help button home button Endocrine Society Endocrinology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Devi, G. R.
Right arrow Articles by Oh, Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Devi, G. R.
Right arrow Articles by Oh, Y.
Endocrinology Vol. 141, No. 11 4171-4179
Copyright © 2000 by The Endocrine Society


ARTICLES

Differential Effects of Insulin-Like Growth Factor (IGF)-Binding Protein-3 and Its Proteolytic Fragments on Ligand Binding, Cell Surface Association, and IGF-I Receptor Signaling1

Gayathri R. Devi2, Doo-Hyun Yang3, Ron G. Rosenfeld and Youngman Oh

Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, Oregon 97201-3042

Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Gayathri R. Devi, Ph.D., AVI BioPharma, Inc., 4575 SW Research Way, Suite 200, Corvallis, Oregon 97333. E-mail: grdevi{at}avibio.com


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3), the predominant IGF carrier protein in circulation, is posttranslationally modified in vivo by IGFBP-3 protease(s) into a number of fragments. Based on the ascertained and predicted recognition sites for known IGFBP-3 proteases, FLAG-epitope tagged intact IGFBP-3, NH2terminal (1–97), intermediate fragment (88–148), and COOH-terminal fragments (98–264 and (184–264) were generated in a baculovirus and/or Escherichia coli expression system and examined, by Western ligand blot and affinity cross-linking assays, for their ability to bind IGF and insulin. The NH2- and COOH-terminal fragments bound both IGF and insulin specifically (albeit with significantly reduced affinity) for IGF but higher affinity for insulin, when compared with intact IGFBP-3. The effect of IGFBP-3 and the fragments on IGF-I receptor (IGFIR) signaling pathways was studied by testing IGF-I-induced receptor autophosphorylation in IGFIR-overexpressing NIH-3T3 cells. IGFBP-3 showed a dose-dependent inhibition of autophosphorylation of the ß-subunit of IGFIR. The (1–97) NH2-terminal fragment inhibited IGFIR autophosphorylation at high concentrations, and this effect seems largely attributable to sequestration of IGF-I. In contrast, no inhibition of IGF-I-induced IGFIR autophosphorylation was detectable with the (98–264) and (184–264) COOH-terminal fragments, despite their ability to bind IGF. However, unlike the (1–97)NH2-terminal fragment, the COOH-terminal fragments of IGFBP-3 retained their ability to associate with the cell surface, and this binding was competed by heparin, similar to intact IGFBP-3.


    Introduction
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
THE INSULIN-LIKE GROWTH factors (IGF)-I and -II play an active role in cell proliferation and exist in association with distinct and specific IGF-binding proteins designated as IGFBPs 1–6 (1) and possibly IGFBP-related proteins (IGFBP-rPs) (2). IGFBP-3, the major IGFBP in adult serum, binds both IGFs with high affinity and specificity, and it serves as a carrier of IGFs, prolonging their half lives, as well as modulating their proliferative and anabolic effects on target cells by regulating IGF bioavailability. Exogenous IGFBP-3 has also been demonstrated to significantly inhibit the growth of various cells, including Hs578T estrogen receptor-negative human breast cancer cells (3). Decreased cell growth was observed when human IGFBP-3 complementary DNA (cDNA) was transfected into mouse Balb/c fibroblast cells (4) and into fibroblast cells derived from mouse embryos homozygous for a targeted disruption of the type I IGF receptor gene (5). The mechanism of this inhibition seems to be both IGF-independent and IGF receptor-independent and is mediated, presumably, through binding to specific IGFBP-3 receptors (6, 7, 8).

IGFBP-3 may be posttranslationally modified by IGFBP-3 protease(s) present in biological fluids or culture media (plasmin, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), matrix metalloproteases) (9) and those whose activity has been demonstrated only in vitro like that of stromelysin 3, thrombin (10). Serum IGFBP proteases(s) have been detected in diabetes (11, 12), renal (13), pregnancy (14), malignancy (15, 16), and following traumatic conditions or invasive procedures, such as surgery. Cleavage sites in IGFBP-3 have been located at the beginning of the variable domain (residues 95–98), particularly residue 97, which is the cleavage site for PSA, plasmin, human serum, and thrombin and yields a fragment of approximately 16 kDa or 20 kDa (glycosylated IGFBP-3) (10). However, the COOH-terminal fragments, containing a highly basic heparin-binding domain, have only been detected in vitro by plasmin digestion of intact IGFBP-3 and these fragments seem to inhibit degradation of other binding proteins (17). It is recognized that IGFBP proteolysis also occurs in the normal state outside of the bloodstream (18, 19) and that, in the cell environment, it is an essential mechanism in regulating the bioavailability of IGF. Both intact IGFBP-3 and IGFBP-3 proteolytic fragments have been shown to be capable of blocking the mitogenic effect of IGFs (20). Whether these actions primarily represent IGF-dependent or IGF- independent remains to be determined.

Our laboratories have demonstrated that the NH2-terminal recombinant fragments of IGFBP-3 (1–87) and (1–97) retain the ability to bind IGF, albeit with substantially reduced affinity. Additionally, these fragments specifically bind insulin and modulate insulin binding to its receptor (21, 22). Based on these studies, it has been hypothesized that the conserved NH2- and COOH-terminal sequences, as well as the appropriate ternary structure formed by disulfide bonds in the six classical IGFBPs, are all required for high-affinity binding of IGFs. A recent study had indicated that a natural COOH-terminal fragment of human IGFBP-2 retained partial IGF-binding activity (23), and a COOH-terminal, 13-kDa IGFBP-5 fragment (isolated from hemofiltrate) showed similar results (24). However, there is limited information on the binding characteristics of the IGFBP-3 COOH-terminal domain and the resultant biological effects of proteolytic fragments containing either the NH2- or COOH-terminal residues.

In this study, we demonstrate the ability of COOHterminal fragments of IGFBP-3 to bind IGFs. The (98–264)IGFBP-3 fragment and the (1–97)NH2-terminal fragment are both characterized, furthermore, by the ability to bind insulin with low affinity, but with higher affinity than is the case for intact IGFBP-3. Additionally, we have examined the effect of intact IGFBP-3 and the IGFBP-3 fragments on IGF-I-stimulated autophosphorylation of the IGF-I receptor (IGFIR) ß-subunit and their ability to associate with the cell surface.


    Materials and Methods
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Antibodies and reagents
IGF-I and IGF-II were purchased from Austral Biologicals (Santa Clara, CA). 125I-IGF-I (specific activities between 50–70 µCi/µg by a modification of chloramine-T technique) and IGFBP-3 monoclonal antibody were kindly provided by Diagnostic Systems Laboratories, Inc., Webster, TX. IGFBP-3Escherichia coli was obtained from Celtrix Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Santa Clara, CA). 125I-(A14)-monoiodinated insulin was purchased from Amersham Pharmacia Biotech (Piscataway, NJ). Bovine insulin was purchased from Sigma (St. Louis, MO). Antiphosphotyrosine monoclonal antibody (4G10) was a generous gift from Dr. B. J. Druker (Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Oregon Health Sciences University). Reagents used for SDS-PAGE were purchased from Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. (Richmond, CA).

Cell culture
NIH-3T3 cells overexpressing the human IGFIR were kindly gifted from Dr. C. T. Roberts, Jr. (Department of Pediatrics, Oregon Health Sciences University) and grown in DMEM with 10% FCS plus 500 µg/ml geneticin at 37 C with 5% CO2.

Generation and purification of recombinant IGFBP-3 proteolytic fragments
(1–97)IGFBP-3 and (88–148)IGFBP-3 FLAG-epitope tagged fragments were generated and purified in baculovirus and tested to be 99% pure, as described earlier (25, 26). The cDNAs for the COOH-terminal fragments (98–264) and (184–264) were generated by PCR amplification from the human IGFBP-3 cDNA and a FLAG epitope sequence (DYKDDDDK), and a stop codon was added immediately following amino acid 264. The signal peptide sequences of IGFBP-3 cDNA were ligated to NH2-termini of IGFBP-3 fragments. After sequencing, the 98–264 amplicon was then subcloned into the baculovirus expression vector pFASTBAC1 (Life Technologies, Inc., Grand Island, NY) and transformed into DH10Bac Escherichia coli cells. The amplified DNA was transfected into Sf9 insect cells (ATCC, Manassas, VA), and large-scale protein purification was begun by infecting the P2 virus into 108 HI-5 insect cells (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA), at a multiplicity of infection of 3, at 27 C for 3 days. The media from the infected cells were collected and concentrated, and the resultants were bound to an anti-M2 antibody column overnight at 4 C, and the FLAG tagged (98–264) protein was then eluted by using FLAG peptide (0.5 µg/ml), as described earlier (27). The purified protein was subjected to SDS-PAGE in a 15% gel and stained with Coomasie blue. Further, the fragment was also identified by immunoblotting with the M2 anti-FLAG antibody (Eastman Kodak Co., New Haven, CT) and anti-IGFBP-3 monoclonal antibody (Diagnostic Systems Laboratories, Inc.). Eluted fractions from an anti-M2 antibody column were pooled, concentrated, and quantitated by comparison with known amounts of BSA and IGFBP-3Escherichia coli after silver staining.

The (184–264)IGFBP-3 amplicon, after sequencing, was subcloned in the C-terminal end of glutathione S-transferase (GST) in the plasmid pGEX4T and transformed into Escherichia coli cells. The culture was grown overnight in LB-ampicillin and induced with 2 mM IPTG, and the cell lysates of the (184–264) GST fusion protein were prepared. The lysates were incubated with GST Sepharose beads for 1 h at RT and then washed. Purity and concentration of the fragments were determined by comparison with known amounts of BSA standards after silver staining. Further, the purified protein was subjected to SDS-PAGE in a 15% gel and stained with Coomasie Blue and also transferred to nitrocellulose and identified by immunoblotting with M2 anti-FLAG antibody (1:3000 dilution).

Affinity cross-linking
Intact IGFBP-3 or the NH2- and COOH-terminal fragments were incubated with 125I-IGF-I or 125I-insulin (50,000 cpm), in the presence or absence of unlabeled ligand, in a 100-µl vol for 16 h at 4 C and then cross-linked with 0.5 mM disuccinimidyl suberate (DSS) for 15 min at 4 C. The samples were then subjected to SDS-PAGE (12% or 15% gels) under reducing conditions, and autoradiography on Biomax MS film (Eastman Kodak Co.). Bands were quantified by densitometry (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.).

Western ligand blot analysis
Ligand blotting was performed as described by Hossenlopp at al (28), with minor modifications. Briefly, samples of intact IGFBP-3 (1–97), IGFBP-3, and (98–264)IGFBP-3 fragments, at the concentrations indicated in the figure legends, were subjected to SDS-PAGE (12% or 15% gel) under reducing or nonreducing conditions, electroblotted onto nitrocellulose filters, incubated with 1.5 x 106 cpm of 125I-insulin or a mixture of 125I-IGF-I and 125I-IGF-II, washed, dried, and exposed to film (Biomax).

Monolayer 125I-IGF-I affinity cross-linking
125I-IGF-I (100,000 cpm) was preincubated in a microfuge tube for 2 h at 4 C, in the presence or absence of cold IGF-I, intact IGFBP-3 (30 nM) (98–264), IGFBP-3 (250 nM) (184–264), IGFBP-3 (250 nM), or (1–97)IGFBP-3 (250 nM), in binding buffer (50 mM HEPES, 150 mM NaCl, 0.5% BSA). Confluent NIH-3T3 cells stably transfected with the human IGFIR cDNA (NIH-3T3-IGFIR cells) were incubated in serum free medium overnight. The cells were washed once with PBS. The cells were incubated with the 125I-IGF-I/IGFBP-3 combinations in triplicate wells for 3 h at 15 C. The cells were then washed with PBS and cross-linked with DSS for 15 min at 4 C, and the reaction was quenched with 100 mM Tris/HCl. The cells were solubilized with sample buffer. The covalent ligand-receptor (125I-IGF-I-IGFIR) complex in the lysates was resolved on a nonreducing 6% SDS-PAGE, followed by autoradiography. Another set of the same samples of cell lysates was run on a 15% SDS-PAGE under reducing conditions and immunoblotted with M2 anti-FLAG antibody or anti-IGFBP-3 monoclonal antibody, and the cell-associated bands were detected with enhanced chemiluminescence (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).

Determination of cell-surface association of intact IGFBP-3 and the fragments
Confluent monolayers of NIH-3T3-IGFIR cells were incubated in serum free medium overnight. Intact IGFBP-3 (30 nM); fragments 98–264 (250 nM), 184–264 (250 nM), or 1–97 (250 nM) in the presence or absence of 100 µg/ml heparin (Sigma), in binding buffer, was added to the cells. In a similar experiment, cells were treated with heparin (100 µg/ml) for 1 h, before addition of the peptides as listed above. The treatments were carried out at 15 C for 3 h. The cells were washed with PBS and cross-linked with DSS, as described above. The solubilized cell lysates were then run on a 15% SDS-PAGE and immunoblotted with anti-IGFBP-3 monoclonal antibody and detected with enhanced chemiluminescence.

IGF-I-induced IGFIR autophosphorylation assay
Confluent monolayers of serum-starved NIH-3T3-IGFIR cells were exposed for 5 min to 7 nM IGF-I, which had been preincubated with/without intact IGFBP-3 (1–97), IGFBP-3, or (98–264)IGFBP-3 for 2 h at 4 C. The reaction was quenched by solubilization buffer [1% Nonidet P-40, 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 1 mM EDTA, 150 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol, 12 U/ml aprotinin, phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, and 1 mM Na3VO4]. Solubilized proteins (25 µl of the cell lysates) were separated by SDS-PAGE (7.5%) under reducing conditions and visualized by immunoblot analysis. For immunoblot analysis, the filters were blocked in Tris-buffered saline (TBS) with 2% gelatin for 1 h at room temperature and then incubated with antiphosphotyrosine monoclonal antibody (1.5 µg/ml) diluted by TBS + 0.1% Triton X-100 (TBST) for 1 h at room temperature. The filters were then rinsed in 1 x TBST and incubated in a 1:5000 dilution of goat antimouse IgG-conjugated horseradish peroxidase (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) for 1 h at room temperature. Immunoreactive proteins were visualized using an enhanced chemiluminescence detection system.


    Results
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Expression of the IGFBP-3 recombinant fragments
Based on the ascertained and predicted PSA recognition sites in IGFBP-3 and the recognition sites for other known IGFBP-3 proteases, such as metalloproteases and plasmin, both intact IGFBP-3 and four different recombinant fragments were generated in a baculovirus and/or Escherichia coli expression system. Each peptide was coupled with a FLAG-epitope tag at the carboxyterminus, as shown in Fig. 1AGo. The purified proteins were immunoblotted with anti-FLAG M2 or anti-IGFBP-3 monoclonal antibody for estimation of their molecular weights. Intact IGFBP-3 and all the fragments were detectable by anti-FLAG M2 antibody under reducing (Fig. 1BGo) and nonreducing conditions. Dimerized forms of the proteins were identified in anti-FLAG M2 immunoblots run under nonreducing conditions (data not shown). Small discrepancies between the Mr for intact IGFBP-3 (1–97), IGFBP-3 (98–264), IGFBP-3, and (88–148)IGFBP-3 proteins seen on the immunoblots relative to the predicted Mr, which is purely based on amino acid composition of the proteins, may have arisen because of N-linked glycosylation. There are three potential N-glycosylation sites (Fig. 1AGo): Asn89, Asn109, and Asn172, in IGFBP-3 (29). The anti-IGFBP-3 monoclonal antibody detected intact IGFBP-3 and (98–264)IGFBP-3 under both nonreducing (Fig. 1BGo) and reducing conditions (data not shown). The fragment 1–97 was detectable only under nonreducing conditions. The 184–264 and 88–148 fragments were not detected effectively with this antibody.



View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Expression of FLAG-epitope tagged human IGFBP-3 and its fragments. A, The cDNA for preparation of the IGFBP-3 fragments was synthesized by a series of PCR reactions using the human IGFBP-3 cDNA as template and incorporating sequence encoding a COOH-terminal FLAG epitope tag. The dark boxes(1–87) represent the conserved NH2-terminal region; the diamond striped boxes(183–264), the conserved COOH-terminal region; and the square striped boxes (88–182), the variable intermediate region of IGFBP-3. The predicted molecular weights (MW) are based on the amino acid composition of the proteins. B, Protein expression was analyzed by immunoblotting using the M2 monoclonal antibody under reducing conditions or the IGFBP-3 monoclonal antibody under nonreducing conditions, coupled to ECL.

 
Analysis of IGF binding to the IGFBP-3 proteolytic fragments
To determine whether the regions encompassed by the IGFBP-3 fragments contained a functional IGF-I-binding/cross-linking site, the proteins were incubated with 125I-IGF-I and then affinity cross-linked with DSS and analyzed by SDS-PAGE. The data in Fig. 2AGo demonstrate that 125I-IGF-I can be cross-linked to the (1–97)IGFBP-3 and (98–264)IGFBP-3 fragments in a dose-dependent manner. Significant IGF cross-linking was observed at 50 nM concentrations of (1–97)IGFBP-3, which was completely saturated by 100 nM concentrations. In the case of (98–264)IGFBP-3, a dosedependent increase in IGF binding with increasing protein concentrations with saturation of binding occurred by 500-nM concentration range. The expected sizes of the individual proteolytic fragment coupled to 7-kDa 125I-IGF-I were detected, shown as 25- and 41-kDa bands, respectively. A faint band at 39 kDa is potentially a dimerized form of 1–97 fragment cross-linked to IGF-I.



View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. IGF binding analysis. A, 125I-IGF-I affinity cross-linking: IGFBP-3 proteolytic fragments were incubated with 125I-IGF-I (1 x 105 cpm) in a 100 µl vol for 16 h at 4 C and then cross-linked with 0.5 mM DSS for 15 min at 4 C. The affinity-labeled fragments were separated on a 15% SDS polyacrylamide gel under reducing conditions. An autoradiogram of the gel is shown. Values associated with the arrows indicate the calculated molecular weights of the major radioactive species. B, Competitive 125I-IGF-I affinity cross-linking: IGFBP-3 fragments (50 nM) equivalent to 5 pmol, were incubated with radiolabeled IGF-I in the presence or absence of the indicated concentrations of unlabeled IGF-I or insulin. Cross-linking was then done with DSS, followed by SDS-PAGE under reducing conditions. The autoradiogram shown is representative of three replicates. The ar-rows indicate the major radioactive species. C, Quantitative analysis of radiolabeled 125I-IGF-II displacement from IGFBP-3 fragments: the gels shown in B were densitometrically analyzed for quantitative estimation of the radioactivity associated with the individual bands, except in the case of 98–264 displacement with cold IGF-I, in which affinity cross-linking was done with lower concentrations of cold IGF-I, to construct the displacement curve. The data have been expressed as a percentage of maximal band intensity.

 
For estimation of the affinity of IGF-I binding, the proteolytic fragments were affinity cross-linked with 125I-IGF-I in the presence of increasing amounts of unlabeled IGF-I or insulin ranging between 0.15–4.5 µM. A dose-dependent displacement of 125I-IGF-I labeling of the IGFBP-3 fragments 1–97 and 98–264 was observed with increasing concentrations of unlabeled IGF-I (Fig. 2BGo). Quantitative analysis of the radioactive bands in these gels was done by densitometric analysis, and the data were plotted, as a function of IGF-I or insulin concentration, to construct 125I-IGF-I displacement curves (Fig. 2CGo). Calculation of the unlabeled IGF-I concentrations required to achieve 50% displacement of binding (IC50) indicated that (1–97)IGFBP-3 fragment had an IC50 value of 0.2–0.3 µM. The (98–264)IGFBP-3 fragment binding to 125I-IGF-I was completely displaced by 0.15 µM unlabeled IGF-I (Fig. 2BGo) and, using lower concentrations of unlabeled IGF-I in similar experiments, revealed the IC50 to be in the range of 0.1–0.15 µM (Fig. 2CGo). In addition, insulin was also able to compete for 125I-IGF-I binding to the fragments, especially to (1–97)IGFBP-3. The IC50 values calculated for unlabeled insulin to compete for 125I-IGF-I binding revealed that the 1–97 fragment had an IC50 value of about 0.3 µM insulin, which was at least 3-fold lower than that of the 98–264 fragment (IC50 = 0.8–1 µM), as shown in Fig. 2CGo. In summary, the (1–97)IGFBP-3 showed slightly lower binding affinity for IGF-I, relative to (98–264)IGFBP-3, and 125I-IGF-I binding to the fragments was equipotently displaced by insulin.

Further, the ability of the fragments to bind IGF-I and IGF-II was assessed by Western ligand blotting. The data in Fig. 3Go demonstrate that both the 1–97 and 98–264 fragments were able to bind to a mixture of IGF-I and IGF-II at concentrations as low as 5–10 pmol. It is to be noted, however, that the intensity of the major radiolabeled bands was much lower than that observed with intact IGFBP-3 at similar concentrations. The 20-kDa faint band observed in the case of (1–97)IGFBP-3 is probably a different glycosylation product of the 16-kDa fragment.



View larger version (45K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 3. IGF-I Western ligand blot. IGFBP-3 and the proteolytic fragments (indicated concentrations) were electrophoresed on 12% SDS-PAGE under nonreducing conditions. After electroblotting to nitrocellulose, the blots were incubated with a mixture of 125I-IGF-I and 125I-IGF-II. Values associated with the arrows indicate the calculated molecular weights of the major radioactive species.

 
Analysis of insulin binding to IGFBP-3 fragments
The observations that insulin could compete for 125I-IGF-I binding to the fragments led us to assess their insulin binding activity. Both (1–97)IGFBP-3 and (98–264)IGFBP-3 showed a strong 125I-insulin cross-linking band, in comparison with that observed with IGFBP-3 at similar concentrations (Fig. 4aGo). Unlabeled insulin was able to dose-dependently inhibit 125I-insulin binding to both the NH2 and COOH-terminal fragments (Fig. 4BGo), although even higher concentrations of unlabeled insulin could not completely displace 125I-insulin binding to the (98–264)IGFBP-3, suggesting a slow dissociation rate. Calculation of the unlabeled insulin concentrations required to achieve IC50 indicated that the (1–97)IGFBP-3 had an IC50 value ranging between 0.3–0.4 µM, whereas nearly 1 µM unlabeled insulin was required to cause 50% displacement of 125I-insulin binding to the (98–264) fragment (Fig. 4cGo). IGF-I was also able to compete for the 125I-insulin binding to the fragments, although higher concentrations of IGF-I were required in the case of (98–264)IGFBP-3. In summary, the (1–97)IGFBP-3 showed significantly high affinity for insulin, relative to the (98–264)IGFBP-3 fragment.



View larger version (42K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 4. Insulin binding analysis. A, 125I-insulin affinity cross-linking: IGFBP-3 proteolytic fragments were incubated with 125I-insulin (1 x 105 cpm) in a 100 µl vol for 16 h at 4 C and then cross-linked with 0.5 mM DSS for 15 min at 4 C. The affinity labeled fragments were separated on a 15% SDS polyacrylamide gel. An autoradiogram of the gel is shown, which is representative of three replicates. Values associated with the arrows indicate the calculated molecular weights of the major radioactive species. B, Competitive 125I-insulin affinity cross-linking: IGFBP-3 and the proteolytic fragments (50 nM) equivalent to 5 pmol, were incubated with radiolabeled insulin in the presence or absence of the indicated concentrations of unlabeled insulin or IGF-I. Cross-linking was then done with DSS, followed by SDS-PAGE. The autoradiogram of the dried gel is shown. The arrows indicate the major radioactive species. C, Quantitative analysis of radiolabeled 125I-insulin displacement from IGFBP-3 fragments: the gels shown in B were densitometrically analyzed for quantitative estimation of the radioactivity associated with the individual bands. The data have been expressed as a percentage of maximal band intensity.

 
Further, Western blot analysis with iodinated insulin showed that both the 1–97 and the 98–264 fragments bound insulin. The IGFBP-3 intermediate fragment (88–148), which lacks both the NH2- and COOH-terminal domains, showed no binding to IGF-I, IGF-II,or insulin, in Western ligand blot (data not shown).

IGFBP-3 and 1–97 fragment inhibit IGF-I interaction with the IGFIR
To determine, whether the ability of intact IGFBP-3 and the amino- and carboxyterminal fragments to bind IGFs in vitro lead to sequestration of IGFs in vivo, a 125I-IGF-I monolayer affinity cross-linking assay was done in the NIH-3T cells overexpressing the IGFIR (NIH-3T3-IGFIR). The data in Fig. 5AGo shows that 125I-IGF-I specifically cross-links with the IGFIR shown as a 230-kDa band under nonreducing conditions. 125I-IGF-I binding to IGFIR was completely displaced by 100 nM unlabeled IGF-I. Further, the IGF-I-IGFIR complex formation was completely inhibited by preincubation of the iodinated IGF-I with unlabeled IGFBP-3 (30 nM) and about 90% inhibited by preincubating with 250 nM concentration of (1–97) NH2-terminal fragment. The cross-linked band was not inhibited, however, by preincubation of the 125I-IGF-I with 250 nM of (98–264)IGFBP-3 or the (184–264)IGFBP-3 fragment.



View larger version (73K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 5. Monolayer affinity cross-linking with 125I-IGF-I. A, 125I-IGF-I was preincubated at 4 C in the presence or absence of unlabeled IGF-I (100 nM), IGFBP-3 (30 nM), or fragments (250 nM); and then these treatments were added to confluent monolayers of NIH-3T3-IGFIR cells for 3 h at 15 C. After washing, the cells were cross-linked, and cell lysates were run on a 6% SDS-PAGE gel. The arrow indicates the IGFIR species cross-linked to radiolabeled IGF-I. B, A set of the same cell lysates were run on a 15% SDS-PAGE, under reduced conditions, and immunoblotted with M2 anti-FLAG monoclonal antibody.

 
The same set of samples were resolved on an immunoblot and probed with M2 anti-FLAG antibody. Results in Fig. 5BGo show that the carboxyterminal fragments (98–264), (184–264), and intact IGFBP-3 molecules associated with the cell surface in the presence of IGF-I. (1–97)IGFBP-3, however, showed no cell-associated band.

The carboxyterminal fragments have the ability to associate to the cell surface
Since, compared with the NH2-terminal fragment, the (98–264) COOH-terminal IGFBP-3 fragment failed to inhibit binding of IGF-I to the IGFIR, we wanted to study the ability of the fragments to associate with the cell surface in the absence of IGF-I. Monolayer cross-linking was carried out with the FLAG-epitope tagged intact IGFBP-3 (1–97) or (98–264) fragments in NIH-3T3-IGFIR cells, and the cell-associated proteins were detected by immunoblotting the cell lysates with anti-IGFBP-3 monoclonal antibody. The (98–264) carboxyterminal fragment and intact IGFBP-3 molecules associated with the cell surface. (1–97)IGFBP-3, however, showed no cell-associated band (Fig. 6Go, lanes 2 and 5). Further, there was no detectable shift in molecular weights of the cross-linked proteins when compared with control (Fig. 1BGo) noncross-linked protein preparations.



View larger version (59K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 6. Effect of heparin on cell surface association of IGFBP-3 and its fragments. Confluent NIH-3T3-IGFIR cells were treated with either peptides alone [lane 1, untreated cells; lane 2, IGFBP-3; lane 5, (98–264)IGFBP-3; lane 8, (1–97)IGFBP-3] or with peptides preincubated with heparin for 1 h at 4 C [lane 4, IGFBP-3+heparin; lane 7, (98–264)IGFBP-3+heparin]; or the cells were first treated with heparin for 1 h, washed, and then the following peptides were added: lane 3, IGFBP-3; lane 6, (98–264)IGFBP-3. All the treatments were carried out for 3 h at 15 C. After washing, the cells were cross-linked, and cell lysates were run on a 15% SDS-PAGE and immunoblotted with anti-IGFBP-3 monoclonal antibody. The arrows indicate the cellsurface-associated species.

 
To test whether the ability of intact IGFBP-3 and the carboxylterminal fragment to bind to the cell surface was via the heparin-binding domains, cells were preincubated with heparin (100 µg/ml) and then treated with the peptides; alternatively, the peptides were preincubated with heparin and then added to the cells, followed by monolayer cross-linking in both cases (Fig. 6Go). Similar results were observed in both types of experiments, i.e. heparin blocked the cell surface association of intact IGFBP-3 (Fig. 6Go, lanes 3 and 4) and the (98–264)IGFBP-3 fragment (Fig. 6Go, lanes 6 and 7).

Inhibition of IGFIR signaling
Since intact IGFBP-3 and its fragments have the ability to bind IGFs and thereby impede its interaction with the IGFIR, we analyzed the potential biological manifestation of this interaction on IGFIR signaling. This was carried out by testing the effect of IGFBP-3 and its fragments on IGF-I-induced IGFIR autophosphorylation in NIH-3T3-IGFIR cells. Control experiments with IGF-I revealed that 5-min treatments with 7–14 nM of the peptide showed maximal intensity autophosphorylation of the 95-kDa band of the ß-subunit of IGFIR in antiphosphotyrosine immunoblots (Fig. 7AGo).



View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 7. IGFIR autophosphorylation assay. A, Confluent NIH-3T3-IGFIR cells stably transfected with the human IGFIR cDNA were exposed for either 5 min or 10 min to 1, 7, and 14 nM IGF-I peptide. The reaction was quenched by solubilization buffer, and the solubilized proteins were separated by 7.5% SDS-PAGE, under reducing conditions, and visualized by immunoblot analysis using antiphosphotyrosine monoclonal antibody. The arrow indicates the 95-kDa ß-subunit of IGFIR. B, Confluent NIH-3T3-IGFIR cells were exposed for 5 min to 50 ng/ml IGF-I, which had been preincubated with IGFBP-3, 1–97, or 98–264 proteolytic fragment for 2 h at 4 C. The solubilized proteins were separated by 7.5% SDS-PAGE, under reducing conditions, and visualized by immunoblot analysis using antiphosphotyrosine monoclonal antibody. The arrows indicate the 95-kDa ß-subunit of IGFIR in each immunoblot. C, The specific 95-kDa bands representing the phosphorylated ß-subunit of the IGFIR and the 116-kDa nonspecific bands in the gels shown in B and in other replicate experiments (n = 2–4) were densitometrically analyzed. The ratio of the two band intensities was used to normalize and quantify the percentage of maximal IGF-I-induced IGFIR autophosphorylation detected in the presence of intact IGFBP-3 and its fragments.

 
IGFBP-3 inhibited IGF-I-stimulated autophosphorylation of the IGFIR ß-subunit in a dose-dependent manner (Fig. 7BGo). Quantification of the inhibition of the phosphorylated subunit of IGFIR was carried out by densitometrically analyzing the specific 95-kDa band and the 116-kDa nonspecific band in each gel. The ratio of the two band intensities was used to normalize and calculate the percentage of maximal IGF-I-stimulated IGFIR autophosphorylation detected in the presence of IGFBP-3 and the IGFBP-3 fragments (Fig. 7CGo). IGFBP-3 caused 50% inhibition of the IGF-I-induced autophosphorylation at 5–7 nM concentration range, and by 15–20 nM IGFBP-3 concentrations, complete inhibition of IGFIR autophosphorylation was observed. In contrast, the (1–97)IGFBP-3 fragment inhibited receptor autophosphorylation only at higher concentrations (50–70% inhibition at 100–250 nM concentrations). The (98–264)IGFBP-3 and (184–264)IGFBP-3 fragments, however, did not show any significant inhibition of IGF-I-induced IGFIR autophosphorylation, even at 250 nM concentrations (Fig. 7Go, B and C), although these fragments were able to bind IGF-I in binding assays.


    Discussion
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
We report herein that IGFBP-3 fragments are capable of binding IGF-I and IGF-II, although with lower affinity than that seen with intact IGFBP-3. Further, the fragments have the ability to bind insulin with higher affinity than observed with intact IGFBP-3. The principal conclusion is that the high-affinity binding of IGFs by IGFBP-3 requires proper tertiary configuration of the NH2- and COOH-terminal domains. This observation is further supported by the recent concept of an IGFBP superfamily (30, 31). Over the course of evolution, the classical IGFBPs, which have well-conserved NH2- and COOH-terminal domains, evolved into highaffinity IGF-binders (1). In contrast, the IGFBP-rPs (low- affinity IGFBPs) only share the conserved NH2-terminal domain (32). This structural difference, combined with the present data, strongly implicate the importance of the IGFBP COOH-terminal domain in conferring high-affinity IGF binding.

The concept that interaction between NH2- and COOH-terminal domains is essential for high-affinity IGF binding was initially conceived based on observations that proteolysis of IGFBPs in biological fluids results in fragments that have diminished or no binding affinities for IGFs (33). The in vitro generation of recombinant fragments or fragments isolated by limited proteolysis supports the in vivo data. A 16-kDa fragment corresponding to the NH2-terminus and a small portion of intermediate region, generated by proteolytically modifying IGFBP-4, specifically cross-linked to both IGF-I and II, although with a 20-fold lower affinity than intact IGFBP-4 (34, 35). Similarly, a carboxytruncated 23-kDa IGFBP-5 fragment from osteoblast-like cells demonstrated decreased IGF binding affinity (36, 37). Deletion mutagenesis of the carboxyterminal domains of IGFBP-1 and IGFBP-4 has resulted in a decrease in IGF affinity, thereby demonstrating the importance of the highly conserved Cys-Try-Cys-Val motif in the carboxyterminal region (38, 39). The present study is the first to clearly demonstrate the ability of the 28-kDa (98–264), IGFBP-3 intermediate+COOH-terminal proteolytic fragment to bind both IGFs and insulin in two different procedures, affinity cross-linking and Western ligand blot. Interestingly, the binding of the (98–264)IGFBP-3 fragment to 125I-IGF-I or 125I-insulin was competitively displaced by both IGF-I and insulin, though with different affinities, suggesting that the insulin and IGF binding sites are probably not identical but overlap or reside closely on the IGFBP-3 molecule. This is in contrast with the (1–97)IGFBP-3 fragment, where insulin and IGF-I were approximately equipotent in displacing 125I-IGF-I.

We have shown that IGFBP-3 causes a dose-dependent inhibition of IGF-I-induced IGFIR autophosphorylation in NIH-3T3 cells overexpressing the IGFIR. This inhibition occurs at an 1:1 molar ratio of IGFBP-3 to IGF-I, suggesting an IGF-dependent mechanism of modulation of receptor signaling. The (1–97) NH2-terminal fragment retained the ability to modulate IGF-I binding and signaling via the IGFIR by inhibiting IGF-I-stimulated IGFIR autophosphorylation, albeit at 50-fold higher concentrations than intact IGFBP-3. That this inhibition of IGFIR signaling is largely attributable to sequestration of IGF-I is strongly supported by the observations that both intact IGFBP-3 and (1–97)IGFBP-3 compete with 125I-IGF-I binding/cross-linking to the receptor in monolayer affinity cross-linking experiments.

Interestingly, the (98–264) fragment unlike the (1–97)IGFBP-3, failed to show any inhibition of IGFIR signaling, despite its ability to bind IGFs, as revealed by in vitro binding analysis. The COOH-terminal fragments (98–264) and (184–264) also failed to compete for 125I-IGF-I binding and cross-linking to the IGFIR, compared with intact IGFBP-3 and the (1–97) NH2-terminal IGFBP-3 fragment. We speculate that the inability of the fragments containing the COOH-terminal domain of IGFBP-3 to inhibit IGF-I binding to the IGFIR could be attributable to the following mechanisms: 1) the COOH-terminal fragment binds IGF-I, and the entire complex is still capable of binding to and autophosphorylating the IGFIR, implying that the binding site on IGF-I for the receptor and for the carboxyterminal region of IGFBP-3 are different; and 2) the COOH-terminal domain of IGFBP-3 possesses an extracellular matrix (ECM) binding region, and it is possible that in the cellular environment, the fragments containing the COOH-terminal domains are more prone to associate with the cell surface and are not available to sequester IGF-I, especially given their low affinity for IGF. To test these hypotheses, the ability of the FLAG-epitope tagged fragments to associate with the cell surface was studied in the presence of IGF-I, with subsequent cross-linking and by analysis of cell lysates on immunoblots probed with anti-IGFBP-3 or M2 anti-FLAG antibody. Our data indicate that the COOH-terminal fragments (98–264) and (184–264) have the ability to associate to the cell surface in the presence of IGF-I, unlike the NH2 fragment (1–97)IGFBP-3, which showed no cell-surface association. Further, there was no shift in molecular weight of the cell-surface associated bands, and heparin blocked the binding of both intact and the (98–264)IGFBP-3 fragment to the cell surface, ruling out the possibility of interaction of the fragments with any receptor molecule and thereby supporting the second hypothesis. This is in agreement with an earlier study (40), which reported that an IGFBP-3 deletion fragment, lacking the 184–264 region, failed to show any cell-surface association. There are two putative heparin-binding motifs in IGFBP-3, located at amino acids 148–153 and 219–226 in the central and carboxylterminal regions, respectively, and the carboxylterminal motif has been shown to have 4-fold higher affinity for heparin (41). Recently, Bramani et al., 1999 (42), have identified two nonbasic residues (Gly203 and Gln209) within the ECM binding region (201–218) in the carboxyterminal region of IGFBP-5, mutations of which cause 8- to10-fold reduction in affinity for human IGF-I. This region is a highly conserved domain in IGFBP-5, -3, and -6 and is known to contain the heparin-binding domain. The authors have proposed that the IGF-I and ECM binding sites partially overlap, and heparin binding to the basic amino acids might interfere with IGF-I interaction in vivo.

Previous studies with mini-receptor constructs and with isolated domains or proteolytic fragments of the IGF2R (43) urokinase receptor (44), GH receptor (45), talin (46), to name a few, have confirmed the involvement of two or more ligand contact regions. Similarly, in the case of IGFBP-3, it seems that the IGF- and insulin-binding domains are bipartite and possibly overlapping. In our biological system, the stoichiometry of IGFBP-3 binding to IGF-I seems to be 1:1. We postulate that both NH2- and COOH-terminal domains have residues that are capable of binding IGF-I and insulin with low affinity. However, there is simultaneous interaction of the two so-called half sites, in intact IGFBP-3, which creates a high-affinity IGF binding site on the molecule. Simultaneously, this interaction leads to a markedly reduced ability of intact IGFBP-3 to bind insulin, possibly because of masking of the residues that interact with insulin, as a result of tertiary conformational change (21). With respect to IGF binding to IGFBP-3, it is unclear whether the NH2- and COOH-terminal domains contribute equally. We predict the presence of functional residues in the NH2-terminus (1–97) and COOH-terminus (149–264) that confer high affinity by cooperative or conformational changes; the structural residues that mediate the necessary noncovalent interactions may reside in the NH2-, intermediate or COOH-terminus of the IGFBP-3 molecule. Alternatively, given the striking similarity of the NH2-terminal domains and the fact that this region is encoded by a single exon in all of the classical IGFBPs and the IGFBP-rPs (low-affinity IGF binders), it is possible that the NH2-terminus is the critical functional component involved in binding IGFs, and that conformational effects imposed on the NH2-terminus by the COOH-terminal domain are required for high-affinity binding.

In summary, the present study, along with previous work from our and other laboratories, clearly demonstrates the ability of the IGFBP-3 aminoterminal fragment to bind IGF and insulin and to inhibit IGFIR and insulin receptor autophosphorylation (21, 22), revealing that this 16-kDa fragment may be capable of both IGF-I-dependent and IGF-independent roles in modulating cell growth. However, the carboxylterminal fragments, which also have the ability to bind both IGF-I and insulin in vitro, fail to prevent binding of either IGF-I or insulin (data not shown) to their respective receptors, because of the tendency of these fragments for cell surface association via the heparin-binding domain. Also intriguing is the identification of a thyroglobulin-like motif in the COOH-terminal regions of IGFBP superfamily, which has also been found in the superfamily of protein inhibitors of cysteine proteinases (47, 48). Whether this highly conserved thyroglobulin type-I element indeed acts as an inhibitor of cysteine proteinases in these proteins, remains to be established. The intermediate region of IGFBP-3 does not seem to bind IGFs or insulin, and its role in high-affinity binding to IGFs is probably related to its ability to promote proper tertiary structure and optimal interactions between the amino- and carboxyterminal residues. Further, it has been demonstrated that the intermediate region of IGFBP-3 is involved in the specific interaction between IGFBP-3 and its putative cell-surface receptor (26). Taken together, it is tempting to speculate that various forms of IGFBP-3 fragments resulting from proteolysis by IGFBP-3 specific proteases will have different effects on the IGF-IGFIR axis, as well as potential IGF-independent actions.


    Acknowledgments
 
We are grateful to Donna Graham and Elizabeth Wilson for technical support and to Drs. Vivian Hwa and Stephen M. Twiggs for helpful discussions. We thank Diagnostic Systems Laboratories, Inc. for providing radiolabeled IGF-I.


    Footnotes
 
1 This research was supported by US Army Grants DAMD17-991-9522 (to G.R.D.) and DAMD17-96-1-6204 and DAMD17-96-1-7204 (to Y.O.H.) and by NIH Grants R01-DK-51513 (to R.G.R.) and CA-58110 (to R.G.R.). Back

2 Present address: AVI BioPharma Inc., 4575 SW Research Way, Suite 200, Corvallis Oregon 97333. Back

3 Present address: Department of Surgery, Chonbuk National University Medical School, Chonju, Korea. Back

Received March 28, 2000.


    References
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Jones JI, Clemmons DR 1995 Insulin-like growth factors and their binding proteins: biological actions. Endocr Rev 16:3–34[CrossRef][Medline]
  2. Rosenfeld RG, Hwa V, Wilson L, Lopez-Bermejo A, Buckway C, Burren C, Choi WK, Devi G, Ingermann A, Graham D 1999 The insulin-like growth factor binding protein superfamily: new perspectives. Pediatrics 104:1018–1021[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Oh Y, Muller HL, Lamson G, Rosenfeld RG 1993 Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-independent action of IGF-binding protein-3 in Hs578T human breast cancer cells. J Biol Chem 268:14964–14971[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Cohen P, Lamson G, Okajima T, Rosenfeld R 1993 Transfection of the human IGFBP-3 gene into Balb/c fibroblasts: a model for the cellular functions of IGFBPs. Growth Regul 3:23–26[Medline]
  5. Valentinis B, Bhala A, DeAngelis T, Baserga R, Cohen P 1995 The human insulin-like growth factor (IGF) binding protein-3 inhibits the growth of fibroblasts with a targeted disruption of the IGF-I receptor gene. Mol Endocrinol 9:361–367[Abstract]
  6. Oh Y, Muller HL, Pham H, Rosenfeld RG 1993 Demonstration of receptors for insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 on Hs578T human breast cancer cells. J Biol Chem 268:26045–26048[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Rajah R, Valentinis B, Cohen P 1997 Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-binding protein-3 induces apoptosis and mediates the effects of transforming growth factor-b1 on programmed cell death through a p53- and IGF-independent mechanism. J Biol Chem 272:12181–12188[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Leal SM, Liu Q, Huang SS, Huang JS 1997 The Type V transforming growth factor b receptor is the putative insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 3 receptor. J Biol Chem 272:20572–20576[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Rajah R, Katz L, Nunn S, Solberg P, Beers T, Cohen P 1995 Insulin-like growth factor binding protein (IGFBP) proteases: functional regulators of cell growth. Prog Growth Factor Res 6:273–284[CrossRef][Medline]
  10. Booth BA, Boes M, Bar RS 1996 IGFBP-3 proteolysis by plasmin, thrombin, serum: heparin binding, IGF binding, and structure of fragments. Am J Physiol 271:E465–E470
  11. Bang P, Brismar K, Rosenfeld RG 1994 Increased proteolysis of insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) in noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus serum, with elevation of a 29-kilodalton (kDa) glycosylated IGFBP-3 fragment contained in the approximately 130- to 150-kDa ternary complex. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 78:1119–1127[Abstract]
  12. Bereket A, Lang CH, Blethen SL, Fan J, Frost RA, Wilson TA 1995 Insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 proteolysis in children with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: a possible role for insulin in the regulation of IGFBP-3 protease activity. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 80:2282–2288[Abstract]
  13. Powell DR, Durham SK, Liu F, Baker BK, Lee PD, Watkins SL, Campbell PG, Brewer ED, Hintz RL, Hogg RJ 1998 The insulin-like growth factor axis and growth in children with chronic renal failure: a report of the Southwest Pediatric Nephrology Study Group. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 83:1654–1661[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Bang P, Fielder PJ 1997 Human pregnancy serum contains at least two distinct proteolytic activities with the ability to degrade insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3. Endocrinology 138:3912–3917[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Muller HL, Oh Y, Gargosky SE, Wilson KF, Lehrnbecher T, Rosenfeld RG 1994 Insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 concentrations and insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 protease activity in sera of patients with malignant solid tumors or leukemia. Pediatr Res 35:720–724[Medline]
  16. Baciuchka M, Remacle-Bonnet M, Garrouste F, Favre R, Sastre B, Pommier G 1998 Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) proteolysis in patients with colorectal cancer: possible association with the metastatic potential of the tumor. Int J Cancer 79:460–467[CrossRef][Medline]
  17. Binoux M, Lalou C, Mohseni-Zadeh S 1999 Biological actions of proteolytic fragments of the IGFBPs. In: Rosenfeld RG, Roberts Jr CT (eds) The IGF System-Molecular Biology, Physiology, and Clinical Applications. Humana Press, Totawa, NJ, pp 281–313
  18. Lalou C, Binoux M 1993 Evidence that limited proteolysis of insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) occurs in the normal state outside of the bloodstream. Regul Pept. 48:179–188
  19. Maile LA, Xu S, Cwyfan-Hughes SC, Fernihough JK, Pell JM, Holly JM 1998 Active and inhibitory components of the insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 protease system in adult serum, interstitial, and synovial fluid. Endocrinology 139:4772–4781[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Lalou C, Lassarre C, Binoux M 1996 A proteolytic fragment of insulin-like growth factor (IGF) binding protein-3 that fails to bind IGFs inhibits the mitogenic effects of IGF-I and insulin. Endocrinology 137:3206–3212[Abstract]
  21. Yamanaka Y, Wilson EM, Rosenfeld RG, Oh Y 1997 Inhibition of insulin receptor activation by insulin-like growth factor binding proteins. J Biol Chem 272:30729–30734[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Vorwerk P, Yamanaka Y, Spagnoli A, Oh Y, Rosenfeld RG 1998 Insulin and IGF binding by IGFBP-3 fragments derived from proteolysis, baculovirus expression and normal human urine. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 83:1392–1395[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Ho PJ, Baxter RC 1997 Characterization of truncated insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-2 in human milk. Endocrinology 138:3811–3818[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Standker L, Wobst P, Mark S, Forsmann WG 1998 Isolation and characterization of circulating 13-kDa C-terminal fragments of human insulin-like growth factor binding protein-5. FEBS Lett 441:281–286[CrossRef][Medline]
  25. Vorwerk P, Oh Y, Lee PD, Khare A, Rosenfeld RG 1997 Synthesis of IGFBP-3 fragments in a baculovirus system and characterization of monoclonal anti-IGFBP-3 antibodies. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 82:2368–2370[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Yamanaka Y, Fowlkes JL, Rosenfeld RG, Oh Y 1999 Characterization of insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) binding to human breast cancer cells. Endocrinology 140:1319–1328[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Oh Y, Nagalla SR, Yamanaka Y, Kim H-S, Wilson E, Rosenfeld RG 1996 Synthesis and characterization of insulin-like growth factor binding protein (IGFBP-7). J Biol Chem 271:30322–30325[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Hossenlopp P, Seurin D, Segovia-Quinson B, Hardouin S, Binoux M 1986 Analysis of serum insulin-like growth factor binding proteins using western blotting: use of the method for titration of the binding proteins and competitive binding studies. Anal Biochem 154:138–143[CrossRef][Medline]
  29. Zapf J, Born W, Chang JY, James P, Froesch ER, Fischer JA 1988 Isolation and NH2-terminal amino acid sequences of rat serum carrier proteins for insulin-like growth factors. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 156:1187–1194[CrossRef][Medline]
  30. Hwa V, Oh Y, Rosenfeld RG 1999 Insulin-like growth factor binding proteins: a proposed superfamily. Acta Paediatr Suppl 428:37–45
  31. Baxter RC, Binoux M, Clemmons DR, Conover C, Drop SLS, Holly JMP, Mohan S, Oh Y, Rosenfeld RG 1998 Recommendations for nomenclature for the insulin-like growth factor binding protein (IGFBP) superfamily. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 83:3213[Free Full Text]
  32. Hwa V, Oh Y, Rosenfeld RG 1999 The insulin-like factor binding protein (IGFBP) superfamily. Endocr Rev 20:761–787[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Collett-Solberg PF, Cohen P 1996 The role of the insulin-like growth factor binding proteins and the IGFBP proteases in modulating IGF action. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 25:591–614[CrossRef][Medline]
  34. Cheung P-T, Wu J, Banach W, Chernausek SD 1994 Glucocorticoid regulation of an insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-4 protease produced by a rat neuronal cell line. Endocrinology 135:1328–1335[Abstract]
  35. Chernausek SD, Smith CE, Duffin KL, Busby WH, Wright G, Clemmons DR 1995 Proteolytic cleavage of insulin-like growth factor binding protein 4 (IGFBP-4): localization of cleavage sit to non-homologous region of native IGFBP-4. J Biol Chem 270:11377–11382[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Andress DL, Birnbaum RS 1992 Human osteoblast-derived insulin-like growth factor (IGF) binding protein 5 stimulates osteoblast mitogenesis and potentiates IGF action. J Biol Chem 267:22467–22472[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Andress DL, Loop SM, Zapf J, Kiefer MC 1993 Carboxy-truncated insulin-like growth factor binding protein-5 stimulates mitogenesis in osteoblast-like cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 195:25–30[CrossRef][Medline]
  38. Qin X, Strong DD, Baylink DJ, Mohan S 1998 Structure-function analysis of the human insulin-like growth factor binding protein-4. J Biol Chem 273:23509–23516[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Brinkman A, Groffen CA, Kortleve DJ, Kessel AGV, Drop SL 1988 Isolation and characterization of a cDNA encoding the low molecular weight insulin-like growth factor binding protein (IGFBP-1). EMBO J 7:2417–2423[Medline]
  40. Firth SM, Ganeshprasad U, Baxter RC 1998 Structural determinants of ligand and cell surface binding of insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-3. J Biol Chem 273:2631–2638[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Fowlkes J, Serra D 1996 Characterization of glycosaminoglycan-binding domains present in insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-3. J Biol Chem 271:14676–14679[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Bramani S, Song H, Beattie J, Tonner E, Flint DJ, Allan GJ 1999 Amino acids within the extracellular matrix (ECM) binding region (201–218) of rat insulin-like growth factor binding protein (IGFBP-5) are important determinants in binding IGF-I. J Mol Endocrinol 23:117–123[Abstract]
  43. Devi GR, Byrd JC, Slentz DH, MacDonald RG 1998 An insulin-like growth factor II (IGF-II) affinity-enhancing domain localized within extracytoplasmic repeat 13 of the IGF-II/mannose 6-phosphate receptor. Mol Endocrinol 11:1661–1672
  44. Behrendt N, Ronne E, Dano K 1996 Domain interplay in the urokinase receptor. Requirement for the third domain in high affinity ligand binding and demonstration of ligand contact sites in distinct receptor domains. 271:22885–22894
  45. de Vos AM, Ultsch M, Kossiakoff AA 1992 Human growth hormone and extracellular domain of its receptor: crystal structure of the complex. Science 255:306–312[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  46. Gilmore AP, Wood C, Ohanian V, Jackson P, Patel B, Rees DJ, Hynes RO, Critchley DR 1993 The cytoskeletal protein talin contains at least two distinct vinculin binding domains. J Cell Biol 122:337–347[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  47. Lenarcic B, Turk V 1999 Thyroglobulin type-1 domains in equistatin inhibit both papain-like cysteine proteinases and cathepsin D. J Biol Chem 272:563–566[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  48. Fowlkes JL, Thrailkill KM, George-Nascimento C, Rosenberg CK, Serra DM 1997 Heparin-binding, highly basic regions within the thyroglobulin type-I repeat of insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-binding proteins (IGFBPs) -3, -5, and -6 inhibit IGFBP-4 degradation. Endocrinology 138:2280–2285[Abstract/Free Full Text]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
S.-H. Oh, W.-Y. Kim, J.-H. Kim, M. N. Younes, A. K. El-Naggar, J. N. Myers, M. Kies, P. Cohen, F. Khuri, W. K. Hong, et al.
Identification of Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 as a Farnesyl Transferase Inhibitor SCH66336-Induced Negative Regulator of Angiogenesis in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Clin. Cancer Res., January 15, 2006; 12(2): 653 - 661.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Endocr. Rev.Home page
J. D. Veldhuis, J. N. Roemmich, E. J. Richmond, A. D. Rogol, J. C. Lovejoy, M. Sheffield-Moore, N. Mauras, and C. Y. Bowers
Endocrine Control of Body Composition in Infancy, Childhood, and Puberty
Endocr. Rev., February 1, 2005; 26(1): 114 - 146.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Biol. Chem.Home page
X. Yan, B. E. Forbes, K. A. McNeil, R. C. Baxter, and S. M. Firth
Role of N- and C-terminal Residues of Insulin-like Growth Factor (IGF)-binding Protein-3 in Regulating IGF Complex Formation and Receptor Activation
J. Biol. Chem., December 17, 2004; 279(51): 53232 - 53240.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Biol. Chem.Home page
S. S. Huang, F.-M. Tang, Y.-H. Huang, I-H. Liu, S.-C. Hsu, S.-T. Chen, and J. S. Huang
Cloning, Expression, Characterization, and Role in Autocrine Cell Growth of Cell Surface Retention Sequence Binding Protein-1
J. Biol. Chem., October 31, 2003; 278(44): 43855 - 43869.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
L. D. Payet, X.-H. Wang, R. C. Baxter, and S. M. Firth
Amino- and Carboxyl-Terminal Fragments of Insulin-Like Growth Factor (IGF) Binding Protein-3 Cooperate to Bind IGFs with High Affinity and Inhibit IGF Receptor Interactions
Endocrinology, July 1, 2003; 144(7): 2797 - 2806.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
J. A. Kricker, C. L. Towne, S. M. Firth, A. C. Herington, and Z. Upton
Structural and Functional Evidence for the Interaction of Insulin-Like Growth Factors (IGFs) and IGF Binding Proteins with Vitronectin
Endocrinology, July 1, 2003; 144(7): 2807 - 2815.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Endocr. Rev.Home page
S. M. Firth and R. C. Baxter
Cellular Actions of the Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Proteins
Endocr. Rev., December 1, 2002; 23(6): 824 - 854.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
P. Vorwerk, B. Hohmann, Y. Oh, R. G. Rosenfeld, and R. M. Shymko
Binding Properties of Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 (IGFBP-3), IGFBP-3 N- and C-Terminal Fragments, and Structurally Related Proteins mac25 and Connective Tissue Growth Factor Measured Using a Biosensor
Endocrinology, May 1, 2002; 143(5): 1677 - 1685.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
C. K. Buckway, E. M. Wilson, M. Ahlsen, P. Bang, Y. Oh, and R. G. Rosenfeld
Mutation of Three Critical Amino Acids of the N-Terminal Domain of IGF-Binding Protein-3 Essential for High Affinity IGF Binding
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., October 1, 2001; 86(10): 4943 - 4950.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow