Aberrant activation of the Ras pathway plays an undisputed role in human cancer (
Downward, 2003). However, in some primary cells activated Ras induces the accumulation of p53, p16 and ARF and triggers cellular senescence (
Serrano et al., 1997). This apparent paradox can be reconciled by the observation that Ras-induced senescence is bypassed by inactivating Rb and p53, suggesting that this response may have evolved as a mechanism of tumor suppression (
Serrano et al., 1997). Importantly, recent reports have further demonstrated that oncogene-induced senescence occurs
in vivo in response to
Ras,
Raf and
PTEN mutations in human tumors and in mouse tumor models (
Braig et al., 2005;
Chen et al., 2005;
Collado et al., 2005;
Michaloglou et al., 2005). In each case, a senescent population of cells was detected in benign but not advanced lesions, supporting the
in vitro observation that activation of these pathways leads to an initial burst of proliferation followed by cellular senescence. Thus, these data suggest that senescence functions as a mechanism of tumor suppression by limiting the development of these benign lesions, in the absence of additional cooperating mutations.
However, while these studies support an important biological role for oncogene-induced senescence, the molecular mechanisms that trigger this response are not completely understood. Certainly some of the signals that contribute to the senescence response have been identified. For example, activation of the Ras/Raf pathway is known to mediate some of its effects through activation of p16 and ARF (
Ohtani et al., 2001;
Wei et al., 2001;
Zhu et al., 1998). However, many additional questions remain unanswered. First, it appears that some cells are sensitive to oncogene-induced senescence while other cell-types are not (
Collado et al., 2005;
Tuveson et al., 2004), although there is no current mechanistic explanation for this observation. In addition, the historical definition of a senescent cell is one that cannot activate immediate early genes in response to growth factors (
Seshadri and Campisi, 1990). This observation implies that there must be a signal(s) that actively suppresses early signal transduction events in senescent cells, which presumably contributes to their inability to proliferate. However this aspect of senescence cannot be intuitively explained by the known functions of p53 and Rb.
To address these questions we first developed a system in which we could study cell types that might respond differently to the same oncogenic insult. Specifically, we examined the consequences of inactivating the
NF1 tumor suppressor. The
NF1-encoded protein, neurofibromin (NF1), is a Ras GTPase activating protein (GAP), and has been shown to function as such
in vitro and
in vivo (reviewed in (
Cichowski and Jacks, 2001)). Loss-of-function mutations in
NF1 underlie the familial cancer syndrome neurofibromatosis type I, which is characterized by the development of a variety of tumorigenic and non-tumorigenic symptoms. Notably, many of the lesions associated with NF1 are benign. We and others have previously shown that Ras is hyper-activated in
NF1-deficient mouse cells and human tumor cell lines (
Basu et al., 1992;
Bollag et al., 1996;
Cichowski et al., 2003;
DeClue et al., 1992;
Johannessen et al., 2005;
Kim et al., 1995). Accordingly, we reasoned that acutely inactivating neurofibromin, via an RNAi strategy, would provide a unique means of activating physiological levels of Ras in different cell lines, which cannot be accomplished by ectopically expressing an activated Ras protein.
Interestingly, loss of neurofibromin in primary mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) resulted in their immortalization, similar to the phenotype of MEFs expressing a single mutant
K-ras allele (
Tuveson et al., 2004). In contrast, acute neurofibromin-deficiency in primary human cells rapidly triggered senescence. Surprisingly, while Ras, AKT and ERK activity were sustained in MEFs upon neurofibromin loss, in primary human cells these proteins were transiently activated and then quickly suppressed to lower than baseline levels. This negative feedback response was not limited to NF1 knock-down (NF1
KD) cells, as a mutant
Raf allele also induced a rapid and dramatic suppression of Ras and the PI3K/AKT pathway. In both cases, this negative feedback response appeared to be mediated by several classes of proteins known to suppress Ras signaling. In addition, we found that the suppression of PI3K in this context can interface with Rb and p53 pathways minimally through its effects on HDM2 and FOXO, and does so
in vivo in benign human tumors. Taken together, these data suggest that one mechanism by which a cell protects itself from oncogenic insult is by initiating a fail-safe negative feedback signaling program that ultimately promotes the senescence response. Thus, these negative regulatory proteins may be unappreciated components functioning to limit the development of benign tumors.