Pro-inflammatory cytokines are secreted from both fat cells and immune cells residing in adipose tissue, particularly when animals or humans become obese
2. We noted with interest that the primary amino acid sequence of PPARγ contained a consensus site for phosphorylation by the protein kinase cdk5 at serine 273 of PPARγ2 (
Supplementary Fig. 1a). This protein kinase is not regulated by cyclins, but is instead activated by p35/25, which are targets of numerous cytokines and pro-inflammatory signals
19. When murine PPARγ was incubated
in vitro with cdk5 and its cofactor p35 (), the nuclear receptor was phosphorylated as efficiently as histone H1, a known substrate of the cdk5/p35 complex. Mutation of serine-273 to alanine completely blocked phosphorylation by cdk5, indicating that there were no other cdk5 sites in PPARγ detected by an antibody that recognizes phosphorylated cdk5 consensus sites (). Other members of the cdk protein family did not phosphorylate PPARγ (
Supplementary Fig. 1b). Cdk5 also phosphorylated PPARγ at Ser-273 in cells, as shown by co-transfection of the kinase with wild-type (wt) and mutant PPARγ (
Supplementary Fig. 1c). Finally, cdk5 did not modify murine PPARα or PPARδ (
Supplementary Fig. 1d).
Obesity is characterized by elevated circulating and local levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines and free fatty acids, and cdk5 is activated by various cytokines
19,20. illustrates that treatment of 3T3-L1 adipocytes with TNF-α caused phosphorylation at Ser-273 of PPARγ. Furthermore, the phosphorylation of PPARγ at Ser-273 occurred upon treatment of fat cells with IL-6 or FFAs (
Supplementary Fig. 2a and b). These modifications were greatly suppressed by an shRNA directed against murine cdk5 ( and
Supplementary Fig. 2c) or roscovitine, a selective cdk5 inhibitor (
Supplementary Fig. 2d). Although cytokines and FFA may affect other phosphorylation sites within PPARγ, these results strongly suggest that the phosphorylation at Ser-273 of PPARγ is occurring specifically through cdk5.
We next asked how the Ser-273 phosphorylation of PPARγ altered the ability of this receptor to affect adipogenesis and gene expression within differentiated adipocytes. Wild-type and S273A mutant alleles of PPARγ had the same transcriptional activity on a PPAR-response element (
Supplementary Fig. 3) when expressed in fibroblasts previously engineered to completely lack this receptor (,
Supplementary Fig. 4a)
21. These initial experiments took advantage of the considerable serum-induced basal level of cdk5 activity in cultured cells
22. While treatment of cells with cytokines and FFAs induced a more robust activation of cdk5, these treatments also lead to de-differentiation of adipocytes
23. The mutant and wt PPARγ alleles both drove PPARγ-mediated adipogenesis with equal efficiency (). While most classical adipocyte-selective genes, like
aP2 and
C/EBPα, were expressed to equal levels, certain transcripts including the key fatty acid transporter
cd36, and the adipokines
adiponectin,
adipsin and
leptin were sensitive to mutation of the cdk5 site in PPARγ (). Mutation of the cdk5 site also increased the secretion of adiponectin into the culture medium (
Supplementary Fig. 4b). To understand how regulation of Ser-273 affects expression of
adiponectin and other specific genes, we compared the chromatin association of phosphorylated and non-phosphorylated PPARγ (
Supplementary Fig. 5). There were no differences in DNA binding by the phosphorylation of PPARγ, suggesting that other factors, such as co-regulator recruitment to PPARγ, may be differentially regulated in a phosphorylation-dependent manner. We next compared the ability of mutant and wild-type PPARγ alleles to alter fat cell gene expression
in vivo.
Adiponectin and
adipsin were markedly dysregulated, being elevated in transplanted fat pads expressing mutant vs. wt PPARγ (). While both
cd36 and
leptin were expressed at slightly higher levels in cells expressing mutant receptor, this did not reach statistical significance.
It is notable that
adiponectin and
adipsin are inappropriately regulated in obesity
14,15. This led us to ask whether cdk5 modification of PPARγ is activated in adipose tissues of obese mice. Adipose tissues were harvested at several time points from mice placed on either a standard chow or a high fat/high sugar diet containing 60% kcal from fat. As shown in
Supplementary Table 1, overt hyperinsulinemia was apparent at 13 weeks. There was detectable basal levels Ser-273 phosphorylation of PPARγ in chow fed animals, with no increase in this modification after 3 weeks on high fat diet (,
Supplementary Fig. 6a). High-fat feeding for 7 weeks led to increased phosphorylation of PPARγ compared to chow-fed controls, with the difference becoming more pronounced after 13 weeks. Similarly, there was no phosphorylation of cdk5 after 3 weeks of high fat feeding; however, activated cdk5 was easily observed after 7 and 13 weeks of the HFD (
Supplementary Fig. 6c) along with increased levels of the cleaved p25 protein, the more stable form of the activating subunit for cdk5
19. We also compared the cdk5-mediated modification of PPARγ in two different white fat depots: inguinal fat, a type of subcutaneous fat, and epididymal fat, a visceral depot
24. and
Supplementary Figs. 6b and d illustrate that the increase in phosphorylation by cdk5 occurred in both white fat depots, with greater intensity in the epididymal depot.
Anti-diabetic drugs of the thiazolidinedione (TZD) class, such as rosiglitazone, are agonist ligands for PPARγ, improving insulin sensitivity in both mice and humans
10. To ask whether anti-diabetic PPARγ ligands alter cdk5-mediated phosphorylation of this receptor, we treated fat cells expressing wt PPARγ with TNF-α, rosiglitazone, or a combination of these two agents. shows that rosiglitazone inhibited Ser-273 phosphorylation at approximately 1 µM, similar to the dose required for other PPARγ-mediated activities in adipose cells
13. GW9662, a PPARγ antagonist
25, completely blocked this effect of rosiglitazone. We also examined the effect of these compounds on the cdk5-mediated phosphorylation of a naturally occurring mutant form of PPARγ (Q286P) that no longer directly binds known ligands
26. Rosiglitazone could not interfere with cdk5 phosphorylation in this case, implying that direct binding of the ligand was required for inhibition. To address whether ligands work
directly to inhibit cdk5-mediated phosphorylation, we mixed purified PPARγ, cdk5/p35 and rosiglitazone under conditions to achieve modification
in vitro. Rosiglitazone blocked Ser273-phosphorylation
in vitro, with a half-maximally effective dose of about 30 nM (), near the K
d of this compound for PPARγ binding
13. Importantly, this inhibition is not caused by a general inhibition of cdk5 activity, since incubation with rosiglitazone did not inhibit the ability of cdk5 to phosphorylate Rb ().
MRL24 is a non-TZD compound with high affinity for PPARγ, with excellent anti-diabetic activity in mice
18, but poor agonist properties toward PPARγ in transcription and adipogenesis assays. As reported previously
18 and shown in , MRL24 showed weak transcriptional activity compared to rosiglitazone. On the other hand, MRL24 was very effective at blocking cdk5-mediated phosphorylation of PPARγ (); 30 nM of MRL24 inhibited the modification of PPARγ as effectively as 300 nM of rosiglitazone, both
in vitro and in cells (,
Supplementary Figs. 7a and b). We also examined the ability of several other published PPARγ ligands that have been shown to have poor agonist properties, but strong anti-diabetic activities
in vivo27–29. As shown in
Supplementary Fig. 8, Mbx-102, BVT.13 and nTZDpa were all effective at inhibiting the cdk5-mediated phosphorylation of PPARγ.
To systematically compare changes in gene expression caused by both the Ser-273 mutation in PPARγ and specific PPARγ ligands, we performed Affymetrix analyses of gene expression with RNA from cells expressing either wt or mutant PPARγ, plus wt cells treated with rosiglitazone or MRL24. As shown in , unsupervised clustering of these data resulted in several notable clusters of expression. The overlap in global regulation of gene expression between the mutant form of PPARγ and the PPARγ ligands is highly significant (
p<0.005 for each drug vs. mutation). Genes exhibiting differential expression between wt and mutant PPARγ segregated into four major groups. One group, labeled “a”, were genes whose expression was decreased by Ser-273 mutation. This same group of genes was also suppressed by both rosiglitazone and MRL24, though neither ligand functioned as dramatically as did the non-phosphorylatable mutant of PPARγ. This is understandable as it is unlikely that ligand treatment caused complete dephosphorylation of PPARγ comparable to the mutant protein. The very small cluster labeled “b” contained
Ahnak nucleoprotein and proteolipid protein (
plp) 1, which are critical for myelination
30,31, and sorting nexin 5 (
Snx5), which is important for vesicle trafficking
32. A larger cluster, labeled “c”, represented genes were decreased by cdk5-mediated phosphorylation of PPARγ. Several of the genes known to be dysregulated in obesity, including
adiponectin and
adipsin, were present in this cluster. Rosiglitazone increased essentially all of these genes, but indicates that this occurred as part of a very large gene set increased by rosiglitzone action. Indeed, genes induced most dramatically by rosiglitazone (labeled “d”)
did not correspond to the cdk5 mutation-induced gene set and were largely the classic genes of adipogenesis, like
aP2 and lipoprotein lipase (
Lpl). In sharp contrast, the gene cluster strongly increased by MRL24 was much smaller than that induced by rosiglitazone, and corresponded remarkably well to the gene set induced by the mutation in the cdk5 site of PPARγ.
Taken together, the data presented in – suggest that cdk5 modification of PPARγ could be a major source of gene dysregulation and pathology of adipose tissues in obesity. To directly address this, we created refined gene sets regulated by the cdk5 modification of PPARγ, using the concept of principal component analysis of gene expression data (
Supplementary Fig. 9). shows that the great majority of these genes had dysregulated expression in an obesity-dependent manner. In total, of the 17 genes most significantly reduced by cdk5 phosphorylation of PPARγ, at least 12 of these genes were also decreased in obese mice. Interestingly, most of these genes were more significantly impacted in epididymal fat tissue compared to the inguinal depot (
Supplementary Fig. 10), consistent with differential phosphorylation of PPARγ in the two depots (). In addition, shRNA-mediated knock-down of cdk5 in cells resulted in marked dysregulation of the gene sets, particularly
adiponectin and
adipsin (
Supplementary Fig. 11), further confirming that cdk5-mediated phosphorylation of PPARγ plays a significant role in the regulation of specific fat cell genes.
To develop a structural understanding of how PPARγ ligands affect cdk5-mediated phosphorylation of PPARγ, we turned to hydrogen/deuterium exchange (HDX) linked to mass-spectrometry
33. As shown in , rosiglitazone, but not MRL24 significantly reduced H/D exchange in helix 12 (H12), which contains the ligand-binding domain comprising part of the AF-2 surface of the receptor responsible for classical agonism
34,35. On the other hand, MRL24 had a more marked impact on H/D exchange kinetics across H3 (aa 309–315), the β-sheet at 369–379, and the cdk5 site itself at Ser-273 in PPARγ. Rosiglitazone also affected the exchange across H3 and the beta sheet region, but did not significantly alter the H/D exchange across Ser-273. When these HDX data are mapped onto the known co-crystal structures of PPARγ with each of these ligands bound, it is clear that MRL24 reduced the dynamic nature of these regions to a greater extent than rosiglitazone (). It is likely that the ligand-induced reduction in the dynamic nature of H3, the β-sheet, and the cdk5 site, “freezes” this region in a configuration less favorable to cdk5 phosphorylation. Since cdk5 phosphorylation of PPARγ does not affect chromatin occupancy of this receptor (
Supplementary Fig. 2), we examined the possibility that the region near the cdk5 site might be an important location for ligand-gated coregulator interactions. As shown in
Supplementary Fig. 12, HDX data shows that a model coactivator, SRC3, interacts with a PPARγ region far from helix 12, near Ser-273, when MRL24 is bound. Thus, specific coregulator modulation of PPARγ by modifications at serine 273 is highly plausible.
Next, we asked whether the PPARγ ligands alter cdk5-mediated phosphorylation of PPARγ
in vivo. As shown in and
Supplementary Fig. 13, treatment with either rosiglitazone or MRL24 at 10 mg/kg for 7 days dramatically improved glucose tolerance of high-fat fed mice and reduced fasting insulin levels without changing body weight. Importantly, both of these compounds reduced cdk5-mediated phosphorylation of PPARγ in the adipose tissue of every mouse treated (). These drugs did not affect the status of another known phosphorylation site, Ser112 (
Supplementary Fig. 14). Furthermore, 12 of the 17 genes most significantly controlled by cdk5 action on PPARγ (as described above) were altered by the action of one or both drugs (). These data demonstrate that anti-diabetic PPARγ ligands inhibit cdk5 phosphorylation of PPARγ
in vivo and reverse changes in gene expression linked to this modification. Consistent with these results, treatment of roscovitine significantly suppressed cdk5-mediated phosphorylation and most of the gene set regulated by the phosphorylation of PPARγ (
Supplementary Fig. 15). However, we cannot exclude the possibility that weight loss in the treatment group may be influencing changes in phosphorylation and gene expression.
Finally, we investigated whether humans undergoing therapy with a PPARγ ligand showed decreased phosphorylation of PPARγ at the cdk5 site in adipose tissue, and how this correlated with improvements in systemic insulin sensitivity. As shown in , Ser-273 phosphorylation of PPARγ was generally decreased in subcutaneous fat biopsies from patients following rosiglitazone treatment. However, one patient displayed increased phosphorylation and two patients showed only a modest decrease. Notably, patients who had little or no reduction in PPARγ phosphorylation also displayed little improvement in clinical parameters such as fasting insulin and fasting glucose with rosiglitazone treatment (
Supplementary Tables 2 and 3). To investigate the relationship of these effects to changes in insulin sensitivity, we compared the final, euglycemic, hyperinsulinemic clamped glucose infusion rate with the relative change in PPARγ phosphorylation for each patient. As shown in , there was a powerful, negative correlation (r=−0.92 and
p=0.001) between changes in glucose infusion rate and changes in PPARγ phosphorylation. Thus, in this patient cohort, improvement of insulin sensitivity using rosiglitazone was tightly coupled to decreased phosphorylation of PPARγ at the cdk5 site.