Immunol 2002;9:69 – 82. [36] Hayashi K, Altman A. Protein kinase C theta (PKCtheta): a key player in T cell life and death. Pharmacol Res 2007;55:537– 44. [37] Waldmann I, Walde S, Kehlenbach RH. Nuclear import of c-Jun is mediated by multiple transport receptors. J Biol Chem 2007;282:27685–92. [38] Chida K, Nagamori S, Kuroki T. Nuclear translocation of Fos is stimulated by interaction with Jun through the leucine zipper. Cell Mol Life Sci 1999;55:297– 302. [39] Croft M. Costimulation of T cells by OX40, 4 –1BB, and CD27. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev 2003;14:265–73.
© Copyright 2024