Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Nov;77(21):4413-4428.
doi: 10.1007/s00018-019-03425-6. Epub 2020 Jan 2.

hnRNPA2B1 inhibits the exosomal export of miR-503 in endothelial cells

Affiliations

hnRNPA2B1 inhibits the exosomal export of miR-503 in endothelial cells

Jennifer Pérez-Boza et al. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2020 Nov.

Abstract

The chemotherapeutic drug epirubicin increases the exosomal export of miR-503 in endothelial cells. To understand the mechanisms behind this process, we transfected endothelial cells with miR-503 carrying a biotin tag. Then, we pulled-down the proteins interacting with miR-503 and studied their role in microRNA exosomal export. A total of four different binding partners were identified by mass spectrometry and validated by western blotting and negative controls, among them ANXA2 and hnRNPA2B1. Using knock-down systems combined with pull-down analysis, we determined that epirubicin mediates the export of miR-503 by disrupting the interaction between hnRNPA2B1 and miR-503. Then, both ANXA2 and miR-503 are sorted into exosomes while hnRNPA2B1 is relocated into the nucleus. The combination of these processes culminates in the increased export of miR-503. These results suggest, for the first time, that RNA-binding proteins can negatively regulate the exosomal sorting of microRNAs.

Keywords: EVs; Exosomal export; Exosomes; MicroRNAs; RNA-binding proteins.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Exosome characterization and identification of miR-503 binding proteins: a exosome characterization of HUVEC lysates and exosomes (10 µg) against the EV markers: CD9, CD63, CD81, syntenin (SYN), and the cellular marker cytochrome C (Cyt C). b Dynamic light scattering analysis of exosomal preparations. c Electron microscopy images of HUVEC exosomes labeled with anti-CD63 and anti-CD105, scale bars = 100 nm. d Cells were treated with epirubicin for 24 h. Cell lysates were prepared 24 h after treatment and exosomes were collected 72 h after removing the chemotherapeutic drug. Cellular and exosomal levels of miR-503 were evaluated by qPCR. Data show mean ± SEM (n = 3). **p < 0.01 vs. respective control. e Schematic representation of the protocol used to identify the MEC proteins. HUVECs (30 × 106 cells) were transfected with miR-503-biotin (10 nM). The following day, the cells were crosslinked with DTSSP and UV. HUVECs lysates were incubated with streptavidin beads. Both input (IN) (cellular lysate) and pull-down fractions (PD) were separated by SDS-PAGE. Isolated proteins were identified by mass spectrometry and f validated by western blotting against pull-down (PD) and input (IN) (1% of cell lysate) fractions using vinculin as loading control. Cel-miR-67 was used as a negative control for the pull-down
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Epirubicin regulates the mRNA levels of TSP1 and hnRNPA2B1. HUVECs were treated with epirubicin for 24 h and the levels of a RNA and b proteins were assessed, respectively, by qPCR at 24, 48, and 72 h after treatment and western blotting at 24, 48, 72, and 96 h after treatment. Data represents fold change against non-treated cells. Plots show mean and SEM from three independent experiments. *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001. c Representative western blot. d HUVECs were treated with epirubicin for 24 h and exosomes were produced for additional 72 h. Exosomes were purified by ultracentrifugation and the levels of proteins were determined by western blotting (10 µg/lane). Representative example of N = 3
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Epirubicin disrupts the interaction between miR-503 and VIM and hnRNPA2B1. a HUVECs (30·106 cells) were transfected with miR-503-biotin (10 nM). The following day, the cells were crosslinked with DTSSP and UV (UV + CHL), only UV (UV) or not subjected to any crosslinking (No CL). HUVECs lysates were incubated with streptavidin beads. Both input (IN) (cellular lysate) and pull-down fractions (PD) were separated by SDS-PAGE and revealed by western blotting using indicated proteins. Input (IN) = 1% of cell lysate. Vinculin was used as loading control. b, c HUVECs were transfected with miR-503 (10 nM). 48 h later, immunoprecipitation assays were performed using the indicated antibodies or an IgG control and the levels of miR-503 were evaluated by qPCR. Plots show b fold change of miR-503 in the immunoprecipitated (IP) vs input fractions (IN) in non-treated cells and c fold change of immunoprecipitated miR-503 in epirubicin-treated (EPI) vs non-treated cells (NT). Plots represent mean and SEM from three independent experiments,*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. IN = 1% of the cellular lysate before immunoprecipitation
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
hnRNPA2B1 re-localizes into the nucleus after epirubicin treatment. a Confocal images of hnRNPA2B1 (green) and DAPI (blue) of HUVECs treated with epirubicin for 24 h. Pictures taken at the indicated times after starting the treatment. b Quantification of the intensity in the cytoplasm and nucleus were performed using ImageJ on epifluorescence images. c Nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions from HUVECs treated with epirubicin and analysed by western blotting for hnRNPA2B1 localization. d Abundance ratio of hnRNPA2B1 between nucleus and cytoplasm in subcellular fractions. All plots show results from three independent experiments. *p < 0.05. Validation of subcellular fractionation method in Supplementary Figure S4
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
ANXA2, hnRNPA2B1, TSP1 and VIM are necessary for the effect of epirubicin on the exosomal export of miR-503. HUVECs were transfected with siRNA for the indicated protein or control siRNA (siScr) (20 nM). Then, cells were treated with epirubicin for 24 h (or not) and exosomes were produced for the following 72 h. The levels of miR-503 (a, c, e) and miR-210 (b, d, f) in purified cells and exosomes were then assessed via qPCR. Data show fold change of miR-503 (a) and miR-210 (b) in exosomes from siRNA-transfected cells vs Scramble RNA-transfected (siScr) cells in non-treated conditions. Fold change of miR-503 and mR-210 respectively in exosomes (c, d) and cells (e, f) after siRNA transfection and epirubicin treatment normalized to untreated conditions. Plots show mean and SEM of three independent experiments. (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001)
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
ANXA2 and hnRNPA2B1 are necessary for the effect of epirubicin on the exosomal export of miR-503 in microvascular endothelial cells. HMVECs were treated with epirubicin for 24 h. Cell lysates were prepared 24 h after treatment and exosomes were collected 72 h after removing the chemotherapeutic drug. Cellular and exosomal levels of miR-503 were evaluated by qPCR. Plot represents mean and SEM (n = 3). b HMVECs were transfected with miR-503-biotin (10 nM). The following day, the cells were crosslinked with DTSSP and UV. HMECs lysates were incubated with streptavidin beads. Both input (IN) (cellular lysate) and pull-down fractions (PD) were separated by SDS-PAGE. Previously identified components of the MEC complex were validated by western blotting against pull-down (PD) and input (IN) (1% of cell lysate) fractions using vinculin as loading control. c HMVECs were transfected with miR-503 (10 nM). 48 h later, immunoprecipitation assays were performed using the indicated antibodies and the levels of miR-503 were evaluated by qPCR. Plot shows fold change of miR-503 in the immunoprecipitated (IP) vs input fractions (IN) in non-treated cells and (d) fold change of immunoprecipitated miR-503 in epirubicin-treated (EPI) vs non-treated cells (NT). Plots represent mean and SEM from three independent experiments, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. IN = 1% of the cellular lysate before immunoprecipitation

References

    1. van Niel G, D’Angelo G, Raposo G. Shedding light on the cell biology of extracellular vesicles. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2018 doi: 10.1038/nrm.2017.125. - DOI - PubMed
    1. McKelvey KJ, Powell KL, Ashton AW, et al. Exosomes: mechanisms of uptake. J Circ Biomark. 2015 doi: 10.5772/61186. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dreyer F, Baur A. Biogenesis and functions of exosomes and extracellular vesicles. Methods Mol Biol. 2016;1448:201–216. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-3753-0_15. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pérez-Boza J, Lion M, Struman I. Exploring the RNA landscape of endothelial exosomes. RNA. 2018;24:423–435. doi: 10.1261/rna.064352.117. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kalluri R, LeBleu VS (2017) Discovery of double-stranded genomic DNA in circulating exosomes. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol LXXXI:030932. 10.1101/sqb.2016.81.030932 - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms