Encyclopedia of Signaling Molecules

2018 Edition
| Editors: Sangdun Choi

Ephrin Receptor A2

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67199-4_101649

Synonyms

 ARCC2;  CTPA;  CTPP1;  CTRCT6;  ECK

Historical Background

Erythropoietin-producing human hepatocellular carcinoma receptors (EPH) have been discovered through a screening aimed at identifying novel kinases involved in cancer (Holland et al. 1997). They form the largest subfamily of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) and are among the oldest evolutionarily conserved receptor/ligand pairs (Pasquale 2008). EPH receptors and their ephrin (EFNs) ligands are expressed in all embryonic germ layers of vertebrates and mediate cell migration and positioning, boundary formation, and segmentation during important developmental processes such as gastrulation (Pasquale 2008). Axon guidance is one of the main functions of EPHs/EFNs; however, this system is nowadays regarded as a universal cell-to-cell communication pathway that allows cellular moving to a specific position and maintains cellular organization through chemotactic/chemorepulsive forces (Pasquale 2008; Genander 2012). Recent studies are also focusing on the role of EPHs/EFNs in the regulation of adult stem niche in various organs (Genander 2012; Perez White and Getsios 2014) as well as on their function in regulating specialized functions such as synaptic plasticity, memory formation, epithelial and vascular homeostasis and integrity, bone remodeling, insulin secretion, and inflammatory and immune response. EPHA2 is an active modulator of the cellular adhesion process and it appears to be closely connected with adhesion molecules like E-cadherin, mediating EPHA2 localization at cell-cell contact, or like claudin-4 that is phosphorylated by EPHA2 at the tight junctions, decreasing cell-cell adhesion and enhancing paracellular permeability (Tanaka et al. 2005). Interestingly, rare genetic variants of EPHA2 (on chromosome 1p36) have been linked with cataract occurrence in Caucasians. One of these variants, Arg721Gln increases basal kinase activity of EPHA2.

Structure and Activation

In humans, EPHs are classified in two groups according to their ability to bind EFN ligands of the A subclass anchored to the cell membrane through a glycosyl-phosphatidylinositol (GPI) linkage or of the B subclass that are transmembrane proteins with a short cytoplasmatic region. EPHA2 belongs to the A subclass, binding preferentially EFNA1 GPI-bound ligand. It has an N-terminal extracellular region composed of a ligand-binding domain (LBD) followed by a cysteine-rich domain (CRD) and two fibronectin-type III repeats (FNIII 1/2). The transmembrane domain (TMD) is followed by a juxtamembrane domain (JMD), a single tyrosine kinase domain (TKD), and a postsynaptic density-95 discs large zona occludens-1 (PDZ) binding domain at the C-teminus (Fig. 1).
Ephrin Receptor A2, Fig. 1

Structure ofEPHA2. EPHA2 receptor binds a GPI-bound ligand (EFNA1). The N-terminal extracellular region is composed of a ligand-binding domain (LBD), a cysteine-rich domain (CRD), and two fribronectin-type III repeats (FNIII 1/2). The transmembrane domain (TMD) is followed by a juxtamembrane domain (JMD), a single tyrosine kinase domain (TKD), and a PDZ-binding domain at the C-teminus

Like all the other RTKs, upon ligand binding, EPHA2 undergoes dimerization/oligomerization with conformational changes triggering the autophosphorylation of the receptor on specific tyrosine residues, whereas at the same time the phosphorylation of tyrosines located in the inhibitory juxtamembrane domain facilitates receptor activation and phosphorylation of cytoplasmic downstream signal proteins (Davis et al. 2009). EPHA2 contains also an autophosphorylated tyrosine residue within the activation loop; however, differently from other RTKs, phosphorylation of this residue is not essential for kinase activity (Pasquale 2008). Similarly to other RTKs, receptor-ligand binding induces conformational reorganization of EPHA2 LBD that facilitates the interaction with other EPHs, resulting in rapid oligomers as well as heterodimers formation, allowing joining of different dimer pairs into tetramers and formation of high-order cluster complexes. Interestingly, binding of different EPHs to EPHA2 is able to modulate signaling in the absence of EFN binding and to suppress EPH protumorigenic signaling. Examples are EPHB6 suppression of EPHA2 ligand-independent signaling in breast cancer cell or EPHA7-mediated inhibition of EPHA2 oncogenic signaling in lymphoma.

Cellular Signaling

Because EFNA1 ligand is bound to surface of neighboring cells, the interaction with EPHA2 elicits a bidirectional signaling. In ligand-expressing cells, the binding through the GPI anchor stimulates a “reverse signaling” involving juxtamembrane proteins such as Src or, in turn, interacting with other membrane-bound receptors such as RET or NTRK1 (Pasquale 2008).

In receptor-expressing cells, EFN binding elicits a “forward signaling” (Pasquale 2008) mediated by Rho-like small GTPases as well as by signal transducers typically activated from other RTKs such as RAS/MAPK and PI3K/AKT pathways. A striking difference with other RTKs is that in general EPHs use these mechanisms to inhibit rather than promote cell growth and to favor cell repulsion rather than cell attraction, and therefore the “ligand-dependent” EPH signaling has been recognized as a tumor suppression rather than tumor promotion mechanism, inhibiting cell migration and invasiveness as well as reducing tumor growth (Miao et al. 2000; Pasquale 2008). The cell repulsive effect of EPHA2 is mediated by an increased balance of RhoA activation versus Rac1/Cdc42 activation with increased formation of actin stress fibers, cell retraction, and inhibition of cell movement. In different conditions, however, EPHA2 can also promote Rac1 activation by activating Rac1 GEF such as Vav and inhibiting RhoA via p190RhoGAP (Wakayama et al. 2011) (Fig. 2).
Ephrin Receptor A2, Fig. 2

EPHA2 ligand-dependent signaling. The EFNA1-EPHA2 binding stimulates a bidirectional signaling. In ligand-expressing cells, there is a “reverse signaling” generally involving proteins of the Src family (like Fyn). In receptor-expressing cells, there is a “forward signaling” mediated by the small GTPAses, Rho and Rac, as well as by signal transducers of the RAS/MAPK and PI3K/AKT pathways. EPHA2 elicits a cell repulsive effect mediated by an increased balance of RhoA activation vs. Rac1/Cdc42 activation with increased formation of actin stress fibers, cell retraction, and inhibition of cell movement. In other models, EPHA2 phosphorylation promotes Rac1 activation by activating Rac1 GEF such as Vav and inhibiting RhoA via p190RhoGAP

Several evidences suggest that the EPHA2 ligand-dependent signaling is modulating the effect of other RTKs, such as FGFR, TRKB, and IGF1R (Miao et al. 2001; Pasquale 2008). This inhibitory function involves recruitment of p120RAS-GAP that promotes GTP hydrolysis and therefore switches off p21 RAS (Minami et al. 2011; Pasquale 2008). Similarly, EPHA2 forward signaling reduces AKT phosphorylation on both T308 and S473 sites (Miao et al. 2009). However, it is worth mentioning that RTKs activation leads to MAPK activity and EPHA2 overexpression, activating a positive regulatory feedback loop (Macrae et al. 2005). An interesting crosstalk between EPHA2/EFNA1 and VEGFR has been described in cancer, where high expression of EFNA1 in endothelial cells is recognized as chemoattractant in tissue angiogenesis and tumor neovasculature, supporting the first discovery of EFNA1 as a TNFα-induced gene in human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs). Of note, EFNA1 and EPHA2 expressions are upregulated by VEGFR and HIF-1α in hypoxic conditions, leading to EPHA2 phosphorylation and increased expression of VEGFR that subsequently activates distant endothelial cells (Beauchamp and Debinski 2012). This crosstalk suggests a role for EPHA2-EFNA1 in regulating tumor-stroma interaction and tumor progression. Similarly, EPHA2-EFNA1 binding is decreasing MET activation and inhibiting EGF-induced motility (Macrae et al. 2005). In conclusion, although a consistent number of studies have identified several molecular players in EPHA2 “ligand-dependent” signaling, the precise cellular effects are still far from being understood. Moreover, numerous evidences suggest the existence of a “ligand-independent” activation mechanism with a prominent role in tumor promotion, adding more complexity to the EPHA2-EFNA1 system.

Role of EPHA2 in Cancer

Considering the multiplicity and the versatility played in adult and embryonic cellular activities, it is not surprising that EPHs/EFNs play a key role in tumors (Pasquale 2008). As previously discussed, most of the reports point to a tumor-suppressive effect of the “ligand-dependent” EPH stimulation compared to an oncogenic effect of “ligand-independent” stimulation (Pasquale 2008). Accordingly, in several cancer types, it is often documented a reduced expression of the EFN ligands and at the same time an increased expression of the EPH receptors.

EPHA2 represents the family member most upregulated in human cancer, through a deregulation that most takes place at the transcriptional and posttranslational level. It is overexpressed in a variety of human malignancies, and it is often associated to increased tumor grade and poor prognosis in a number of malignancies such as breast, lung, prostate, skin, esophageal, gastric, and renal carcinoma, as well as in thyroid carcinomas (Amato et al. 2014). Despite its high-expression levels, tyrosine phosphorylation of EPHA2 is often downregulated in malignant cells compared to normal cells, and EFNA1 is frequently downregulated in tumor cells contributing to the loss of cell-cell contact among cancer cells (Pasquale 2008). The main phosphotyrosine involved in ligand-independent activation of EPHA2 has been identified as serine 897 (Ser897), mapping near the EPHA2 SAM domain. This phosphorylation has been reported to mediate the switch from the antioncogenic to the prooncogenic function of EPHA2. Miao and coworkers recently demonstrated that phosphorylation of EPHA2 on Ser897 is mediated by AKT and it is crucial for glioma and prostate cancer cell invasiveness and stem cell maintenance. S897A mutation abolished the ligand-independent promotion of cell motility. In contrast, EFNA1 stimulation of EPHA2 blunted AKT and caused EPHA2 dephosphorylation on Ser897 (Miao et al. 2009). Moreover, overexpression of EPHA2 in glioblastoma cell lines promoted cell invasion. These effects were ligand independent and required the AKT-mediated phosphorylation on Ser897. Finally, overexpression of EPHA2 promoted stem cell properties in a kinase-independent manner (Miao et al. 2015a).

More recently, Zhou and coworkers have reported that inflammatory cytokines are able to promote phosphorylation of EPHA2 at Ser897 and that this phosphorylation is mediated by RSK kinase rather than AKT. Accordingly, Ser897-phosphorylated EPHA2 colocalizes with phosphorylated active form of RSK in various human tumor specimens, and this double positivity was related to poor survival in lung cancer patients and increased breast cancer cells metastatic properties (Zhou et al. 2015) (Fig. 3). Finally, EPHA2 colocalizes and interacts at the plasma membrane of cancer cells with EGFR, functions as a transcriptional target of EGF-EGFR, and has a ligand-independent effect on EGF-expressing cancer cell motility (Larsen et al. 2010). EPHA2 has been described to interact also with ERBB2, forming an EPHA2-RTK protein complex and enhancing activation of RAS/MAPK and Rho pathways (Brantley-Sieders et al. 2008).
Ephrin Receptor A2, Fig. 3

EPHA2 signaling in cancer. Differently from the ligand-dependent activation of EPHA2 that has been described to have an antioncogenic effect, the ligand-independent activation of the receptor through the AKT- and RSK-mediated phosphorylation of Ser897 has been described to be involved in increased invasiveness and metastatic properties of cancer cells

EPHA2 Therapeutic Targeting

EPHA2 is rarely mutated but it is frequently overexpressed in carcinomas of the breast, lung, and several other cancer types. In non-small cell lung carcinomas (NSCLC), EPHA2 is associated to poor outcome and its genetic disruption in KRAS-induced NSCLC impairs tumor growth. In vitro EPHA2 knockdown reduces growth and survival of NSCLC cell lines and EPHA2 ATP-competitive kinase inhibitor ALW-II-41-27 reduces tumorigenesis in a NSCLC xenograft model (Amato et al. 2014). More recently, EPHA2 inhibition by ALW-II-41-27 has been demonstrated to overcome resistance of NSCLC cell lines to the EGFR TKIs erlotinib or AZD9291 (Amato et al. 2016). In mammary carcinomas, EPHA2 has been reported to be overexpressed in aggressive subtypes featuring poor prognosis. Moreover, EPHA2 ablation reduced initiation and metastatic progression of mammary carcinomas in MMTV-ERBB2 transgenic mice. In melanomas, EPHA2 was recently reported to be involved in resistance and adaptation to BRAF/MEK kinase inhibitors. Chronic exposure to BRAF inhibitors caused upregulation of EPHA2 phosphorylated on Ser897, accompanied by increased cell invasion and reduced expression of EFNA1 ligand. Similarly, in melanoma cell lines that developed resistance to BRAF chemical inhibition as well as in tumor specimens from patients who relapsed upon BRAF inhibitor treatment, EPHA2 was found overexpressed and hyperphosphorylated on Ser897 and treatment with ALW-II-41-27 EPHA2 TKI was able to suppress BRAF inhibitor-resistant melanoma cells (Miao et al. 2015b). Interestingly, knockout mice showed that EPHA2 was dispensable for normal hematopoiesis as well as for acute myeloid leukemias initiated by the MLL-AF9 oncogene, while radiolabeled anti-EPHA2 monoclonal antibodies blocked leukemogenesis in experimental mice.

According to these evidences, EPHA2 has been considered as a promising molecular target for cancer treatment and various tools are being explored to hit EPHA2 in different cancer models, including EPHA2 monoclonal antibody, polyspecific antibodies designed to target different EPH simultaneously, soluble or endotoxin-conjugated EFNA1, small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (such as ALW-II-41-27), gold- or polyethylene glycol (PEG)-coated EFNA1 nanoshells, human adenoviruses engineered with EFA1 extracellular domain or with EFNA1 mimetic homing peptide (YSAYPDSVPMMSK named YSA), and functionalized YSA-nanocarriers for drug delivery (www.clinicaltrials.gov). Finally, some studies have tested the combination of EPHA2-targeting therapies with chemotherapeutics or other targeted therapies, such as combination of EPHA2-antibody and paclitaxel in ovarian tumors, EPHA2 siRNA with FAK or Src siRNAs and EPHA2 antibody with tamoxifen, EPHA2 inhibitors, and gemcitabine in pancreatic cancer (Amato et al. 2016).

Summary

EPHA2/EFNA1 system acts as a main player in several physiological cellular processes such as cell-cell contact, cellular adhesion, and connection to extracellular matrix, and therefore these molecules have been investigated in different pathological phenomena as well as in cancer. Among the different EPHs, EPHA2 is the most overexpressed in human cancers, although the precise mechanism of action has not been clarified yet. Many evidences point to an antioncogenic effect of the ligand-dependent EPHA2 activation and to a prooncogenic function of the ligand-independent receptor activation, and therefore several blocking strategies are being tested in different cancer models to evaluate their therapeutic application.

References

  1. Amato KR, Wang S, Hastings AK, Youngblood VM, Santapuram PR, Chen H, Cates JM, Colvin DC, Ye F, Brantley-Sieders DM, Cook RS, Tan L, Gray NS, Chen J. Genetic and pharmacologic inhibition of EPHA2 promotes apoptosis in NSCLC. J Clin Invest. 2014;124:2037–49.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amato KR, Wang S, Tan L, Hastings AK, Song W, Lovly CM, Meador CB, Ye F, Lu P, Balko JM, Colvin DC, Cates JM, Pao W, Gray NS, Chen J. EPHA2 blockade overcomes acquired resistance to EGFR kinase inhibitors in lung cancer. Cancer Res. 2016;76:305–18.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beauchamp A, Debinski W. Ephs and ephrins in cancer: ephrin-A1 signalling. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2012;23:109–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brantley-Sieders DM, Zhuang G, Hicks D, Fang WB, Hwang Y, Cates JM, Coffman K, Jackson D, Bruckheimer E, Muraoka-Cook RS, Chen J. The receptor tyrosine kinase EphA2 promotes mammary adenocarcinoma tumorigenesis and metastatic progression in mice by amplifying ErbB2 signaling. J Clin Invest. 2008;118:64–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davis TL, Walker JR, Allali-Hassani A, Parker SA, Turk BE, Dhe-Paganon S. Structural recognition of an optimized substrate for the ephrin family of receptor tyrosine kinases. FEBS J. 2009;276:4395–404.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Genander M. Eph and ephrins in epithelial stem cell niches and cancer. Cell Adhes Migr. 2012;6:126–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Holland SJ, Gale NW, Gish GD, Roth RA, Songyang Z, Cantley LC, Henkemeyer M, Yancopoulos GD, Pawson T. Juxtamembrane tyrosine residues couple the Eph family receptor EphB2/Nuk to specific SH2 domain proteins in neuronal cells. EMBO J. 1997;16:3877–88.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Larsen AB, Stockhausen MT, Poulsen HS. Cell adhesion and EGFR activation regulate EphA2 expression in cancer. Cell Signal. 2010;22:636–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Macrae M, Neve RM, Rodriguez-Viciana P, Haqq C, Yeh J, Chen C, Gray JW, McCormick F. A conditional feedback loop regulates Ras activity through EphA2. Cancer Cell. 2005;8:111–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Miao H, Burnett E, Kinch M, Simon E, Wang B. Activation of EphA2 kinase suppresses integrin function and causes focal-adhesion-kinase dephosphorylation. Nat Cell Biol. 2000;2:62–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Miao H, Wei BR, Peehl DM, Li Q, Alexandrou T, Schelling JR, Rhim JS, Sedor JR, Burnett E, Wang B. Activation of EphA receptor tyrosine kinase inhibits the Ras/MAPK pathway. Nat Cell Biol. 2001;3:527–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Miao H, Li D, Mukherjee A, Guo H, Cutter J, Basilon JP, Sedor J, Wu J, Danielpour D, Sloan AE, Cohen ML, Wang B. EphA2 mediates ligand-dependent inihibition and ligand-indipendent promotion of cell-migration and invasion via reciprocal regulatory loop with Akt. Cancer Cell. 2009;16:9–20.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Miao H, Gale NW, Guo H, Qian J, Petty A, Kaspar J, Murphy AJ, Valenzuela DM, Yancopoulos G, Hambardzumyan D, Lathia JD, Rich JN, Lee J, Wang B. EphA2 promotes infiltrative invasion of glioma stem cells in vivo through cross-talk with Akt and regulates stem cell properties. Oncogene. 2015a;34:558–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Miao B, Ji Z, Tan L, Taylor M, Zhang J, Choi HG, Frederick DT, Kumar R, Wargo JA, Flaherty KT, Gray NS, Tsao H. EPHA2 is a mediator of vemurafenib resistance and a novel therapeutic target in melanoma. Cancer Discov. 2015b;5:274–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Minami M, Koyama T, Wakayama Y, Fukuhara S, Mochizuki N. EphrinA/EphA signal facilitates insulin-like growth factor-I-induced myogenic differentiation through suppression of the Ras/extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 cascade in myoblast cell lines. Mol Biol Cell. 2011;22:3508–19.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pasquale EB. Eph-ephrin bidirectional signaling in physiology and disease. Cell. 2008;133:38–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Perez White BE, Getsios S. Eph receptor and ephrin function in breast, gut, and skin epithelia. Cell Adhes Migr. 2014;8:327–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tanaka M, Kamata R, Sakai R. EphA2 phosphorylates the cytoplasmic tail of Claudin-4 and mediates paracellular permeability. J Biol Chem. 2005;280:42375–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Wakayama Y, Miura K, Sabe H, Mochizuki N. EphrinA1-EphA2 signal induces compaction and polarization of Madin-Darby canine kidney cells by inactivating Ephrin through negative regulation of RhoA. J Biol Chem. 2011;286:44243–53.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zhou Y, Yamada N, Tanaka T, Hori T, Yokoyama S, Hayakawa Y, Yano S, Fukuoka J, Koizumi K, Saiki I, Sakurai H. Crucial roles of RSK in cell motility by catalysing serine phosphorylation of EphA2. Nat Commun. 2015;6:7679.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Molecular Medicine and Medical BiotechnologiesUniversity of Naples “Federico II”NaplesItaly
  2. 2.Institute of Experimental Endocrinology and Oncology (IEOS)CNRNaplesItaly