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
. 2021 Jul 27;12(1):4536.
doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-24769-3.

NEK2 inhibition triggers anti-pancreatic cancer immunity by targeting PD-L1

Affiliations

NEK2 inhibition triggers anti-pancreatic cancer immunity by targeting PD-L1

Xiaozhen Zhang et al. Nat Commun. .

Abstract

Despite the substantial impact of post-translational modifications on programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1), its importance in therapeutic resistance in pancreatic cancer remains poorly defined. Here, we demonstrate that never in mitosis gene A-related kinase 2 (NEK2) phosphorylates PD-L1 to maintain its stability, causing PD-L1-targeted pancreatic cancer immunotherapy to have poor efficacy. We identify NEK2 as a prognostic factor in immunologically "hot" pancreatic cancer, involved in the onset and development of pancreatic tumors in an immune-dependent manner. NEK2 deficiency results in the suppression of PD-L1 expression and enhancement of lymphocyte infiltration. A NEK binding motif (F/LXXS/T) is identified in the glycosylation-rich region of PD-L1. NEK2 interacts with PD-L1, phosphorylating the T194/T210 residues and preventing ubiquitin-proteasome pathway-mediated degradation of PD-L1 in ER lumen. NEK2 inhibition thereby sensitizes PD-L1 blockade, synergically enhancing the anti-pancreatic cancer immune response. Together, the present study proposes a promising strategy for improving the effectiveness of pancreatic cancer immunotherapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. NEK2 is a prognostic factor for immunologically “hot” pancreatic cancer.
ac Expression profile of NEK2 in pancreatic cancer. Relative NEK2 expression in pancreatic cancer was analyzed using large-scale RNA-Seq datasets of PDAC from the TCGA database (n (T) = 179, n (N) = 171; n: number of patients) (a). NEK2 expression was measured in paired tumor and normal pancreatic tissues by IHC staining, with representative images (b) and statistical results (c) shown (n = 30; n: number of patients) (N: Normal pancreatic tissue; T: Pancreatic tumor tissue). Scale bars: 100 μm. d Correlation of NEK2 with prognostic factors in pancreatic cancer. Tissue microarray analysis of the prognostic role of NEK2 in pancreatic cancer (n = 64 weakly positive; n = 50 strongly positive) (p < 0.0001). e Overall survival (OS) of patients with pancreatic cancer with high or low expression of NEK2 (n = 177). f Overall survival (OS) of pancreatic cancer patients with high numbers of CD8+ T cells and with high or low expression of NEK2 (n = 76). g Overall survival (OS) of pancreatic cancer patients with decreased CD8+ T cells and with high or low expression of NEK2 (n = 101). h Bioinformatics analysis of the correlation between NEK2 and immune effector cells using TCGA datasets. In a, data are represented as boxplots where the middle line is the median; the lower and upper hinges correspond to the first and third quartiles; the upper whisker extends from the hinge to the largest value no further than 1.5 × IQR from the hinge (where IQR is the inter-quartile range); the lower whisker extends from the hinge to the smallest value at most 1.5 × IQR of the hinge, while data beyond the end of the whiskers are outlying points that are plotted individually. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 using a two-tailed t-test; ns: not significant. Kaplan–Meier method and a Gehan–Breslow–Wilcoxon test are indicated in d. The Hazard Ratios (HR) and p-values by the log-rank (Mantel–Cox) test are indicated in eg.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2. NEK2 deficiency improves pancreatic cancer immunogenicity.
a, c Schematic protocols displaying WT and NEK2-depleted pancreatic cancer cells separately, and s.c. injection into immunocompetent and immunodeficient mice (n = 7). b, e Representative images of tumors and growth curves of immunocompetent mice. Tumors were measured at specified time points then dissected at the endpoint (n = 7). d, f Representative images of tumors and growth curves of tumors from immunodeficient mice. Tumors were measured at specified time points and dissected at the endpoint (n = 7). g, h The weight of tumors from immunocompetent and immunodeficient mice was reported at the endpoint (n = 7). i, j Representative images and statistical results of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (n = 7). k Schematic protocols showing WT and NEK2-depleted pancreatic cancer cells separately injected into immunocompetent and immunodeficient mice (n = 13). l, m Survival of immunocompetent and immunodeficient mice bearing NEK2-depleted pancreatic cancer cells (n = 13). Kaplan–Meier survival curves with log-rank test assessing the significance between WT and NEK2 KD immunocompetent (l) (p < 0.0001) and immunodeficient (m) (p = 0.33) mice. Results represent means ± SD of one representative experiment in ej. All data are representative of three independently performed experiments. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 using a two-tailed t-test; ns: not significant. Kaplan–Meier method and a Gehan–Breslow–Wilcoxon test are indicated in m and l.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3. NEK2 inhibition enhances the anti-pancreatic cancer immune response.
a, c Schematic protocols of pancreatic cancer cells with or without pretreatment with a kinase-specific inhibitor of NEK2 (10 μM, 24 h) separately and s.c. injected into immunocompetent and immunodeficient mice (n = 7). b, d Tumor incidence in immunocompetent and immunodeficient mice was recorded at the times indicated. Tumors were further treated using an NEK2 inhibitor (100 μg/mouse, 2 weeks). e, f Schematic protocol of the treatment schedule and tumor growth curve in immunocompetent mice (n = 5). Tumors were measured at the time points indicated and removed at the endpoint. (h, i) Schematic protocol of the treatment schedule and tumor growth curve in immunodeficient mice (n = 5). Tumors were measured at specified time points and dissected at the endpoint. Tumor and mouse weight of immunocompetent (g, k) (n = 5) and immunodeficient mice (j, l) (n = 5) as reported at the endpoint. mo Representative images and further quantification of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. Scale bars: 100×: 50 μm; 200×: 100 μm. Kaplan–Meier method and a Gehan–Breslow–Wilcoxon test are indicated in b and d. Results represent means ± SD of one representative experiment in f, g, i, j, k, l, m, and n. All data are representative of three independently performed experiments. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 using a two-tailed t-test; ns: not significant.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4. NEK2 positively correlates and interacts with PD-L1 in pancreatic cancer.
a Western blot analysis of NEK2 and PD-L1 in clinical pancreatic tissue samples from patients (n = 20) (N: Normal pancreatic tissue; T: Pancreatic tumor tissue). bd Representative images and statistical results of IHC staining of NEK2 and PD-L1 in a tissue microarray (n = 156). eg Cell lysates from SW1990, KPC, and CFPAC-1 separately analyzed by IP and Western blotting using the antibodies indicated. Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments. h GST-pull down assay of NEK2-His and GST-PD-L1 protein. Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments. i Representative images of individual immunofluorescence staining of NEK2 and PD-L1 interaction in KPC cells by Duolink assay. The red dots (NEK2/PD-L1 interaction) indicate their interaction. Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments. The Spearman correlations and p-values by Spearman’s test are indicated in d.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5. NEK2 inhibits ubiquitination-mediated proteasomal degradation of PD-L1.
a, b Western blot analysis and flow cytometry of PD-L1 expression in pancreatic cancer cell lines after treatment with NEK2 inhibitor (10 μM, 24 h) and NEK2 knockdown. Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments. c LC–MS proteomics quantitative analysis of pancreatic cancer cells overexpressing NEK2. d Western blot analysis of PD-L1 expression in KPC cells treated with NEK2 inhibitor (10 μM, 24 h) after treatment with MG132 (100 μM, 24 h). Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments. e Western blot analysis of PD-L1 expression in WT and NEK2 KD KPC cells treated with MG132 (100 μM, 24 h). Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments. f Stability analysis of PD-L1 in KPC cells treated with NEK2 inhibitor (10 μM, 24 h) after treatment with cycloheximide (CHX) (20 μg/mL). Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments. g Stability analysis of PD-L1 in WT and NEK2 KD KPC cells treated with CHX (20 μg/mL). Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments. h, i Statistical analysis of three independent experiments is displayed. The intensity of PD-L1 protein expression was quantified using a densitometer. j Ubiquitination assay of PD-L1 in KPC cells treated with NEK2 inhibitor (10 μM, 24 h), subjected to anti-PD-L1 IP and anti-ubiquitin Western blot analysis after treatment with MG132 (50 μM, 24 h). k Ubiquitination assay of PD-L1 in WT and NEK2 KD KPC cells treated with MG132. Results represent means ± SD of one representative experiment in h and i. All data are representative of three independently performed experiments. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 using a two-tailed t-test; ns: not significant.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6. NEK2 phosphorylates PD-L1 at T194/T210 to maintain protein stability.
a Schematic diagram of the NEK-binding motif (F/LXXS/T) in the glycosylation-rich region and amino acid sequences around the potential binding sites of PD-L1 were aligned in evolutionarily divergent species. The F/LXXS/T motifs are highlighted in blue. b Generation of site-specific antibodies against T194 and T210 (Mus musculus: T193 and T209)-phosphorylated PD-L1. c Western blot analysis of T193 and T209-phosphorylated PD-L1 in KPC cells with NEK2 inhibitor (10 μM, 24 h) and NEK2 KD KPC. Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments. d In vitro kinase assay and western blot analysis of pT193-PD-L1 and pT209-PD-L1 expression of recombinant PD-L1 WT and NEK2 (active) protein. Representative image is shown, n = 3 independent experiments. e, f Western blot analysis of PD-L1 expression in flag-PD-L1 WT and T193/209A or T193/209D-transfected KPC cells with or without MG132 treatment. Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments. g Western blot analysis of pT193-PD-L1, pT209-PD-L1, and PD-L1 expression in WT and K37R transfected NEK2 KD KPC cells. Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments. h Ubiquitination assay of PD-L1 in Flag-PD-L1 WT and T193/209A or T193/209D-transfected KPC cells, subjected to anti-PD-L1 IP and anti-ubiquitin Western blot analysis after treatment with MG132 (50 μM, 24 h). Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments. i Ubiquitination assay of PD-L1 in WT and K37R transfected NEK2 KD-KPC cells subjected to PD-L1 IP and Western blot analysis with anti-ubiquitin after treatment with MG132 (50 μM, 24 h). Representative image is shown n = 3 independent experiments.
Fig. 7
Fig. 7. NEK2 inhibition sensitizes PD-L1-targeted pancreatic cancer immunotherapy.
a Schematic protocol of the combination of anti-PD-L1 antibody and NEK2 inhibitor therapy. b Tumor growth curve of mice treated with anti-PD-L1 antibody (200 μg/mouse), NEK2 inhibitor (100 μg/mouse), or their combination (n = 5). c Representative images displaying tumors harvested from mice bearing KPC cells treated with anti-PD-L1 antibody, NEK2 inhibitor, or their combination (n = 5). d, e Tumor weight and mouse body weight (n = 5). f, g Flow cytometric analysis and statistical results of lymphocytes that have infiltrated the tumors (n = 5). Results are presented as means ± SD from one representative experiment in b, d, e, and g. All data are representative of three independently performed experiments. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 using a two-tailed t-test; ns: not significant.
Fig. 8
Fig. 8. Predicted model of the NEK2–PD-L1 signaling pathway in pancreatic cancer.
A schematic model is proposed to illustrate how PD-L1 protein stability is regulated by NEK2 in pancreatic cancer. NEK2 positively regulates and interacts with PD-L1 largely through PD-L1 phosphorylation at the T194/T210 residue in ER of pancreatic cancer. Therefore, treatment with NEK2 inhibitor unexpectedly suppressed PD-L1 protein expression, largely by inhibition of PD-L1 phosphorylation that promotes its degradation.

References

    1. Mizrahi JD, Surana R, Valle JW, Shroff RT. Pancreatic cancer. Lancet. 2020;395:2008–2020. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30974-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bear AS, Vonderheide RH, O’Hara MH. Challenges and opportunities for pancreatic cancer immunotherapy. Cancer Cell. 2020;38:788–802. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2020.08.004. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grossberg AJ, et al. Multidisciplinary standards of care and recent progress in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2020;70:375–403. doi: 10.3322/caac.21626. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chen LP, Han X. Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy of human cancer: past, present, and future. J. Clin. Investig. 2015;125:3384–3391. doi: 10.1172/JCI80011. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dong, H. D. et al. Tumor-associated B7-H1 promotes T-cell apoptosis: a potential mechanism of immune evasion. Nat. Med. 8, 793–800 (2002). - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms