Chemokine/GPCR Signaling-Mediated EMT in Cancer Metastasis

Tian, Xutengyue; Wang, Jiayi; Jiang, Lanxin; Jiang, Yuchen; Xu, Juan; Feng, Xiaodong

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2208176

Journal of Oncology

On this page

Abstract Introduction Conclusion Conflicts of Interest Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Special Issue

Clinical and Basic Progress on Head and Neck Cancer

View this Special Issue

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 | Article ID 2208176 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2208176

Chemokine/GPCR Signaling-Mediated EMT in Cancer Metastasis

Xutengyue Tian,¹Jiayi Wang,¹Lanxin Jiang,¹Yuchen Jiang,¹Juan Xu,²and Xiaodong Feng¹

Academic Editor: Zhi-En Feng

Received25 Jun 2022

Revised08 Aug 2022

Accepted23 Aug 2022

Published11 Oct 2022

Abstract

Metastasis, the chief cause of cancer-related deaths, is associated with epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT). In the tumor microenvironment, EMT can be triggered by chemokine/G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling, which is closely associated with tumor progression. However, the functional links between chemokine/GPCR signaling-mediated EMT and metastasis remain unclear. Herein, we summarized the mechanisms of chemokine/GPCR signaling-mediated EMT with an insight into facilitating metastasis and clarified the role of chemokine in the local invasion, intravasation, circulation, extravasation, and colonization, respectively. Moreover, several potential pathways that might contribute to EMT based on the latest studies on GPCR signaling were proposed, including signaling mediated by G protein, β-arrestin, intracellular, dimerization activation, and transactivation. However, there is still limited evidence to support the EMT programme functional contribution to metastasis, which keeps a key question still open whether we should target EMT programme of cancer cells. Answers to that question might help develop an anticancer strategy or guide new directions for anticancer metastasis therapy.

1. Introduction

Chemokines are a group of small (8∼14 kDa) structurally related molecules that participate mainly in leukocyte trafficking via GPCR signaling. Approximately 48 ligands are found to bind to 19 different chemokine receptors nowadays[1]. And most chemokine receptors are Gαi-coupled GPCRs regulating directed cell migration, adhesion, and cell-cell interactions. In the tumor microenvironment, chemokines are major drivers of tumor progression, angiogenesis, metastasis, and even EMT in multiple cancers.

EMT was first proposed by Elizabeth Hay in the field of development, where cells undergoing EMT remodel their cytoskeletons, gain front-back polarity, and abandon tight junctions [2]. Interestingly, in neoplasms, a complete-EMT (c-EMT) is rare; instead, it is often “hijacked” partly by malignant cells, termed the partial-EMT (p-EMT). Those programmes were recognized as important in the context of cancer, owing to their potential in conferring malignant cells with motility, stemness, and invasiveness, which allows malignant cells to find a new place to colonize [3].

Metastasis is the chief cause of cancer-related death (about 90% [4]). However, metastatic dissemination is not efficient; once cancer cells leave their favorable surroundings, they are exposed to various threats such as shear stress, which may lead to death [5]. Only a few cancer cells succeed in forming metastases, and they must complete metastatic processes, including local invasion, intravasation, transportation through circulation, extravasation, and colonization. They have the traits to exploit the microenvironment, transform themselves for adaptation, survive, and form distant metastases [6, 7]. Currently, one of the key phenotypes discovered in cancer cells throughout metastatic dissemination is the mesenchymal phenotype, regarded as a consequence of EMT [8]. However, whether chemokine/GPCR mediates metastasis through EMT programmes or should we focus on targeting EMT programmes for anticancer metastasis therapies development remains unclear.

2. EMT and Metastasis in Brief

EMT is a cellular programme in which epithelial cells acquire mesenchymal phenotypes with a loss of epithelial phenotypes [2]. This programme is known to be associated with tumor initiation, invasion, migration, stemness, proliferation, and chemoresistance and has received extraordinary attention for EMT-associated protein markers for their clinical significance in evaluating the malignancy of cancer. In the tumor microenvironment, cancer cells tend to undergo a partial-EMT (p-EMT) programme instead of a complete-EMT (c-EMT) programme [3]. Unlike the c-EMT programme, the p-EMT programme is used to describe cancer cells in an epithelial-mesenchymal intermediate state, manifesting as simultaneously expressing both epithelial and mesenchymal markers or simply loss of epithelial markers with no change in mesenchymal markers [9]. To date, the EMT programme is believed to be triggered by the stroma in the malignant tissue, which is mainly composed of carcinoma-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs), T lymphocytes, and myeloid-derived suppressor cells [10]. Together, they employ paracrine or direct contacts to induce EMT in carcinoma cells, which transduce signaling ending up at EMT-TFs (Snail, Slug, Twist1/2, and Zeb1/2) [10].

EMT programmes have been reported to be associated with multiple steps. In primary tumor, EMT cells are reported to localize at the leading edge of the tumor, which is in proximity to stroma [11, 12], exhibiting invasive features that secrete matrix metalloproteases (MMPs) and form invadopodia [13, 14] to remodel ECM. Twist has been reported specifically enhanced in intravasation [14, 15]. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have been reported to have mesenchymal characteristics and express EMT regulators, such as components of the TGF-β pathway and FOXC1 [16]. Notably, the source of TGF-β in circulation is likely to be platelets that attach to CTCs and help these cells survive in circulation [16, 17]. Attachment of cancer cells to endothelial cells is the first step in extravasation.And N-cadherin, a marker of mesenchymal cells, expressed both by endothelial and some cancer cells, is important for attachment and extravasation [18]. Interestingly, even the relationship between EMT and metastasis was carefully reviewed by Mittal [11], and most studies successfully established the association of them, but still, very limited concrete experimental evidence has proven the EMT programme a potent regulator of cancer cell dissociation from the primary tumor and crossing the endothelial barrier.

Clinically, the EMT-TFs have been found critical prognostic value in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) [19]. Overexpression of Twist1, Snail1, Snail2, and ZEB1 indicated a poor overall survival (OS) of HNSCC [19]. And EMT status of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) is also associated with HNSCC recurrence [20]. Single-cell transcriptomic analysis revealed that head and neck squamous cells mainly undergo the p-EMT programme instead of the c-EMT programme. Notably, among the classical EMT-TFs, only Snail2 was detected, hinting at a post-transcriptional regulation [12]. Immunohistochemistry stained these p-EMT cancer cells at the leading edge of the tumor, closely interacting with CAFs [12]. And, flow cytometry has confirmed the significance abundance of CAFs in human HNSCC [21]. These studies indicated the possible critical role of CAFs in mediating EMT in HNSCC. However, the influence of TAMs cannot be excluded even though there are limited studies.

3. Chemokine-Mediated EMT and Associated Metastasis

The chemokine superfamily comprises a large number of ligands and receptors. In further studies, the confusing ligand-receptor relationships were gradually unveiled and categorized into two subgroups: “inflammatory” and “homeostatic”. A plethora of literature has shown that chemokines from both subgroups are able to induce EMT (see Table 1) and promote metastasis. In addition to mediating EMT, chemokines also contribute to directed migration and transendothelial migration of cancer cells and recruitment of non-cancer cells in the whole dissemination process (Figure 1). CXCL12-CXCR4 axis has been well studied in cancer, with a significant effect on mediating EMT in a variety of cancers, such as gastric cancer, breast cancer, head and neck cancer, and lung cancer (see Table 1). In the context of metastasis, CXCL12 as a typical homeostatic chemokine regulates directional metastasis, which might be a result of its function in mediating EMT, directing cell migration. Signaling through CXCL12-CXCR4 could mediate intracellular actin polymerization and induce typical pseudopodia formation after 20 minutes of stimulation, suggesting an active mesenchymal transition [83]. MCF-7 cells stably expressing SDF-1 (CXCL12) observed significant downregulation of E-cadherin and enhanced expression of Slug, fibronectin, and vimentin through the NF-κB pathway [84]. In a 2D environment, MCF-7 expressing constitutively active CXCR4 exhibited upregulation of ZEB1 and cadherin 11, loss of E-cadherin, and p120 isoform switching [32]. Interestingly, MCF-7 CXCR4 WT cells displayed epithelial characteristics under 2D condition but mesenchymal characteristics under 3D culture. This structural discrepancy between 3D and 2D cultures indicates that confinement may be critical for regulating EMT [32]. CXCL12 is mostly recognized to be secreted by CAF in a paracrine way [85]. Accordingly, cancer cells upregulate the expression of CXCR4 with increased vimentin and decreased E-cadherin upon sensing CAF-produced CXCL12 in a coculture system [86]. These CXCR4-positive cells thus migrate directionally along the CXCL12 gradient toward their destination, such as blood vessels [85, 87]. Additionally, CXCR4-positive tumor cells might exploit interstitial fluid to form autologous gradients that direct them to blood vessels [88, 89]. The role of CXCL12 in effective vascular barrier crossing and distal colonization has been extensively studied. For example, CXCL12 can directly promote the adhesion of cancer cells to endothelial cells or induce morphological changes via GTPase-mediated signaling [90, 91]. After extravasation to metastasized tissues, the main problem is how to adapt and thrive in new microenvironments. Zhang et al. proposed a view that stromal signals resembling those of a distant organ select for cancer cells that are primed for metastasis in that organ. For example, triple-negative breast tumor cells that tend to thrive on the CAFs-derived CXCL12 and IGF are primed for metastasis in the CXCL12-rich microenvironment [92]. CCL2-CCR2 axis not only acts on cancer cells to mediate EMT and transendothelial migration but also recruits TAMs to assist tumor progression and metastasis. CCL2 is an inflammatory chemokine that attracts monocytes, natural killer cells, and memory T cells to mediate multiple inflammatory processes. In neoplasms, CCL2 is well recognized to have a promalignant effect with TAMs. A recent study indicates that CCL2 attracts circulating monocytes into the tumor and triggers their acquisition of a TAM phenotype [93]. In turn, the TAMs display a tumor-promoting effect in the tumor microenvironment. A recent study indicated that ZEB1 expression is required for the activation of macrophages toward a protumor TAM phenotype, which enhances the expression of CCR2 and MMP9. Through MMP9, TAMs activate CCL2 expression in cancer cells. Together they form a CCR2-MMP9-CCL2 positive loop that drives tumor progression and are probably critical in triggering the EMT programme [94]. In addition to cancer cells, CCL2 is also secreted by TAMs. In colorectal cancer, TAMs secrete CCL2 via Wnt5a/CaMKII/ERK/CCL2 axis, and those CCL2 molecules act on cancer cells and drive tumor progression [95]. CCL2-CCR2 axis has been reported to mediate EMT in various cancers, including hepatocellular, gastric, prostate, breast, head, and neck cancer (Table 1). Like CXCL12, most researchers incubated carcinoma cells, which have been starved overnight, with CCL2 for about 48 h, and witnessed alterations in cell morphology and EMT markers. For example, in breast cancer, MCF-7 incubated with CCL2 (50 ng/ml) observed spindle morphology and increased Snail, E-cadherin, and vimentin expression. The MEK1/2 and GSK-3 beta could reverse the CCL2-induced EMT phenotype, indicating that MAPK/GSK-3-beta/Snail signaling is involved in EMT regulation [60]. Interestingly, no apparent changes in Snail mRNA levels were shown during CCL2 treatment. This might be a result of post-transcriptional regulation of CCL2. Study about CCL2 in metastatic dissemination is limited. Current studies have reported CCL2 attracting monocytes to the primary tumor that facilitate migration. These monocytes subsequently differentiate into migratory TAMs that carry cancer cells along the CXCL12 gradient secreted by perivascular fibroblasts toward blood vessels [96]. In further process, the CCL2 secreted by cancer cells can also interact with CCR2 on endothelial cells to facilitate the transendothelial process [6]. CCL19/CCL21-CCR7 axis also plays a vital role in EMT (see Table 1) and lymphatic metastasis. CCL19 and CCL21, two known ligands of CCR7, display nonoverlapping roles in the homing of the immune system, including trafficking of T cells and dendritic cells [97]. For example, CCL19 functions in the thymic emigration of mature T cells from fetal thymic organ cultures, but not CCL21 [98]. Therefore, even if they share the same receptor, their roles in EMT or tumor progression might be slightly different. Cancer cells incubated with CCL19 (50 ng/ml) or CCL21 (100 ng/ml) showed increased expression of N-cadherin and vimentin and decreased expression of E-cadherin. In this process, adverse signaling pathways were involved such as PI3K/Akt, JAK/STAT, and MAPK pathways. The specific origin of CCL19 and CCL21 in the tumor microenvironment remains unclear. Studies have found CCL21 expression in the high endothelial venules of lymph nodes, which connects it with lymphatic metastasis. For now, several studies have found a correlation between CCR7 expression and lymph node metastasis [99, 100]. Studies on the mechanism of which CCL19/CCL21 attracts cancer cells toward lymph nodes are unclear. A study proposed that CCL21/CCL19-CCR7 axis mediated the directional migration of cancer cells to lymphatics with an autocrine fashion. Specifically, CCL21/CCL19 secreted by tumor cells with membrane CCR7 generates an autologous gradient, along which tumor cells migrate to lymphatics [89]. Additionally, CCL21 secreted by lymphatic can also guide lymphatic metastasis [101, 102]. The deregulation of chemokines has been observed in HNSCC via bioinformatics analysis of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Chemokines such as CXCL1, CXCL8, CXCL13, CCL3, and CCL5 are reported upregulation in mRNA levels [103]. Interestingly, the well-studied chemokines such as CXCL12, CCL2, and CCL7 were not obviously deregulated in mRNA levels, indicating a post-transcriptional modification. CXCL12 is well studied in HNSCC and has prognostic value. Patients with higher expression of CXCL12/CXCR4 have higher risk of regional recurrence [104]. CXCL12 secreted by CAFs or malignant cells can activate the EMT programme via the PI3K-Akt pathway (Table 1) and promote invasion via MAPK-AP1 and NF-κb pathways [105, 106]. CCL2 can be secreted by CAFs and malignant cells to assist tumor progression, EMT, and migration [107]. CCL2-CCR4 axis, not the CCL2-CCR2 axis, is reported to facilitate cell migration via Vav guanine nucleotide exchange factor 2 (Vav2) Rac family small GTPase1 (Rac1) complex-myosin light chain (MLC) signaling [108]. However, we still have few clues on how CCL2 contributes to EMT in HNSCC. CCR7 in HNSCC is associated with lymph node metastasis [109]. CCL19-CCR7 axis facilitates migration, invasion, and adhesion with the involvement of PI3K-cdc42, MMP9, RhoA/ROCK, and β-1 integrin [110–113], while JAK-STATs and MAPK pathways have been reported correlated with EMT activation (Table 1).

Figure 1

Interaction between cancer cells and non-cancer cells via chemokine. CXCL12 is secreted by CAFs, malignant cells, and endothelial cells. Malignant cells migrate along CXCL12 gradient to blood vessels with the help of CAFs or independently. CCL2 is secreted by malignant cells to recruit TAMs. They migrate toward blood vessels with the help of TAMs. CCL21 gradient directs malignant cells to lymphatic vessels via autocrine way. CAFs, carcinoma-associated fibroblasts and TAMs, tumor-associated macrophages.

Above all, these studies reflect the complexity of chemokine/GPCR-mediated EMT-associated metastatic dissemination of cancer cells, in which cancer cells, non-cancer cells, cytokines, and the ECM should be considered. Further studies are required to clarify how these factors work together to promote metastasis. Only a few studies demonstrated morphological changes among cells under microscopes, perhaps because the p-EMT programme rather than the c-EMT programme is more common in cancer.

4. Signaling Pathways Inducing EMT by Chemokines

EMT can be induced by several intracellular signaling pathways in neoplastic epithelial cells when they receive chemokine/GPCR signaling from the tumor microenvironment. Regarding to the signaling pathways that are triggered by chemokines, we need to refer to literature about GPCRs to deduce them. To date, as new biological techniques and research pop out, the modes of GPCR become a more complex picture [114]. Wang et al. proposed new insights into modes of GPCR activation, including biased, intracellular, dimerization, transactivation, and biphasic activation. These patterns are applicable in explaining the biological effects of chemokines [114]. Herein, we refer to these modes; categorize the signaling of chemokine receptors into G protein, β-arrestin, intracellular, dimerization transactivation, and MAPK signaling; and summarize each function in mediating EMT (Figure 2).

Figure 2

Signaling pathways to EMT initiated by chemokine receptors. Binding chemokines with their cognate receptors triggers G-protein signaling and JAK/STAT signaling at the very beginning if receptors are dimerized. Subsequently, β-arrestins bind to chemokine receptors, resulting in Gαi-β-arrestin complexes and stimulation of Gαi and Erk signaling. Most chemokine receptors lose their connection with β-arrestins after they are dragged into the cytoplasm and simply recycle back to the plasma membrane. During transactivation, chemokine receptors may stimulate receptor tyrosine kinases by elevating the expression of their ligands in the cytoplasm, such as TGF-β, EGF, and IGF.

4.1. G-Protein Signaling

Most chemokine receptors have been identified to be Gαi-dependent, since the first chemokine CXCL8 was found to mediate signaling via Gαi subunit [115, 116]. Gαi protein, a direct inhibitor of ACs, which subsequently suppresses cAMP and alters PKA and EPAC activation, has been shown to possess the ability to mediate the neoplastic transformation of normal cells when constitutively activated. In contrast, the Gαs protein, a direct stimulator of ACs, has a tumor-suppressive role [117]. For example, conditional deletion of Gαs results in the formation of basal-cell carcinoma by releasing PKA-mediated inhibition of sonic hedgehog (SHH) and YAP signaling pathways [118]. Moreover, Pattabiraman et al. uncovered a role of PKA in mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition and loss of tumor-initiating ability [119]. Notably, they used immortalized human mammary epithelial cells to model tumor-initiating cells in basal-like breast cancers rather than cancer cells [119]. This might explain why the in vitro model exhibited distinct c-EMT. These studies imply that Gαi protein, which has an opposite effect to the Gαs protein might be critical in maintaining the balance of epithelial and mesenchymal states. So far, few studies have directly elucidated the correlation between Gαi protein and the EMT programme.

Gβγ subunits, once thought to be only negative regulators of Gα-dependent signaling, are now recognized to be more critical in GPCR signaling (reviewed in [120]), as well as chemokine receptors, because of their indispensability in chemotaxis [121]. In the early event, Gβγ dimmers are required by many downstream effectors. Phospholipase Cβ (PLCβ) is an effector directly activated by Gβγ subunits. PLCβ activation leads to the production of inositol-1,4,5-trisphosphate (Ins (1,4,5) P3) and diacylglycerol (DAG), which regulate the release of intracellular calcium (Ca2+) and activation of protein kinase C (PKC). The role of calcium flux in EMT was firstly described by Davis et al. EGF-mediated EMT was calcium-signal-dependent, partially owing to the effect of TRPM7 [122]. Reminiscent of the effect of Gαq-coupled GPCRs, which can directly stimulate PLCβ and induce calcium flux, Norgard et al. provided concrete evidence that Gαq-coupled GPCRs mobilize calcium through Ca²⁺-calmodulin-Camk2b axis to assist cells in achieving a p-EMT state [123]. Interestingly, E-cadherin expression was not found to be downregulated in this study. Instead, it was translocated from the cell membrane to the cytoplasm [123]. However, the role of calcium signaling by Gβγ subunits in mediating EMT remains to be explored. PI3Kγ, a critical regulator of survival signaling, is also a direct effector of Gβγ subunits [120]. Several studies have reported the participation of PI3K downstream chemokine receptors in mediating EMT. The CXCL12/CXCR4 axis mediates EMT via activation of PI3K-Akt/PKB in human sacral chondrosarcoma, breast cancer, and oral carcinoma cells [32, 50, 52]. Commonly, the PI3K-Akt signaling pathway works together with the MEK-MAPK pathway to induce EMT, and inhibition of either can only partially reverse the transition. In the context of CCR7, its ligand CCL19 was reported to upregulate Snail through MAPK and PI3K in gastric cancer, whereas CCL21 was reported to upregulate Slug through the same pathway in human chondrosarcoma [72, 78]. These studies highlighted Gβγ subunits regulating MAPK and PI3K mediated EMT by chemokine receptor stimulation, and we will further discuss the role of MAPK signaling in the EMT programme in the latter part of this review.

4.2. β-Arrestin Signaling

Current studies on GPCRs indicate that β-arrestins not only can induce GPCRs internalization and desensitization but also can activate a novel pathway that is distinct from pathways induced by G proteins [124]. From the traditional point of view, most chemokine receptors hold the characteristic of inducing short and transient signals. They tend to rapidly terminate their signals and refresh themselves with the help of regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins, G-protein-coupled receptor serine/threonine kinases (GRKs), and β-arrestins [125, 126]. When chemokine receptors are internalized, they either become ubiquitinated or simply recycled to the membrane for resensitization. This hallmark of chemokine receptors has biological significance in sensing direction and chemotaxis [127, 128]. The internalization and desensitization processes are mainly regulated by GRKs and β-arrestins. Chemokine receptors phosphorylated by GRKs at multiple sites on the cytoplasmic COOH-terminus [126, 129] promote their binding affinity to β-arrestins. To date, β-arrestins have been found to serve as scaffold proteins that recruit several signaling molecules and emit signals parallel to G-protein-dependent signals [130]. For example, β-arrestins potently activate the MAPK kinase pathway by forming a CXCR4-β-arrestin complex that interacts with Raf [131]. Moreover, β-arrestin signaling may switch the coupling of GPCRs from canonical Gα proteins to other Gα proteins. For example, PKA-phosphorylatedβ2-adrenergic receptor switches Gαs to Gαi [132]. This switch of coupling G proteins can be well explained by recent research conducted by Smith et al. [133]. They discovered Gαi:β-arrestin signaling complexes that formed downstream not only Gαi-coupled GPCRs but also Gαs- or Gαq-coupled GPCRs at the plasma membrane. Moreover, the complexes are capable of forming scaffolds with ERK and promoting PTX-sensitive cell migration, which can also explain why Gαi activation is necessary but probably not sufficient for chemotaxis [121, 134]. However, whether β-arrestin contributes to GPCR signaling remains controversial. O’Hayre et al. provided evidence that the loss of β-arrestins enhanced the potency and efficacy of isoproterenol- and epinephrine-induced ERK phosphorylation, suggesting that β-arrestins are not required for MAPK activation [135]. Notably, silencing β-arrestin-1 can reverse the EMT process initiated by the endothelin A receptor of ovarian cancer cells, while elevated β-arrestin-1 expression can promote EMT in prostate cancer cells via the Wnt/β-catenin pathway [136, 137]. β-Arrestin-1 has also been reported necessary in nicotine-induced EMT and protease-activated receptor 2 (PAR2) induced migration in lung cancer cells, with the involvement of Src kinase activity and MAPK signaling [138–140]. However, it still remains unclear whether or how β-arrestin downstream chemokine receptors play a role in the EMT programme. Since, even MAPK signaling, which is associated with various pathways, has been widely reported to be involved in EMT regulation. Further studies are required to identify novel mechanisms of dissection and phenotypic conformations.

4.3. Intracellular Signaling

Accumulated evidence indicates that some GPCRs can be activated not only on the cell surface but also inside the cell and trigger specific signals, suggesting that GPCR activation may be a result of intracellular events [114]. This phenomenon can be explained in two ways. GPCRs located in the cytoplasm can be activated intracellularly. And GPCRs located at the cell surface provide sustained signals after internalization. Chemokine receptors are primarily localized and activated at the cell surface. More importantly, they belong to the class A GPCRs, a group of GPCRs that form unstable endocytic complexes with β-arrestins. Chemokine receptors and β-arrestins disassociate rapidly after internalization and recycle back to the cell surface with MAPK activated in this transient process [141]. Together with G-protein signaling, we can conclude that signals induced by chemokine receptors from activation to resensitization are rapid and transient. Typically, the induction of EMT requires long-term cultivation (for days or weeks) and sustained signaling. This may explain why tyrosine kinase receptors are more popular at inducing EMT, since tyrosine kinase receptors seldom internalize and desensitize, thus providing stable signals to cells. Recent findings suggest that some GPCRs can (mostly class B GPCRs) mediate sustained Gα signaling after internalization, such as vasopressin type 2 receptor (V2R) [142], parathyroid hormone receptor type 1 (PTHR) [143], TSH receptors (TSHRs) [144], and Sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) receptors [145]. One explanation for this sustained Gα signaling is the recent discovery of an internalized GPCR-G protein:β-arrestin megaplex [146]. This megaplex architecture allows GPCRs to promote GDP-GTP exchange and Gα activation, resulting in prolonged G protein signaling [146]. Few studies have reported sustained G protein signaling in chemokine receptors. Here, we use S1P receptors, a group of GPCRs that resemble chemokine receptors, as a reference. They belong to class A GPCRs, coupled to Gαi protein, and regulate essential processes, such as adaptive immune cell trafficking, vascular development, and homeostasis [147]. However, as members of class A GPCRs, they demonstrate persistent signaling after the activation of FTY720P, a “functional antagonist,” by promoting the efficient internalization of S1P1 receptors. In conclusion, certain ligands of chemokine receptors might trigger long-lasting Gαi signaling and bring massive influence on epithelial versus mesenchymal balance in cancer cells.

4.4. Dimerization Signaling

GPCRs were originally considered monomers. To date, much evidence has shown that these receptors exist as homodimers or heterodimers [148]. Surprisingly, these dimers can activate tyrosine kinase signaling pathways [149]. Using a sensitive bioluminescence resonance energy transfer system (BRET), Percherancier et al. found that CXCR4 exists as constitutive homo- and heterodimers [150]. Chemokine receptors can form dimers with different receptors. For example, CXCR4 forms heterodimers with CXCR7 [151], CCR5 [152], CD4 [153], CCR2 [154], and even δ-opioid receptor [155]. Heterodimers may conduct a β-arrestin switching or G protein switching. For instance, CXCR4-CXCR7 heterodimers block Gαi activation and induce β-arrestin signaling pathway [156], and costimulation of CCR2-CCR5 with their cognate ligands leads to novel Gαq/11 signaling, instead of the classical Gαi signaling [157]. Changes in the balance of homo- and heterodimers, as well as the formation of novel heterodimers, could have significant effects on signaling [124], and whether there is a typical heterodimer in cancer that exclusively manages the EMT programme requires further discussion.

4.5. Transactivation Signaling

Transactivation means several GPCR agonists induce rapid tyrosine phosphorylation and activation of receptor tyrosine kinases. Currently, two mechanisms of RTKs and GPCRs interaction have been identified as “ligand-dependent” and “ligand-independent” mechanisms. A typical example of ligand-dependent mechanisms is GPCRs that activate EGFR. GPCRs first activate the Src kinase. Activated Src then elevates the expression of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), which shed and cleave HB-EGF, a classical endogenous ligand for EGFR, from the membrane and subsequently captured by EGFR [114]. In the context of chemokine receptors, the CXCL12-CXCR4 axis mediates TGF-β formation and activates TGF-β signaling, which in turn mediates CXCL12 formation through the pSmad2/3 pathway. Together, CXCL12 and TGF-β form autocrine signaling loops in myofibroblasts of invasive human breast cancers [158]. In a ligand-independent mechanism, GPCRs can transactivate EGFR by forming GPCR-EGFR heterodimers or complexes (reviewed in [114]). Similarly, CXCR4 transactivated by insulin-like growth factor receptor (IGF-1R) and S1P1 receptor by platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) are both activated by forming GPCR-RTK complexes [159, 160]. As mentioned above, RTKs can be important regulators of the EMT programme. For example, TGF-β can induce EMT through the RAS-RAF-MEK-MAPK pathway or SMAD2-SMAD4-SMAD3 complexes [10]. Thus, the induction of EMT may be a joint effort by both chemokine receptors and RTKs.

4.6. MAPK Signaling

MAPK is phosphorylated by multiple signaling induced by chemokines. In the context of G protein signaling, the Gαi subunits activate MAPK through the cAMP-PKA-cRaf pathway and Rap1-cRaf pathway. βγ subunits activate MAPK through PLCβ/PI3K-Src-Shc-Sos pathway (reviewed in [161]). In the case of the β-arrestin pathway, β-arrestin not only functions as scaffolds to enhance cRaf-1 and MEK-dependent activation of MAPK [131, 162] but also forms Gαi:β-arrestin complexes to activate MAPK [133]. However, β-arrestin-mediated Erk MAPK activation and MAPK regulation EMT are all required further mechanistic and phenotypic studies. Studies have found biphasic activation of GPCRs. AT1R-mediated MAPK phosphorylation has two peaks. The first peak is transient and appears at 2 min after activation, while the last peak is sustained and appears at 120–150 min. The appearance of the first peak might be a result of Gα:β-arrestin signaling complexes, while the last might be stimulated by Gβγ subunits or from intracellular signaling. The inhibitors of MAPK might inhibit all the sources of MAPK phosphorylation, which lead us to miss the effect of β-arrestins.

Above all, multiple chemokine/GPCR signaling pathways have been proven correlated with EMT. Among them, the MAPK and PI3K signaling from Gβγ subunits, JAK/STAT signaling form dimerization signaling, and crosstalk between chemokine receptor and Wnt signaling are well focused. And their inhibitors have been proven to reverse or inhibit the EMT process. However, signaling the effect of Gαi and β-arrestin has long been ignored. Indeed, we believe EMT is a result of complicated signaling networks. Further study should complete these networks and distinguish them from each other if possible.

5. Conclusion and Perspective

The chemokine family is one of the pivotal regulators of EMT in the tumor microenvironment with an array of signaling pathways that can activate the EMT programme. However, the limited pathway has been proven to be dominating in the EMT programme and available in all types of cancer cells. Inspired by calcium-mediated p-EMT [123], we can deduce that different signals emitted by chemokine receptors may activate different EMT programmes. Our knowledge of chemokine-triggered signaling and the EMT programme has advanced, but still little is known about how different chemokines and signaling pathways work in combination to drive EMT in different tumors. Chemokines play a pivotal role in metastatic dissemination due to their functions in directing cell migration, facilitating transendothelial migration, mediating cell adhesion, and recruiting stromal and immune cells. Uncovering how cancer cells “hijack” chemokine receptors to mediate cell migration highways will be an exciting and promising direction.

EMT and EMT-TFs are associated with metastasis. However, whether the EMT programme is critically involved in metastasis or merely casual requires concrete experimental evidence. EMT-TFs have a common function in the activation of the EMT programme with each having non-redundant functions [163]. Therefore, the appearance of the EMT phenotype in cancer indicates the activation of certain EMT-TFs. For example, Snail2 was detected in p-EMT malignant cells at the leading edge of cancer [12]. To date, EMT-TFs have been proven to play a critical role in metastasis with a tissue-specific property and spatiotemporal expression patterns [3, 164]. However, the EMT programme has long been associated with the metastasis process, and EMT-TFs functions should not be simply extrapolated as functions of the EMT programme.

EMT programmes have been shown strongly associated with the processes of primary tumor invasion and dissemination, which are considered the first step in the metastatic cascade. Without dissemination, metastases do not develop, but highly invasive cancer cells also need epithelial characteristics to settle and resume tumor growth at metastatic sites. Thus, EMT programmes might not always positively contribute to the whole process of complex cancer metastasis. For example, EMT programme-targeted therapy may activate the MET programme, which encourages colonization of cancer cells [164]. In addition, the transiency of EMT-TFs and effectors, abundance of EMT receptors, and redundant function of EMT pathways make EMT difficult to target experimentally and clinically.

Notably, only a few cancer cells could undergo complex processes of metastasis, including local invasion, dissemination, intravasation, transportation through circulation, extravasation, and final colonization. Interestingly, those cells must go through not only the EMT process during dissemination at the very beginning of metastasis but also the MET process at final colonization [3], suggesting that cancer cells could not be in a certain consistent statements to achieve final metastasis. The key abilities include switching statements from one to another, such as EMT or MET, which as known as “plasticity,” one of the hallmark features of cancer cells [165]. Therefore, plasticity might be a more constant property of metastatic cancer cells, and targeting plasticity might be a suitable strategy for cancer metastasis therapy (Figure 3).

Figure 3

Depiction of epithelial-mesenchymal plasticity in metastasis. Carcinoma cells with plasticity or without plasticity were primarily outlined by a basement membrane. Carcinoma cells with plasticity undergo EMT or MAT, resulting in local invasion, intravasation, circulation, extravasation, and colonization. In this process, carcinoma cells with plasticity decide which morphology (mesenchymal or amoeboid) to transform in response to their circumstances. As carcinoma cells colonize, EMT cells may transform back to epithelial phenotype by MET to proliferate. Abbreviations: EMT, epithelial-mesenchymal transition; MAT, mesenchymal-amoeboid transition; and MET, mesenchymal-epithelial transition.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the National Natural Science Foundations of China (82170971 and 82002888), Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (YJ201987), Sichuan Science and Technology Program (2021ZYD0090 and 2022YFS0207), Scientific Research Foundation, West China Hospital of Stomatology Sichuan University (QDJF2019-3 and RD-03-202110), and CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (CIFMS and 2019-I2M-5-004).

References

A. Zlotnik, O. Yoshie, and H. Nomiyama, “The chemokine and chemokine receptor superfamilies and their molecular evolution,” Genome Biology, vol. 7, no. 12, p. 243, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Yang, P. Antin, G. Berx et al., “Guidelines and definitions for research on epithelial–mesenchymal transition,” Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 341–352, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Brabletz, R. Kalluri, M. A. Nieto, and R. A. Weinberg, “Epithelial to mesenchymal transition in cancer,” Nature Reviews Cancer, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 128–134, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Ganesh and J. MASSAGUé, “Targeting metastatic cancer,” Nat Med, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 34–44, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Follain, D. Herrmann, S. Harlepp et al., “Fluids and their mechanics in tumour transit: shaping metastasis,” Nature Reviews Cancer, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 107–124, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Reymond, B. B. D'Água, and A. J. Ridley, “Crossing the endothelial barrier during metastasis,” Nature Reviews Cancer, vol. 13, no. 12, pp. 858–870, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. F. Quail and J. A. Joyce, “Microenvironmental regulation of tumor progression and metastasis,” Nat Med, vol. 19, no. 11, pp. 1423–1437, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Graziani, I. Rodriguez-Hernandez, O. Maiques, and V. Sanz-Moreno, “The amoeboid state as part of the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition programme,” Trends in Cell Biology, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 228–242, 2022.
View at: Google Scholar
B. Bakir, A. M. Chiarella, J. R. Pitarresi, and A. K. Rustgi, “EMT, MET, plasticity, and tumor metastasis,” Trends in Cell Biology, vol. 30, no. 10, pp. 764–776, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Dongre and R. A. Weinberg, “New insights into the mechanisms of epithelial–mesenchymal transition and implications for cancer,” Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 69–84, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Mittal, “Epithelial mesenchymal transition in tumor metastasis,” Annual Review of Pathology: Mechanisms of Disease, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 395–412, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. V. Puram, I. Tirosh, A. S. Parikh et al., “Single-cell transcriptomic analysis of primary and metastatic tumor ecosystems in head and neck cancer,” Cell, vol. 171, no. 7, pp. 1611–1624.e24, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Yilmaz and G. Christofori, “EMT, the cytoskeleton, and cancer cell invasion,” Cancer Metastasis Rev, vol. 28, no. 1-2, pp. 15–33, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. A. Eckert, T. M. Lwin, A. T. Chang et al., “Twist1-Induced invadopodia formation promotes tumor metastasis,” Cancer Cell, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 372–386, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Yang, S. A. Mani, J. L. Donaher et al., “Twist, a master regulator of morphogenesis, plays an essential role in tumor metastasis,” Cell, vol. 117, no. 7, pp. 927–939, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Yu, A. Bardia, B. S. Wittner et al., “Circulating breast tumor cells exhibit dynamic changes in epithelial and mesenchymal composition,” Science, vol. 339, no. 6119, pp. 580–584, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Labelle, S. Begum, and R. O. Hynes, “Direct signaling between platelets and cancer cells induces an epithelial-mesenchymal-like transition and promotes metastasis,” Cancer Cell, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 576–590, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Qi, N. Chen, J. Wang, and C. H. Siu, “Transendothelial migration of melanoma cells involves N-Cadherin-mediated adhesion and activation of the β-catenin signaling pathway,” Molecular Biology of the Cell, vol. 16, no. 9, pp. 4386–4397, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Wan, H. Liu, M. Zhang et al., “Prognostic value of epithelial mesenchymal transition inducing transcription factors in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a meta analysis,” Head & Neck, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 1067–1076, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Tada, H. Takahashi, S. Ida, Y. Nagata, and K. Chikamatsu, “Epithelial–mesenchymal transition status of circulating tumor cells is associated with tumor relapse in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma,” Anticancer Research, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 3559–3564, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Obradovic, D. Graves, M. Korrer et al., “Immunostimulatory cancer-associated fibroblast Subpopulations can Predict Immunotherapy response in head and neck cancer,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 2094–2109, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Zhang, L. Shi, S. Lu et al., “Autocrine IL-8 promotes F-actin polymerization and mediate mesenchymal transition via ELMO1-NF-κB-Snail signaling in glioma,” Cancer Biology & Therapy, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 898–911, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Lu, B. Dong, F. Xu et al., “CXCL1-LCN2 paracrine axis promotes progression of prostate cancer via the Src activation and epithelial-mesenchymal transition,” Cell Communication and Signaling, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 118, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Wen, Z. Zhao, L. Huang, L. Wang, Y. Miao, and J. Wu, “IL 8 promotes cell migration through regulating EMT by activating the Wnt/β catenin pathway in ovarian cancer,” Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 1588–1598, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. C. Chen, R. Baskaran, N. H. Lee et al., “CXCL2/CXCR2 axis induces cancer stem cell characteristics in CPT 11 resistant LoVo colon cancer cells via Gαi 2 and Gαq/11,” Journal of Cellular Physiology, vol. 234, no. 7, Article ID 11822, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Xu, F. Lin, Z. Wang et al., “CXCR2 promotes breast cancer metastasis and chemoresistance via suppression of AKT1 and activation of COX2,” Cancer Letters, vol. 412, pp. 69–80, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Zhao, B. Ou, D. Han et al., “Tumor-derived CXCL5 promotes human colorectal cancer metastasis through activation of the ERK/Elk-1/Snail and AKT/GSK3β/β-catenin pathways,” Molecular Cancer, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 70, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Cui, Y. Zhao, and J. Xu, “Activated CXCL5-CXCR2 axis promotes the migration, invasion and EMT of papillary thyroid carcinoma cells via modulation of β-catenin pathway,” Biochimie, vol. 148, pp. 1–11, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. Z. Qiu, H. B. Zhang, W. X. Xia et al., “The CXCL5/CXCR2 axis contributes to the epithelial-mesenchymal transition of nasopharyngeal carcinoma cells by activating ERK/GSK-3β/snail signalling,” Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 37, no. 1, p. 85, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. L. Zhou, Z. J. Zhou, Z. Q. Hu et al., “CXCR2/CXCL5 axis contributes to epithelial–mesenchymal transition of HCC cells through activating PI3K/Akt/GSK-3β/Snail signaling,” Cancer Letters, vol. 358, no. 2, pp. 124–135, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Xiang, Z. J. Zhou, G. K. Xia et al., “A positive crosstalk between CXCR4 and CXCR2 promotes gastric cancer metastasis,” Oncogene, vol. 36, no. 36, pp. 5122–5133, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Sobolik, Y. J. Su, S. Wells, G. D. Ayers, R. S. Cook, and A. Richmond, “CXCR4 drives the metastatic phenotype in breast cancer through induction of CXCR2 and activation of MEK and PI3K pathways,” Molecular Biology of the Cell, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 566–582, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Nie, X. Cao, Y. Mao, Z. Lv, M. Lv, and Y WangH. Wang and C. Liu, “Tumor-associated macrophages-mediated CXCL8 infiltration enhances breast cancer metastasis: suppression by Danirixin,” Int Immunopharmacol, vol. 95, Article ID 107153, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
T. Shen, Z. Yang, X. Cheng et al., “CXCL8 induces epithelial-mesenchymal transition in colon cancer cells via the PI3K/Akt/NF-κB signaling pathway,” Oncology Reports, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 2095–2100, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Visciano, F. Liotti, N. Prevete et al., “Mast cells induce epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and stem cell features in human thyroid cancer cells through an IL-8–Akt–Slug pathway,” Oncogene, vol. 34, no. 40, pp. 5175–5186, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Deng, Y. Weng, X. Li, T. Wang, M. Fan, and Q. Shi, “Overexpression of IL-8 promotes cell migration via PI3K-Akt signaling pathway and EMT in triple-negative breast cancer,” Pathology, Research & Practice, vol. 223, Article ID 152824, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Li, J. Liu, L. Li et al., “Epithelial mesenchymal transition induced by the CXCL9/CXCR3 axis through AKT activation promotes invasion and metastasis in tongue squamous cell carcinoma,” Oncology Reports, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 1356–1368, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Wang, X. Ao, Z. Shen et al., “TNF-α augments CXCL10/CXCR3 axis activity to induce Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition in colon cancer cell,” International Journal of Biological Sciences, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 2683–2702, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Yu, D. Wang, X. Wang et al., “CXCL12/CXCR4 promotes inflammation-driven colorectal cancer progression through activation of RhoA signaling by sponging miR-133a-3p,” Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 38, no. 1, p. 32, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. H. Hu, Y. Yao, S. Yu et al., “SDF-1/CXCR4 promotes epithelial–mesenchymal transition and progression of colorectal cancer by activation of the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway,” Cancer Letters, vol. 354, no. 2, pp. 417–426, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Lin, Q. Ma, L. Li, and H. Wang, “The CXCL12–CXCR4 axis promotes migration, invasiveness, and EMT in human papillary thyroid carcinoma B-CPAP cells via NF-κB signaling,” Biochemistry and Cell Biology, vol. 96, no. 5, pp. 619–626, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Cheng, Y. Song, J. Qu et al., “The chemokine receptor CXCR4 and c-MET cooperatively promote epithelial-mesenchymal transition in gastric cancer cells,” Translational Oncology, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 487–497, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Qin, F. Wang, H. Ni et al., “Cancer-associated fibroblasts in gastric cancer affect malignant progression via the CXCL12-CXCR4 axis,” Journal of Cancer, vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 3011–3023, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Li, P. Li, Y. Chang et al., “The SDF-1/CXCR4 axis induces epithelial–mesenchymal transition in hepatocellular carcinoma,” Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry, vol. 392, no. 1-2, pp. 77–84, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Zhang, J. Y. Cui, H. F. Gao et al., “Cancer-associated fibroblasts induce epithelial-mesenchymal transition and cisplatin resistance in ovarian cancer via CXCL12/CXCR4 axis,” Future Oncology, vol. 16, no. 32, pp. 2619–2633, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. F. Saba, Y. Wang, H. Fu et al., “Association of cytoplasmic CXCR4 with loss of epithelial marker and activation of ERK1/2 and AKT signaling pathways in non–small-cell Lung Cancer,” Clinical Lung Cancer, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. e203–e210, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Li, Q. Ma, Q. Xu et al., “SDF-1/CXCR4 signaling induces pancreatic cancer cell invasion and epithelial–mesenchymal transition in vitro through non-canonical activation of Hedgehog pathway,” Cancer Letters, vol. 322, no. 2, pp. 169–176, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Wang, W. Lan, M. Xu et al., “Cancer-associatedfibroblast-derived SDF-1 induces epithelial-mesenchymal transition of lung adenocarcinoma via CXCR4/β-catenin/PPARδ signalling,” Cell Death & Disease, vol. 12, no. 2, p. 214, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Duan, S. Zhang, L. Wang et al., “Targeted silencing of CXCR4 inhibits epithelial-mesenchymal transition in oral squamous cell carcinoma,” Oncology Letters, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 2055–2061, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Onoue, D. Uchida, N. M. Begum, Y. Tomizuka, H. Yoshida, and M. Sato, “Epithelial-mesenchymal transition induced by the stromal cell-derived factor-1/CXCR4 system in oral squamous cell carcinoma cells,” International Journal of Oncology, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 1133–1138, 2006.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Taki, K. Higashikawa, S. Yoneda et al., “Up-regulation of stromal cell-derivedfactor-1alpha and its receptor CXCR4 expression accompanied with epithelial-mesenchymal transition in human oral squamous cell carcinoma,” Oncology Reports, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 993–998, 2008.
View at: Google Scholar
P. Yang, G. Wang, H. Huo, Q. Li, Y. Zhao, and Y. Liu, “SDF-1/CXCR4 signaling up-regulates survivin to regulate human sacral chondrosarcoma cell cycle and epithelial–mesenchymal transition via ERK and PI3K/AKT pathway,” Medical Oncology, vol. 32, no. 1, p. 377, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Biswas, S. Sengupta, S. Roy Chowdhury et al., “CXCL13–CXCR5 co-expression regulates epithelial to mesenchymal transition of breast cancer cells during lymph node metastasis,” Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, vol. 143, no. 2, pp. 265–276, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Xie, Z. Chen, Q. Zhong et al., “M2 macrophages secrete CXCL13 to promote renal cell carcinoma migration, invasion, and EMT,” Cancer Cell International, vol. 21, no. 1, p. 677, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Han, R. Fu, C. Chen et al., “CXCL16 promotes gastric cancer tumorigenesis via ADAM10-dependent CXCL16/CXCR6 Axis and activates akt and MAPK signaling pathways,” International Journal of Biological Sciences, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 2841–2852, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. J. Jin, F. X. Dai, Z. W. Long et al., “CXCR6 predicts poor prognosis in gastric cancer and promotes tumor metastasis through epithelial-mesenchymal transition,” Oncology Reports, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 3279–3286, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Zhuang, G. Cao, C. Kou, and T. Liu, “CCL2/CCR2 axis induces hepatocellular carcinoma invasion and epithelial-mesenchymal transition in vitro through activation of the Hedgehog pathway,” Oncology Reports, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 21–30, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Li, H. Li, X. P. Li et al., “C C chemokine receptor type 2 promotes epithelial to mesenchymal transition by upregulating matrix metalloproteinase 2 in human liver cancer,” Oncology Reports, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 2734–2741, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Yan, Y. Gao, S. Lin, Y. Li, L. Shi, and Q. Kan, “EGR1-CCL2 Feedback Loop Maintains Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition of Cisplatin-Resistant Gastric Cancer Cells and Promotes Tumor Angiogenesis,” Dig Dis Sci, vol. 67, no. 8, pp. 3702–3713, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Li, J. Lu, Y. Chen et al., “MCP-1-induced ERK/GSK-3β/Snail signaling facilitates the epithelial–mesenchymal transition and promotes the migration of MCF-7 human breast carcinoma cells,” Cellular and Molecular Immunology, vol. 14, no. 7, pp. 621–630, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Izumi, L. Y. Fang, A. Mizokami et al., “Targeting the androgen receptor with siRNA promotes prostate cancer metastasis through enhanced macrophage recruitment via CCL2/CCR2‐induced STAT3 activation,” EMBO Molecular Medicine, vol. 5, no. 9, pp. 1383–1401, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Ling, X. Yang, X. Chen, J. Xia, B. Cheng, and X. Tao, “CCL2 promotes cell migration by inducing epithelial‐mesenchymal transition in oral squamous cell carcinoma,” Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 477–482, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Cheng, H. Wu, Z. J. Jin et al., “Up-regulation of chemokine receptor CCR4 is associated with Human Hepatocellular Carcinoma malignant behavior,” Scientific Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, Article ID 12362, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Zhu, X. Li, S. Chen, Q. Zeng, Y. Zhao, and F. Luo, “Tumor-associated macrophage or chemokine ligand CCL17 positively regulates the tumorigenesis of hepatocellular carcinoma,” Medical Oncology, vol. 33, no. 2, p. 17, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Liu, C. Wang, X. Ma et al., “High expression of CCR5 in melanoma enhances epithelial-mesenchymal transition and metastasis via TGFβ1,” The Journal of Pathology, vol. 247, no. 4, pp. 481–493, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Meng, W. Li, C. Li, Z. Gao, K. Guo, and S. Song, “CCL18 promotes epithelial-mesenchymal transition, invasion and migration of pancreatic cancer cells in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma,” International Journal of Oncology, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 1109–1120, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Kapur, H. Mir, C. E. Clark III et al., “CCR6 expression in colon cancer is associated with advanced disease and supports epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition,” British Journal of Cancer, vol. 114, no. 12, pp. 1343–1351, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Han, D. Wu, Y. Yang, Z. Li, J. Zhang, and C. Li, “CrkL meditates CCL20/CCR6-induced EMT in gastric cancer,” Cytokine, vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 163–169, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Marsigliante, C. Vetrugno, and A. Muscella, “Paracrine CCL20 loop induces epithelial-mesenchymal transition in breast epithelial cells,” Molecular Carcinogenesis, vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 1175–1186, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Liu, X. Zheng, H. Deng et al., “Expression of CCR6 in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and its effects on epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition,” Oncotarget, vol. 8, no. 70, Article ID 115244, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Xu, M. Zhou, W. Qiu, J. Ye, and Q. Feng, “CCR7 mediates human breast cancer cell invasion, migration by inducing epithelial-mesenchymal transition and suppressing apoptosis through AKT pathway,” Cancer Medicine, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 1062–1071, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Zhang, Y. Zhou, and Y. Yang, “CCR7 pathway induces epithelial–mesenchymal transition through up-regulation of Snail signaling in gastric cancer,” Medical Oncology, vol. 32, no. 2, p. 17, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Cheng, J. Guo, Q. Yang, and X. Yang, “Crk-like adapter protein regulates CCL19/CCR7-mediated epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition via ERK signaling pathway in epithelial ovarian carcinomas,” Medical Oncology, vol. 32, no. 3, p. 47, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Chen, Z. Shao, E. Jiang et al., “CCL21/CCR7 interaction promotes EMT and enhances the stemness of OSCC via a JAK2/STAT3 signaling pathway,” Journal of Cellular Physiology, vol. 235, no. 9, pp. 5995–6009, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Zhang, D. Wang, Y. Li et al., “CCL21/CCR7 Axis contributed to CD133+ pancreatic cancer stem-like cell metastasis via EMT and Erk/NF-κB pathway,” PLoS One, vol. 11, no. 8, Article ID e0158529, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Zhong, L. Chen, R. Yin et al., “Chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 21/C-C chemokine receptor type 7 triggers migration and invasion of human lung cancer cells by epithelial-mesenchymal transition via the extracellular signal-regulated kinase signaling pathway,” Molecular Medicine Reports, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 4100–4108, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Li, Z. Zou, N. Suo et al., “CCL21/CCR7 axis activating chemotaxis accompanied with epithelial–mesenchymal transition in human breast carcinoma,” Medical Oncology, vol. 31, no. 9, p. 180, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Li, Y. Yang, S. Xu, L. Ma, M. He, and Z. Zhang, “Erratum to: Slug signaling is up-regulated by CCL21/CCR7 to induce EMT in human chondrosarcoma,” Medical Oncology, vol. 32, no. 3, p. 58, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Liu, X. Xu, W. Deng et al., “CCL18 enhances migration, invasion and EMT by binding CCR8 in bladder cancer cells [J],” Molecular Medicine Reports, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 1678–1686, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Kong, W. Yu, Z. Chen et al., “CCR9 initiates epithelial–mesenchymal transition by activating Wnt/β-catenin pathways to promote osteosarcoma metastasis,” Cancer Cell International, vol. 21, no. 1, p. 648, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Park, X. Zhang, S. K. Lee et al., “CCL28-induced RARβ expression inhibits oral squamous cell carcinoma bone invasion,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 129, no. 12, pp. 5381–5399, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. T. T. Do and J. Cho, “Involvement of the ERK/HIF-1α/EMT pathway in XCL1-induced migration of MDA-MB-231 and SK-BR-3 breast cancer cells,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 22, no. 1, p. 89, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. MüLLER, B. Homey, H. Soto et al., “Involvement of chemokine receptors in breast cancer metastasis,” Nature, vol. 410, no. 6824, pp. 50–56, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Kong, S. Guo, C. Liu et al., “Overexpression of SDF-1 activates the NF-κB pathway to induce epithelial to mesenchymal transition and cancer stem cell-like phenotypes of breast cancer cells,” International Journal of Oncology, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 1085–1094, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Orimo, P. B. Gupta, D. C. Sgroi et al., “Stromal fibroblasts present in invasive human breast carcinomas promote tumor growth and angiogenesis through elevated SDF-1/CXCL12 secretion,” Cell, vol. 121, no. 3, pp. 335–348, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. S. H. Soon, E. Kim, C. K. Pon et al., “Breast cancer-associated fibroblasts induce epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in breast cancer cells,” Endocrine-Related Cancer, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. T. Roussos, J. S. Condeelis, and A. Patsialou, “Chemotaxis in cancer,” Nature Reviews Cancer, vol. 11, no. 8, pp. 573–587, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. D. Shah, M. J. Bouchard, and A. C. Shieh, “Interstitial fluid flow increases hepatocellular carcinoma cell invasion through CXCR4/CXCL12 and MEK/ERK signaling,” PLoS One, vol. 10, no. 11, Article ID e0142337, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. D. Shields, M. E. Fleury, C. Yong, A. A. Tomei, G. J. Randolph, and M. A. Swartz, “Autologous chemotaxis as a mechanism of tumor cell homing to lymphatics via interstitial flow and autocrine CCR7 signaling,” Cancer Cell, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 526–538, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Kukreja, A. B. Abdel-Mageed, D. Mondal, K. Liu, and K. C. Agrawal, “Up-regulation of CXCR4 expression in PC-3 cells by stromal-derivedfactor-1alpha (CXCL12) increases endothelial adhesion and transendothelial migration: role of MEK/ERK signaling pathway-dependentNF-kappaB activation,” Cancer Research, vol. 65, no. 21, pp. 9891–9898, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Marchesi, P. Monti, B. E. Leone et al., “Increased survival, proliferation, and migration in metastatic human pancreatic tumor cells expressing functional CXCR4,” Cancer Research, vol. 64, no. 22, pp. 8420–8427, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. F. Zhang, X. Jin, S. Malladi et al., “Selection of bone metastasis seeds by mesenchymal signals in the primary tumor stroma,” Cell, vol. 154, no. 5, pp. 1060–1073, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. A. Franklin and M. O. Li, “Ontogeny of tumor-associated macrophages and its Implication in cancer regulation,” Trends in Cancer, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 20–34, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Cortés, L. Sanchez-Moral, O. De Barrios et al., “Tumor associated macrophages (TAMs) depend on ZEB1 for their cancer‐promoting roles,” Embo j, vol. 36, no. 22, pp. 3336–3355, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Q. Liu, J. Song, Y. Pan et al., “Wnt5a/CaMKII/ERK/CCL2 axis is required for tumor-associated macrophages to promote colorectal cancer progression,” International Journal of Biological Sciences, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 1023–1034, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. N. Arwert, A. S. Harney, D. Entenberg et al., “A Unidirectional transition from migratory to perivascular macrophage is required for tumor cell intravasation,” Cell Reports, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 1239–1248, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. A. Hauser and D. F. Legler, “Common and biased signaling pathways of the chemokine receptor CCR7 elicited by its ligands CCL19 and CCL21 in leukocytes,” Journal of Leukocyte Biology, vol. 99, no. 6, pp. 869–882, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Ueno, K. Hara, M. S. Willis et al., “Role for CCR7 ligands in the emigration of newly generated T lymphocytes from the neonatal thymus,” Immunity, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 205–218, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Mashino, N. Sadanaga, H. Yamaguchi et al., “Expression of chemokine receptor CCR7 is associated with lymph node metastasis of gastric carcinoma [J],” Cancer Research, vol. 62, no. 10, pp. 2937–2941, 2002.
View at: Google Scholar
K. GüNTHER, J. Leier, G. Henning et al., “Prediction of lymph node metastasis in colorectal carcinoma by expressionof chemokine receptor CCR7,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 116, no. 5, pp. 726–733, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Tutunea-Fatan, M. Majumder, X. Xin, and P. K. Lala, “The role of CCL21/CCR7 chemokine axis in breast cancer-induced lymphangiogenesis,” Molecular Cancer, vol. 14, no. 1, p. 35, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Issa, T. X. Le, A. N. Shoushtari, J. D. Shields, and M. A. Swartz, “Vascular endothelial growth factor-C and C-C chemokine receptor 7 in tumor cell–lymphatic cross-talk promote invasive phenotype,” Cancer Research, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 349–357, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Nisar, P. Yousuf, T. Masoodi et al., “Chemokine-cytokine networks in the head and neck tumor microenvironment,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 22, no. 9, p. 4584, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. LEóN, S. Diez, J. GARCíA et al., “Expression of the CXCL12/CXCR4 chemokine axis predicts regional control in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma,” European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, vol. 273, no. 12, pp. 4525–4533, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. T. Tan, C. Y. Chu, Y. C. Lu et al., “CXCL12/CXCR4 promotes laryngeal and hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma metastasis through MMP-13-dependent invasion via the ERK1/2/AP-1 pathway,” Carcinogenesis, vol. 29, no. 8, pp. 1519–1527, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. O. Rehman and C. Y. Wang, “CXCL12/SDF‐1α activates NF‐κB and promotes oral cancer invasion through the Carma3/Bcl10/Malt1 complex,” International Journal of Oral Science, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 105–118, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Li, Q. Xu, Y. Wu et al., “A CCL2/ROS autoregulation loop is critical for cancer-associatedfibroblasts-enhanced tumor growth of oral squamous cell carcinoma,” Carcinogenesis, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1362–1370, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Ling, W. Li, J. Hu et al., “Targeting CCL2-CCR4 axis suppress cell migration of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma,” Cell Death & Disease, vol. 13, no. 2, p. 158, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. J. Shang, K. Liu, and Z. Shao, “Expression of chemokine receptor CCR7 is associated with cervical lymph node metastasis of oral squamous cell carcinoma,” Oral Oncology, vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 480–485, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. J. Zhao, F. Y. Liu, P. Li, X. Ding, Z. H. Zong, and C. F. Sun, “CCL19-induced chemokine receptor 7 activates the phosphoinositide-3kinase-mediated invasive pathway through Cdc42 in metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck,” Oncology Reports, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 729–737, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Guo, F. Liu, L. Yang, J. Huang, X. Ding, and C. Sun, “Chemokine receptor 7 enhances cell chemotaxis and migration of metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck through activation of matrix metalloproteinase-9,” Oncology Reports, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 794–800, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Li, Z. J. Zhao, F. Y. Liu et al., “The chemokine receptor 7 regulates cell adhesion and migration via beta1 integrin in metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck,” Oncology Reports, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 989–995, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Xu, X. Zheng, L. Yang et al., “Chemokine receptor 7 promotes tumor migration and invasiveness via the RhoA/ROCK pathway in metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck,” Oncology Reports, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 849–855, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. Wang, Y. Qiao, and Z. Li, “New insights into modes of GPCR activation,” Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 367–386, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Thelen, P. Peveri, P. Kernen, V. Von Tscharner, A. Walz, and M. Baggiolini, “Mechanism of neutrophil activation by NAF, a novel monocyte‐derived peptide agonist,” Faseb j, vol. 2, no. 11, pp. 2702–2706, 1988.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Zlotnik and O. Yoshie, “The chemokine superfamily revisited,” Immunity, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 705–716, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Arang and J. S. G. Gutkind, “G Protein Coupled receptors and heterotrimeric G proteins as cancer drivers,” FEBS Letters, vol. 594, no. 24, pp. 4201–4232, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Iglesias-Bartolome, D. Torres, R. Marone et al., “Inactivation of a Gαs–PKA tumour suppressor pathway in skin stem cells initiates basal-cell carcinogenesis,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 793–803, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. R. Pattabiraman, B. Bierie, K. I. Kober et al., “Activation of PKA leads to mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition and loss of tumor-initiating ability,” Science, vol. 351, no. 6277, Article ID aad3680, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. F. Schwindinger and J. D. Robishaw, “Heterotrimeric G-proteinβγ-dimers in growth and differentiation,” Oncogene, vol. 20, no. 13, pp. 1653–1660, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. R. Neptune and H. R. Bourne, “Receptors induce chemotaxis by releasing the βγ subunit of G _i , not by activating G _q or G _s,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 94, no. 26, Article ID 14489, 1997.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. M. Davis, I. Azimi, R. A. Faville et al., “Induction of epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) in breast cancer cells is calcium signal dependent,” Oncogene, vol. 33, no. 18, pp. 2307–2316, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. J. Norgard, J. R. Pitarresi, R. Maddipati et al., “Calcium signaling induces a partial EMT,” European Molecular Biology Organization Reports, vol. 22, no. 9, Article ID e51872, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. B. Rubin, “Chemokine signaling in cancer: one hump or two,” Seminars in Cancer Biology, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 116–122, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. G. Dohlman and J. Thorner, “RGS proteins and signaling by heterotrimeric G proteins,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 272, no. 7, pp. 3871–3874, 1997.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Thelen, “Dancing to the tune of chemokines,” Nature Immunology, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 129–134, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. A. Parent and P. N. Devreotes, “A Cell's sense of direction,” Science, vol. 284, no. 5415, pp. 765–770, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. H. Stuelten, C. A. Parent, and D. J. Montell, “Cell motility in cancer invasion and metastasis: insights from simple model organisms,” Nature Reviews Cancer, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 296–312, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. A. Kohout and R. J. Lefkowitz, “Regulation of G Protein-Coupled receptor kinases and arrestins during receptor desensitization,” Molecular Pharmacology, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 9–18, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. J. Lefkowitz and S. K. Shenoy, “Transduction of receptor signals by ß-arrestins,” Science, vol. 308, no. 5721, pp. 512–517, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. M. Luttrell, F. L. Roudabush, E. W. Choy et al., “Activation and targeting of extracellular signal-regulated kinases by β-arrestin scaffolds,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 98, no. 5, pp. 2449–2454, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Daaka, L. M. Luttrell, and R. J. Lefkowitz, “Switching of the coupling of the β2-adrenergic receptor to different G proteins by protein kinase A,” Nature, vol. 390, no. 6655, pp. 88–91, 1997.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. S. Smith, T. F. Pack, A. Inoue et al., “Noncanonical scaffolding of G(αi) and β-arrestin by G protein-coupled receptors,” Science, vol. 371, no. 6534, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
E. R. Neptune, T. Iiri, and H. R. Bourne, “Gαi is not required for chemotaxis mediated by Gi-coupled receptors,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 274, no. 5, pp. 2824–2828, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. O'Hayre, K. Eichel, S. Avino et al., “Genetic evidence that β-arrestins are dispensable for the initiation of β₂-adrenergic receptor signaling to ERK,” Science Signaling, vol. 10, no. 484, Article ID eaal3395, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. ROSANò, R. Cianfrocca, P. Tocci et al., “Endothelin A receptor/β-arrestin signaling to the wnt pathway renders ovarian cancer cells resistant to Chemotherapy,” Cancer Research, vol. 74, no. 24, pp. 7453–7464, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Duan, T. Zhang, Z. Kong et al., “β-arrestin1 promotes epithelial-mesenchymal transition via modulating GSK-3β/β-catenin pathway in prostate cancer cells,” Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, vol. 479, no. 2, pp. 204–210, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Pillai, J. Trevino, B. Rawal et al., “β-Arrestin-1 mediates nicotine-induced metastasis through E2F1 target genes that modulate epithelial–mesenchymal transition,” Cancer Research, vol. 75, no. 6, pp. 1009–1020, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. C. Tsai, Y. T. Chou, and H. W. Fu, “Protease-activated receptor 2 induces migration and promotes Slug-mediatedepithelial-mesenchymal transition in lung adenocarcinoma cells,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Cell Research, vol. 1866, no. 3, pp. 486–503, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Jiang, X. Zhuo, Y. Wu, X. Fu, and C. Mao, “PAR2 blockade reverses osimertinib resistance in non-small-cell lung cancer cells via attenuating ERK-mediated EMT and PD-L1 expression,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Cell Research, vol. 1869, no. 1, Article ID 119144, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. H. Oakley, S. A. Laporte, J. A. Holt, M. G. Caron, and L. S. Barak, “Differential affinities of visual arrestin, βarrestin1, and βarrestin2 for g protein-coupled receptors delineate two major classes of receptors,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 275, no. 22, Article ID 17201, 2000.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. N. Feinstein, N. Yui, M. J. Webber et al., “Noncanonical control of vasopressin receptor type 2 signaling by retromer and arrestin,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 288, no. 39, Article ID 27849, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Ferrandon, T. N. Feinstein, M. Castro et al., “Sustained cyclic AMP production by parathyroid hormone receptor endocytosis,” Nature Chemical Biology, vol. 5, no. 10, pp. 734–742, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. C. Werthmann, S. Volpe, M. J. Lohse, and D. Calebiro, “Persistent cAMP signaling by internalized TSH receptors occurs in thyroid but not in HEK293 cells,” Faseb j, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 2043–2048, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Mullershausen, F. Zecri, C. Cetin, A. Billich, D. Guerini, and K. Seuwen, “Persistent signaling induced by FTY720-phosphate is mediated by internalized S1P1 receptors,” Nature Chemical Biology, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 428–434, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. R. B. Thomsen, B. Plouffe, T. J. Cahill et al., “GPCR-Gprotein-β-arrestin super-complex mediates sustained G protein signaling,” Cell, vol. 166, no. 4, pp. 907–919, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Cartier and T. Hla, “Sphingosine 1-phosphate: lipid signaling in pathology and therapy,” Science, vol. 366, no. 6463, Article ID eaar5551, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Angers, A. Salahpour, and M. Bouvier, “Dimerization: an emerging concept for g protein–coupled receptor ontogeny and function,” Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 409–435, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Mellado, J. M. RODRíGUEZ-Frade, S. MAñES, and C. Martinez-A, “Chemokine signaling and functional responses: the role of receptor dimerization and TK pathway activation,” Annual Review of Immunology, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 397–421, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Percherancier, Y. A. Berchiche, I. Slight et al., “Bioluminescence resonance energy transfer reveals ligand-induced conformational changes in CXCR4 homo- and heterodimers,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 280, no. 11, pp. 9895–9903, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Levoye, K. Balabanian, F. Baleux, F. Bachelerie, and B. Lagane, “CXCR7 heterodimerizes with CXCR4 and regulates CXCL12-mediated G protein signaling,” Blood, vol. 113, no. 24, pp. 6085–6093, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. L. Contento, B. Molon, C. Boularan et al., “CXCR4–CCR5: a couple modulating T cell functions,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 105, no. 29, Article ID 10101, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. MARTíNEZ-MUñOZ, R. Barroso, S. Y. Dyrhaug et al., “CCR5/CD4/CXCR4 oligomerization prevents HIV-1 gp120IIIB binding to the cell surface,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 111, no. 19, Article ID E1960, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Sohy, M. Parmentier, and J. Y. Springael, “Allosteric transinhibition by specific antagonists in CCR2/CXCR4 heterodimers,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 282, no. 41, Article ID 30062, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
O. M. Pello, L. Martínez-muñoz, V. Parrillas et al., “Ligand stabilization of CXCR4/δ-opioid receptor heterodimers reveals a mechanism for immune response regulation,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 537–549, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Sánchez-martín, P. Sánchez-Mateos, and C. Cabañas, “CXCR7 impact on CXCL12 biology and disease,” Trends in Molecular Medicine, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 12–22, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Mellado, J. M. Rodríguez-Frade, A. J. Vila-Coro et al., “Chemokine receptor homo- or heterodimerization activates distinct signaling pathways,” The EMBO Journal, vol. 20, no. 10, pp. 2497–2507, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Kojima, A. Acar, E. N. Eaton et al., “Autocrine TGF-β and stromal cell-derivedfactor-1 (SDF-1) signaling drives the evolution of tumor-promoting mammary stromal myofibroblasts,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 107, no. 46, Article ID 20009, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Akekawatchai, J. D. Holland, M. Kochetkova, J. C. Wallace, and S. R. McColl, “Transactivation of CXCR4 by the insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor (IGF-1R) in human MDA-MB-231 breast cancer epithelial cells,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 280, no. 48, Article ID 39701, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. P. Hobson, H. M. Rosenfeldt, L. S. Barak et al., “Role of the sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor EDG-1 in PDGF-induced cell motility,” Science, vol. 291, no. 5509, pp. 1800–1803, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. G. Goldsmith and D. N. Dhanasekaran, “G Protein regulation of MAPK networks,” Oncogene, vol. 26, no. 22, pp. 3122–3142, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. J. Cheng, J. Zhao, Y. Sun et al., “β-Arrestin differentially regulates the chemokine receptor CXCR4-mediated signaling and receptor internalization, and this implicates multiple interaction sites between β-arrestin and CXCR4,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 275, no. 4, pp. 2479–2485, 2000.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. P. Stemmler, R. L. Eccles, S. Brabletz, and T. Brabletz, “Non-redundant functions of EMT transcription factors,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 102–112, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. H. Tsai, J. L. Donaher, D. A. Murphy, S. Chau, and J. Yang, “Spatiotemporal regulation of epithelial-mesenchymal transition is essential for squamous cell carcinoma metastasis,” Cancer Cell, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 725–736, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Hanahan, “Hallmarks of cancer: new dimensions,” Cancer Discovery, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 31–46, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Xutengyue Tian et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

555

Downloads

755

Citations