It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Enhancing the efficacy of proteasome inhibitors (PI) is a central goal in myeloma therapy. We proposed that signaling-level responses after PI may reveal new mechanisms of action that can be therapeutically exploited. Unbiased phosphoproteomics after treatment with the PI carfilzomib surprisingly demonstrates the most prominent phosphorylation changes on splicing related proteins. Spliceosome modulation is invisible to RNA or protein abundance alone. Transcriptome analysis after PI demonstrates broad-scale intron retention, suggestive of spliceosome interference, as well as specific alternative splicing of protein homeostasis machinery components. These findings lead us to evaluate direct spliceosome inhibition in myeloma, which synergizes with carfilzomib and shows potent anti-tumor activity. Functional genomics and exome sequencing further support the spliceosome as a specific vulnerability in myeloma. Our results propose splicing interference as an unrecognized modality of PI mechanism, reveal additional modes of spliceosome modulation, and suggest spliceosome targeting as a promising therapeutic strategy in myeloma.
The mechanisms of action of proteasome inhibitors (PI) in multiple myeloma (MM) treatment are not fully elucidated. Here, the authors use unbiased phosphoproteomics in PI-treated MM and show increased phosphorylation of splicing-associated proteins, ultimately revealing splicing interference as a mode of PI action as well as demonstrating the spliceosome as a specific therapeutic vulnerability in this disease.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details






1 University of California, Department of Laboratory Medicine, San Francisco, USA (GRID:grid.266102.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2297 6811)
2 University of California, Department of Biomolecular Engineering, Santa Cruz, USA (GRID:grid.205975.c) (ISNI:0000 0001 0740 6917)
3 University of California, Department of Physiology, San Francisco, USA (GRID:grid.266102.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2297 6811)
4 University of California, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, USA (GRID:grid.266102.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2297 6811)
5 University of California, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, USA (GRID:grid.266102.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2297 6811); University of California, Department of Medicine, San Francisco, USA (GRID:grid.266102.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2297 6811)
6 University of California, Department of Laboratory Medicine, San Francisco, USA (GRID:grid.266102.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2297 6811); University of California, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, USA (GRID:grid.266102.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2297 6811)