Age-related changes in oral motor-control strategies during unpredictable load demands in humans

To investigate age-related changes in oral motor strategies in response to unpredictable load demands. Sixty-five healthy children (aged 3–17 yr) were divided into five age-groups based on their dental eruption stages and compared with a group of healthy adults (aged 18–35 yr). Each participant was asked to perform a standardized motor control task involving ‘pulling’ and ‘holding’ a force transducer with the anterior teeth. Different loads were attached to the force transducer in an unpredictable manner. The temporal force profile was divided into two time-segments (an initial segment and a later segment). The peak force and peak force rate during the initial time-segment, and the holding force and intra-trial variability (coefficient of variation) during the later time-segment, were measured. The results showed no differences in the peak force, peak force rate, holding force, and force variability in children compared with adults. However, the trends in the data evaluated using a segmented regression analysis showed that a breakpoint (abrupt change) consistently occurred in the late-mixed dentition group (age 9–11 yr) for most of the outcome variables. The results indicate that while the motor control strategies in children appear to be similar to those in adults, there is a shift in the oral motor developmental trend during the late-mixed dentition stage.     

Oncogenic KRAS engages an RSK1/NF1 pathway to inhibit wild-type RAS signaling in pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a lethal malignancy with limited treatment options. Although activating mutations of the KRAS GTPase are the predominant dependency present in >90% of PDAC patients, targeting KRAS mutants directly has been challenging in PDAC. Similarly, strategies targeting known KRAS downstream effectors have had limited clinical success due to feedback mechanisms, alternate pathways, and dose-limiting toxicities in normal tissues. Therefore, identifying additional functionally relevant KRAS interactions in PDAC may allow for a better understanding of feedback mechanisms and unveil potential therapeutic targets. Here, we used proximity labeling to identify protein interactors of active KRAS in PDAC cells. We expressed fusions of wild-type (WT) (BirA-KRAS4B), mutant (BirA-KRAS4B^G12D), and nontransforming cytosolic double mutant (BirA-KRAS4B^G12D/C185S) KRAS with the BirA biotin ligase in murine PDAC cells. Mass spectrometry analysis revealed that RSK1 selectively interacts with membrane-bound KRAS^G12D, and we demonstrate that this interaction requires NF1 and SPRED2. We find that membrane RSK1 mediates negative feedback on WT RAS signaling and impedes the proliferation of pancreatic cancer cells upon the ablation of mutant KRAS. Our findings link NF1 to the membrane-localized functions of RSK1 and highlight a role for WT RAS signaling in promoting adaptive resistance to mutant KRAS-specific inhibitors in PDAC.

A total of 60,430 new cases of pancreatic cancer were estimated for 2021, and the 5-y relative survival rate has consistently remained below 11% (1). About 85% of these pancreatic cancer tumors are pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) (2). Poor outcomes of PDAC cases result from late diagnoses leading to unresectable and heterogeneous tumors as well as ineffective therapies, which only prolong survival on the order of months (3–5). Mutations in the KRAS proto-oncogene are present in over 90% of PDAC cases and are associated with a poor prognosis (6). Furthermore, mice expressing mutant KRAS in the pancreas develop precursor lesions, which sporadically progress into frank PDAC. This progression is accelerated when combined with other mutations or deletion of tumor suppressor genes (7–11). Additionally, independent studies have shown that the maintenance of murine PDAC cells require KRAS (12–14).As a RAS GTPase, KRAS acts as a molecular switch at the plasma membrane that relays growth factor signaling from receptor tyrosine kinases to downstream pathways such as RAF/MEK and PI3K/AKT (15). GTP binding alters the conformation of the KRAS G domain, thereby creating binding sites for downstream effectors to trigger enzymatic cascades that promote cell transformation (16–19). Intrinsically, KRAS slowly hydrolyzes GTP into GDP to halt signaling; however, GTPase activating proteins (GAPs) such as neurofibromin 1(NF1) catalyze this process (20). In contrast, guanine nucleotide exchange factors, such as son of sevenless homolog 1 (SOS1), catalyze the exchange of GTP for bound GDP. In most PDAC cases, KRAS is mutated at the 12th residue located in the G domain from glycine to either a valine (G12V), or more commonly, aspartate (G12D). These mutations sterically prevent the “arginine finger domain” of GAPs from entering the GTPase site, thereby blocking extrinsic allosteric GTPase activation and stabilizing RAS-GTP (21, 22). Activating mutations in KRAS constitutively trigger RAF/MEK and PI3K/AKT pathways leading to increased cell proliferation as well as other prooncogenic behaviors (15). KRAS signaling not only relies on the G domain but also the C-terminal hypervariable domain (HVR), which is required to stabilize KRAS on membranes where signaling is most efficient (23–26). Independent studies suggest that specific biochemical and cellular consequences of KRAS activation are attributed to the unique properties of the HVR of the predominant splice form KRAS4B, namely the polybasic domain and the lipid anchor (27–30). Localization of RAS proteins to the plasma membrane requires the prenylation of the CAAX motif (23). Additionally, for KRAS4B, the hypervariable region contains a highly polybasic domain consisting of several consecutive lysines, which can interact with the negative charges on the polar heads of phospholipids and stabilize protein interactions (31). Structural and biochemical characterization of the HVR and G domain has contributed to a better understanding of the signaling outputs of KRAS and led to KRAS-targeting strategies.Various approaches to inhibit KRAS include direct inhibition, expression interference, mislocalization, and targeting of downstream effectors (32). Thus far, direct inhibitors against KRAS have only successfully targeted the G12C mutant, which comprises 2.9% of KRAS mutant PDAC (21, 33). For other KRAS mutants, targeting downstream effectors of KRAS in pancreatic cancer remains an alternative approach. Unfortunately, dual inhibition of MEK and AKT pathways was ineffective in PDAC patients (34). Difficulty in targeting KRAS due to adaptive resistance and feedback regulation motivates a better understanding of KRAS biology (35). For example, although PDAC typically features a mutant KRAS, there may be a role for its wild-type (WT) counterpart as well as WT RAS paralogs (HRAS and NRAS), which are GAP sensitive and subject to signaling feedback. While oncogenic KRAS has been shown to activate WT HRAS and NRAS via allosteric stimulation of SOS1 (36), WT KRAS has been proposed to be a tumor suppressor in some KRAS mutant cancers based on the commonly observed mutant-specific allele imbalance that occurs throughout tumor progression (37). Additionally, the reintroduction of WT KRAS abolished tumor T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia development and impaired tumor growth in KRAS mutant lung cancer cells in vivo (37–39). The discovery of novel KRAS protein interactors involved in downstream signaling or feedback and compensatory pathways may elucidate why inhibition of downstream pathways have had limited clinical impact in PDAC. Here, we perform proximity labeling experiments by expressing a fusion of BirA^R118G biotin ligase and KRAS in PDAC cells, which, in the presence of high concentrations of biotin, generates reactive biotinoyl-AMP that labels lysines of nearby proteins, such as interactors of its fusion partner KRAS (40–42). The biotinylated interactor proteins can be isolated by streptavidin pulldown and analyzed by proteomics to identify novel protein interactors (43–45). Because covalent labeling occurs in living cells, enzymatic labeling may potentially identify transient interactors and protein complexes.Two recent studies used proximity-dependent biotin identification (BioID) labeling methods to identify KRAS interactors in 293T and colon cancer cells (46, 47). These studies uncovered and validated the functional relevance of PIP5KA1 and mTORC2 in PDAC cells. However, BirA-KRAS screens in PDAC models have not yet been performed. Since the tumor context may determine protein expression and relevant interactions, we sought to perform a BirA-KRAS screen in PDAC cells. We hypothesize that proximity labeling with BioID presents a means for identifying new mutant KRAS-specific interactions in PDAC, which may unveil new insights into therapeutic design for this malignancy.