Review Article - Journal of Cancer Immunology (2020) Volume 2, Issue 3
The Role of ERO1? in Modulati ng Cancer Progression and Immune Escape
Brennan D. Johnson1, Werner J. Geldenhuys2,3, Lori A. Hazlehurst1,2*
1WVU Cancer Institute, Morgantown, WV 26506, USA
2WVU School of Pharmacy, Morgantown, WV, 25606, USA
3WVU Neuroscience Institute, Morgantown, WV, 25606, USA
- *Corresponding Author:
- Lori A. Hazlehurst
Received date: June 29, 2020; Accepted date: August 10, 2020
Citation: Johnson BD, Geldenhuys WJ, Hazlehurst LA. The Role of ERO1α in Modulating Cancer Progression and Immune Escape. J Cancer Immunol. 2020; 2(3): 103-115.
Copyright: © 2020 Johnson BD, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Endoplasmic reticulum oxidoreductin-1 alpha (ERO1α) was originally shown to be an endoplasmic reticulum (ER) resident protein
undergoing oxidative cycles in concert with protein disulfide isomerase (PDI) to promote proper protein folding and to maintain
homeostasis within the ER. ERO1α belongs to the flavoprotein family containing a flavin adenine dinucleotide utilized in transferring
of electrons during oxidation-reduction cycles. This family is used to maintain redox potentials and protein homeostasis within the
ER. ERO1α’s location and function has since been shown to exist beyond the ER. Originally thought to exist solely in the ER, it has
since been found to exist in the golgi apparatus, as well as in exosomes purified from patient samples. Besides aiding in protein
folding of transmembrane and secretory proteins in conjunction with PDI, ERO1α is also known for formation of de novo disulfide
bridges. Public databases, such as the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and The Protein Atlas, reveal ERO1α as a poor prognostic marker
in multiple disease settings. Recent evidence indicates that ERO1α expression in tumor cells is a critical determinant of metastasis.
However, the impact of increased ERO1α expression in tumor cells extends into the tumor microenvironment. Secretory proteins
requiring ERO1α expression for proper folding have been implicated as being involved in immune escape through promotion of
upregulation of programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) and stimulation of polymorphonuclear myeloid derived suppressor cells (PMNMDSC’s)
via secretion of granulocytic colony stimulating factor (G-CSF). Hereby, ERO1α plays a pivotal role in cancer progression
and potentially immune escape; making ERO1α an emerging attractive putative target for the treatment of cancer.
ERO1, Cancer, ER stress, Cancer therapeutics, Immune resistance
The failure to eradicate minimal residual disease often located at metastatic sites and/or the bone marrow niche continues to be a clinical barrier for successful treatments in cancer [1-4]. Unfortunately, in some tumor’s disease relapse is associated with a multi-drug resistant phenotype that corresponds to resistance to structurally and functionally divergent agents. Similar to conventional therapies the success of immune-oncology is limited to the occurrence of primary resistance in some patients, as well as emergence of acquired resistance . Accumulating experimental evidence indicates that the tumor microenvironment plays a critical role in mediating sensitivity to targeted agents as well as immunotherapy [6,7]. Thus, to improve the gap in patient outcomes new targets need to be validated in the context of the metastatic
phenotype and the tumor microenvironment. This review
will discuss the potential of ERO1α as target for the
treatment of cancer. Despite the endoplasmic reticulum
being one of the largest cellular organelles, it was one of
the last ones discovered . Originally described by Emilio
Veratti in 1902, it was not until the electron microscope was
available that George Palade and Keith Porter made the rediscovery
[9-11] capturing the structural complexities and
tubular structure existing in the cytoplasm . Since the
re-discovery, the ER has been identified to be a continuous
membranous organelle essential for protein folding,
calcium storage, lipid metabolism, protein transport,
post-translational modifications, and protein transport via
vesicles . It is composed of two main parts; smooth ER
and rough ER. The rough ER is composed of ribosomes and continuous cisternae that have an important role in
protein folding and storage, while the smooth ER is void
of ribosomes and composed mainly of microtubules, and
is critical for synthesis and storage of lipids. Maintaining
homeostasis within the ER is essential for proper formation
of desulphated bridges and ultimately, protein folding
. A major determinant of homeostasis occurs through
oxidative enzymes of the flavin dependent endoplasmic
reticulum oxidoreductin-1 (ERO1α) family [15-19] and
by the buffering capacity of reduced glutathione (GSH)
and oxidized glutathione (GSSG) in a 3:1-6:1 molar ratio
in favor of reduced glutathione [20-22]. ERO1α is known
to oxidize protein disulfide isomerase (PDI) in order to
form de novo disulfide bridges . The crucial function
of disulfide bridging occurring in the ER between ERO1α
and PDI have been well-established . Briefly, the target unfolded protein within the ER can be oxidized by PDI resulting in the reduction of PDI. Oxidized ERO1α can in turn lead to the recycling of PDI to the oxidized from. Reduced ERO1α can be oxidized and form denovo disulfide bridge utilizing FAD as a cofactor leading to FADH and reduction of molecular oxygen to ROS (See Figure 1).
Cancer cells typically are under increased levels of ER stress. ER stress is most evident in secretory tumors such as multiple myeloma, breast, lung and pancreatic. However, other inducers of ER stress include hypoxia and chemotherapy. Given the importance of ER homeostasis, ERO1α-PDI interaction, and formation of de novo disulfide bridges ERO1α has emerged as a player in the regulation and tolerance of cancer cells to ER stress . An increase in ER-stress can lead to two possible outcomes: 1.) unfolded protein response (UPR) once activated ultimately brings ER stress back to homeostasis via inhibition of translation and inducing cell cycle arrest, or 2.) if ER stress is not resolved than apoptosis occurs through release of cytochrome C and caspase activation, ultimately protecting the organism from rogue cells that display misfolded proteins . Despite UPR being the main pathway to ER
stress resolution; UPR has also been linked to autophagic
flux. Autophagy can either be inhibited or activated upon
ER stress . Though autophagy is related to ER stress
it is not always activated under ER stress conditions.
Autophagy is an orchestrated process by which misfolded
proteins, damaged or aged organelles, or even mutated
proteins are sequestered in an autophagosome that
ultimately fuses to the lysosome leading to degradation
of sequestered components . Reports recently have
showed that withanolide E in combination with ER stress
inducers enhance apoptosis synergistically in pancreatic
cancer models . Multiple cancer types have been
reported to have increased ER stress including multiple
myeloma, lung, breast, and pancreatic [29-31]. Differences
in ER stress can be driven by genetic, epigenetic, and
microenvironmental heterogeneity that likely result in
a range of pro-survival and anti-apoptotic responses
. Anticancer interventions such as chemotherapy
has also been shown to modulate UPR (Unfolded protein
response) though clinical implications are only starting to
be understood [33,34]. Recent studies have showed that
depending on the context cancer cells can utilize UPR as a
resistance mechanism .
Interestingly, overexpression of ERO1α tends to have a worse prognosis in multiple cancer indications; multiple myeloma , breast [37-39] and hepatocellular carcinoma , as well as lung, esophageal, diffuse B-cell lymphoma, and others according to The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and The Protein Atlas. These data indicate that expression is increased in aggressive and/or drug resistant disease and support the premise the ERO1α is a tractable target for the treatment of cancer. Below, we will delve into four specific topics that will reveal and shed light onto 1.) the structure, function, localization, and characterization of flavin containing ERO1α, 2.) Disease indications, 3.) immune surveillance, and immune evasion and how they are related to ERO1α and 4) chemical probes currently available to test the ERO1α-PDI pathway.
Structure, Function, Localization, and Characterization of Flavin Containing ERO1α
Flavoenzymes are an important classification of enzymes that utilize FAD in redox reactions to maintain enzymatic function. Specifically, ERO1α promotes oxidative protein folding through PDI, producing hydrogen peroxide as a by-product and is tightly regulated to avoid futile oxidation cycles occurring in the ER . There are many secretory and membrane proteins under the assistance of thioldisulfide oxidoreductases helping form disulfide bonds in the ER [42-46]. The major players in ER oxidative
reactions are ERO1α and PDI; both which are conserved from yeast to mammals [16,17,47,48]. Humans contain two
ERO1 isoforms; ERO1α that is expressed in almost all cell
types and ERO1β that is only expressed in select tissues.
The oxidative reaction occurring between ERO1α and PDI
produces hydrogen peroxide, a reactive oxygen species
(ROS) . Although a cell can cope with peroxides formed
during basal oxidative protein folding, sometimes using
them as secondary messengers in cell-signaling cascades
 and possibly as a direct protein disulfide introducer
[50,51]. If ROS production exceeds cellular capacity of
antioxidants defense systems this can be harmful via
introduction of ER oxidative stress . ERO1α is tightly
regulated not only through phosphorylation state , but
also through regulatory disulfide bridging. When disulfide
bridges are formed between cysteine 94 and cysteine 99
ERO1α activity exceeds WT ERO1α (known as hyperactive
ERO1α), whereas if cysteine 94 is bridged with cysteine 131
it leads to complete inactivity of ERO1α (Inactive ERO1α)
. This was shown using biochemical approaches
through site-directed mutagenesis in yeast. However,
this provides a potential regulatory or even compensatory
mechanism that ERO1α can exploit when the ER is under
extreme stress conditions. Hyperactive, inactive, and WT
are the three forms of ERO1α that have been shown to exist in yeast. In yeast, cysteine 100, cysteine 105, cysteine
352, and cysteine 355 are required for oxidative reactions,
whereas cysteines 90, 208, and 349 are dispensable for these
functions . Providing a mechanism by which cysteine
100-cysteine 105 directly engage in oxidative reactions;
whereas cysteine 352-cysteine 355 serve directly to reoxidize
cysteine 100-cysteine 105. Allowing for ERO1p to
undergo another oxidative reaction [16,17,41]. In humans, ERO1α catalyzes the formation of a cysteine disulfide bond as part of the FAD containing enzyme. As can be seen in Figure 2, the cysteine 397 forms a transition complex with FAD, after which cysteine 94 attacks via a nucleophilic C-S bond to form the disulfide bond, with FAD reduced to the FADH2. Cysteine 352-Cysteine 355 bridge in yeast are equivalent to Cysteine 394-Cysteine 397 in humans and undergo the same reaction process with the cofactor FAD. The regulatory cysteine bridges in yeasts (Cys100-Cys105), is also conserved in humans, and is the disulfide bridge occurring between cysteine 94-cysteine 99. This disulfide bridge in humans are responsible for accepting electrons from PDI and transferring them to the disulfide bridge between cysteine 394-cysteine 397; ultimately allowing for cysteine 397 to perform the nucleophilic attack onto bound FAD (see Figure 1 and Figure 2).
Upon successful oxidative protein folding, basal ERO1α can be shuttled into the golgi apparatus, where an interaction with FAM20C kinase occurs . FAM20C is a secretory kinase founded in 2012 known for phosphorylation of the secretory protein Casein. Interestingly FAM20C prefers to use Manganese (Mn2+) instead of Magnesium (Mg2+) as compared to other kinases and is known for recognizing S-x-E/pS motif of secretory proteins [53,54]. It has also been shown to be insensitive to staurosporine, a known broad-spectrum kinase inhibitor. Recently, FAM20C was shown to phosphorylate ERO1α at serine residue 145 (S145). This phosphorylation state allows for 1 of 2 scenarios to take place; 1.) ERO1α can be sent extracellularly through packaging into exosomes, or 2.) Is sequestered by ERp44 (an ER transporter and chaperone protein primarily located in the endoplasmic reticulum-golgi intermediate compartment (ER-GIC) to be transferred back into the ER to undergo another oxidation cycle with PDI . Zhang et al. was also able to conclude from their study that ERO1α activity was increased upon phosphorylation of residue S145, and that this reaction takes place during mammalian lactation, under hypoxia, and reductive stress conditions. Originally reported to co-localize with PDI in the ER lumen , ERO1α has more recently been shown to localize in the golgi apparatus , in proximity to the mitochondrial associated Endoplasmic Reticulum membranes (MAM), but only under oxidizing and normoxic conditions , and was identified from purified exosomes from bladder cancer cells, liver cancer cells, and squamous cell carcinoma cells (exocarto and protein atlas). More intriguing, ERO1α under basal conditions is still found to be localized in the ER despite not having a peptide signal sequence such as the C-terminus KDEL like other ER-resident proteins . The absence of an ER localization signal suggests
that ERO1α functions may extend beyond the ER and
these additional functions based on localization of the
enzyme need to be discovered in order to fully understand
role of ERO1α in the progression of cancer. Questions still
needing to be answered are 1.) What function does ERO1α
provide by being packaged into exosomes or by remaining
in the golgi apparatus, and 2.) What function does ERO1α
have when localized to the MAM region? Though these
questions have not been answered yet fully, there has been
some insight onto the function of ERO1α when localized
near the MAM region. This function is to regulate Ca2+ flux. Downregulation of ERO1α via RNAi was found to inhibit mitochondrial Ca2+ fluxes and modified mitochondrial Ca2+ uniporters. However, upon overexpression of redox active ERO1α increased passive Ca2+ efflux from the ER was observed . Calcium flux is an essential ER regulated
process that is used in signaling, activation of apoptosis,
and even used in cellular movement. Calcium is stored in
the ER but released into the mitochondria for activation
of apoptosis. Calcium can be transferred from the ER into
the mitochondria via the MAM region and is required
to maintain cellular homeostasis . Thus, ERO1α
functionality beyond the scope of just protein folding in
the ER as localization can play pivotal roles in regulating
Recently, ERO1α has been reported as a poor prognostic indicator in multiple cancer indications. Yang et al, showed using genetic shRNA strategies for reducing the expression of Ero1α, in HepG2 and Hep3B cells that high ERO1α expression correlated with increased migration and invasion. Moreover, these same investigators showed that in primary patient specimens high ERO1α expression was associated with poor clinicopathology of vascular invasion, metastasis, advanced Edmondson grade, and TNM stage . Yang et al. were also able to conclude from their in vivo studies using HepG2 cells ectopically expressing ERO1α that an increase in metastatic burden and poor survival in vivo correlated with increased ERO1α expression and S1PR1, p-STAT3, and VEGF-A levels. However, upon depletion of ERO1α using shRNA strategies, S1PR1, p-STAT3, and VEGF-A were also reduced.
In support of clinical data indicating that ERO1α expression is a poor prognostic indicator, we probed the GEPIA database that utilizes samples from TCGA and GTEX database and compiles the data into a Kaplan-Meyer plot based on a single gene of interest. Using GEPIA, we determined that that ERO1α is considered a bad prognostic indicator in multiple cancer indications including Lung Adenocarcinoma, Hepatocellular Carcinoma, Esophageal Carcinoma, and Diffuse B-Cell Lymphoma (see Figure 3 and Table 1). Moreover, genetic and pharmacological studies in cell lines has indicated that ERO1α expression and function contributes to an aggressive cancer phenotype (see Table 1).
|Cancer Type||Cell Type||Native ERO1α|
|Tools used||Native expression|
| Breast||9A3, 9C1,|
|Comparable to MDA-MB-231||↑ERO1α|
|↑ PD-L1; dependent on oxidative folding|| |
|MDA- MB-231, 9A3, 9C1,|
| Comparable to MDA-MB-231|| ↑ERO1α|
|↑ angiogenic potential via VEGF secretion, ↑ tumor growth|| |
| MCF10A|| Comparable to|
| -||Tumor associated Macrophages increased ERO1α expression, causing ↑MMP-9 expression, and ↑ invasion|| |
| 4T1|| Comparable to healthy mouse mammary tissue|| ↑ ERO1α|
|↓ ERO1α expression|
lead to ↓ tumor burden:
↑ ERO1α ↑ MDSC’s and leads to immune evasion
Triple negative patient samples
|Comparable to healthy mouse mammary tis- sue;|
Healthy human breast tissue
| ↓ ERO1α/shRNA||↓ tumor burden, ↓ lung metastasis; Patients with ↑ ERO1α expression had worse prognosis overall.|| |
| MDA- MB-231|| Comparable to MDA-MB-468|| -||MTH-3 treatment lead to ↓ ERO1α, activation of autophagy, and lead to apoptosis|| |
|Hepatocellu- lar Carcino- ma||Patient samples, LO2, Huh-7, HEP3B, SMMC- 7721, HEPG2, MHCC-97H|| ERO1α|
expression lower in healthy tissue compared to tumor samples and cell lines
|↓ ERO1α lead to less metastasis and decreased tumor burden. ↑ ERO1α lead to increase metastatic potential and increased tumor burden.|| |
|Head and Neck|| HN4, CAL27|| -|| -||Tunicamycin treatment|
↑ER stress, ↑ ERO1α expression, and ↓overall tumor burden
|Multiple Myeloma|| Patient samples U266, MM1.S||Increased|
expression poor prognostic indicator
in multiple myeloma
| Chemical EN-460 PB-EN-10|| Pharmacological inhibition Ero1α lead apoptosis and ER stress in U266 myeloma cell line||
(-) indicates no available data
Table 1: Role of ERO1α in cancer progression and metastatic potential in cancer.
The GEPIA was able to confirm that high ERO1α transcript levels correlate with worse prognosis in multiple cancer indications. As mentioned previously ERO1α is responsible for protein folding. More specifically, ERO1α is directly involved in folding of membrane and secretory proteins . Recently, ERO1α has also been shown to have a role in post-translational modification of β1
integrin in colorectal cancer cell when under hypoxic
conditions. When ERO1α is knocked out using CRISPR
Cas9 in HCT116 colorectal cancer cells and placed under
hypoxic conditions it was found that the glycosylation
state of integrin β1 was changed and thus an attenuation
of integrin β1 on the cell membrane occurred; ultimately
leading to contact-inhibited morphology . These are
just a few examples of many that ERO1α is associated with
Immune Surveillance and Immune Evasion Correlate with ERO1α Expression
Recently, immuno-oncology (IO) has demonstrated to be a tractable strategy for achieving durable responses. Targets and delivery approaches which may enhance IO response with respect to percentage of patients that respond remains an active area of research (rev in ). As IO approaches move toward combination strategies, it is essential to determine the effect of modulating novel targets such as Ero1α on the immune tumor microenvironment. Immunotherapies have previously failed in lung cancer but has recently emerged as very effective new therapy , with the emergence of immune checkpoint blockade such as anti-PD-1 (programmed cell death-1) antibodies and anti PD-L1 (programmed cell death-ligand 1) antibodies . ERO1α is thought to be responsible for the processing and folding of PD-L1 and PD-1. PD-L1 is a transmembrane protein located on the cell surface of placental, vascular endothelium, pancreatic islet, muscle, and mesenchymal stem cells , and PD-1 is a receptor belonging to the CD28 family of receptors that is only expressed on the surface of activated T-cells, B-cells, and myeloid cells . The binding of PD-L1 to PD-1 is an immune suppressive signal that inhibits autoimmunity through induction of T-cell apoptosis  and induces tolerance . Recently, a study has shown that ERO1α promotes immune escape through up-regulation of PD-L1 in breast cancer . This connection is due to the intramolecular disulfide bond that exist in PD-L1  and ERO1α is a known contributor to folding of membrane proteins as well as introduction of disulfide bonds . In this recent finding, Tanaka et al. , was able to demonstrate that ERO1α up-regulates PD-L1 surface expression not only through oxidative folding, but also unexpectedly up-regulated PDL1 mRNA expression through augmentation of hypoxia inducible factor-1alpha (HIF-1α) in human triple negative breast cancer cell lines. Although this occurrence could be diminished upon knockdown of ERO1α using RNA Interference (RNAi), as it led to significant attenuation of PD-L1 mediated T-cell apoptosis . This provides insight towards hypoxia mediated immune resistance; specifically, in triple negative breast cancer cell lines. As shown previously in Figure 2, increased expression of ERO1α is a poor prognostic indicator in lung adenocarcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, esophageal carcinoma, and diffuse B-cell lymphoma; However, ERO1α has also be found to be a poor prognostic indicator in breast cancer by multiple researchers [37,38].
Alongside the discovery of PD-L1 and PD-1, of which Dr. Allison and Dr. Honjo won the 2018 Nobel Prize for the discovery of checkpoint blockades PD-1, PD-L1, and CTLA-4, the discovery of myeloid derived suppressor cells (MDSC’s) has also had an outstanding impact clinically. Reports of MDSC’s associated with tumor progression go back to the 1970’s . However, during the 1980’s and early 1990’s, laboratories of Diana Lopez, Jim Talmadge, M. Rita Young, and Hans Schreiber, demonstrated various types of myeloid cells could inhibit immune functions in cancer . There are two main groups of MDSC’s;
Polymorphonuclear MDSC’s (PMN-MDSC’s), and
monocytic MDSC’s (M-MDSC’s). In recent years it has
become clear that these two groups function differently
in terms of immune suppression during tumorigenesis.
M-MDSC’s suppress the immune system in both antigenspecific
and non-specific manners utilizing mechanisms
associated with production of NO and cytokines . PMNMDSC’s
on the other hand can suppress immune responses
primarily in an antigen-specific manner, inducing antigen
specific T-cell tolerance is a major characteristic of these
cells [76,77]. Recently it has been shown that tumor cells
are a source of granulocytic colony stimulating factor
(G-CSF) [78-81], and that production of G-CSF by tumors
are responsible for recruitment of immunosuppressive
PMN-MDSC’s, which promote tumor growth via inhibition
of antitumor immune responses [82,83]. G-CSF is a
glycoprotein that functions as a hematopoietic cytokine
that is secreted from immune, endothelial and bone
marrow stroma cells leading to production of granulocytes
(granulopoiesis), as well as contributes to mobilization of
stem cells . Amongst G-CSF’s many functions, it is a
secretory protein that’s folding cycle is predicted to occur
through ERO1α. In a recent publication; Tanaka et al. 
demonstrated that ERO1α plays a pivotal role in PMNMDSC
induction via up-regulation of G-CSF production
from cancer cells in collaboration with PDI. Tanaka et al.
 were also able to demonstrate that reduced expression of ERO1α through shRNA strategies reduced tumor growth by restoration of antitumor T-cell-mediated immunity, and ERO1α overexpression promoted tumor growth in vivo via suppression of antitumor immunity.
Immune system functionality has been well defined for quite some time. Despite immune system functionality being well described, cancer researchers are still discovering resistance mechanisms to cancer therapies that are utilizing the host immune system. Recently, it was found that hypoxia augmented the endogenous major histocompatibility complex I (MHC Class I) presentation in murine tumor cells . MHC Class I molecules are responsible for presentation of endogenous antigens, expressed on all nucleated cells, and present protein fragment of cytosolic or nucleic nature to CD8+ T-cells on the cell membrane. . These antigens are peptide fragments that are intracellular and obtained from multiple pathways being approximately 8-10 amino acids long . MHC Class I molecules are stabilized by ER chaperones such as ERp57, PDI, and tapasin . Upon binding of the designated peptide antigen to the MHC Class I molecule, the chaperones are released and fully assembled, peptide- MHC Class I complexes leave the ER for presentation of the cell membrane . Conversely, the MHC-Class I peptide complexes that fail to associate in the ER are sent to the cytosol to undergo proteasomal mediated degradation [88,89]. Though the function of MHC Class 1 is clear, it is
not clear if this function is augmented in tumors or during
hypoxic conditions. HIF-1α is known to be induced under
hypoxic conditions and more recently has been shown to
regulate expression of ERO1α [90,91]. More specifically,
ERO1α was induced in hypoxic conditions in a HIF-1α
dependent manner . May et al.  were also able to
demonstrate that ERO1α was not induced under hypoxic
conditions in fibroblast cell lines derived from HIF-1α
knockout mice, revealing ERO1α as a transcriptional target
of HIF-1α. To induce an effective antitumor immunity
using cancer antigen peptide-based immunotherapy,
a cancer antigen must be appropriately presented on
MHC Class I molecules . Kukita et al.  were able
to determine three distinct effects that hypoxia had on
MHC Class 1 presentation; 1.) expression of MHC Class
I peptide complex on the cell surface was augmented, 2.)
activation of antigen specific CD8+ T-cells was augmented, and 3.) specific cytotoxic T-lymphocytes were capable of killing tumor cells under hypoxic conditions. They were also able to determine that ERO1α was responsible for the hypoxia driven antigen presentation by MHC Class I molecules. ERO1α is responsible for the disulfide bond formation of MHC Class I heavy chains. Upon depletion of ERO1α, MHC Class I expression on the cell surface was also shown to be decreased, resulting in decreased cytotoxic T-lymphocyte reactivity . Thus, Kukita et al
 were able to demonstrate that ERO1α plays a crucial
role in hypoxia-induced oxidative folding of MHC Class
I heavy chain, leading to augmentation of MHC Class
I-peptide complex on the tumor cell surface and enhanced
recognition by antigen specific cytotoxic T-lymphocytes.
Functional MHC Class I expression is needed to induce
cell death via induction of CD8+, T-lymphocytes. Despite increased MHC Class I expression in hypoxic conditions, the increased and chronic presence of cancer associated antigens may lead to T-cell exhaustion in hypoxic regions of the tumor, albeit further work is required to fully determine whether increased Ero1α expression leads to T-cell exhaustion in vivo [92, 93]. Because inhibiting
Ero1α is likely to change the cytokine and chemokine
profile of the tumor microenvironment, further studies are
required to fully understand the effect of inhibiting Ero1α
on tumor mediated immune suppression.
Inhibitors of the ERO1 Pathway
Currently pharmacologic inhibitors that target ERO1α are limited. The first inhibitor of ERO1α, known as EN460, and was identified through a screen of 210,960 natural compounds . EN460 is specific for the reduced active form of ERO1α and prevents re-oxidation . Our laboratory recently demonstrated that EN460 could potentially be used to treat cancers with high ER-stress such as multiple myeloma . It was also confirmed during this study that EN460 had multiple off targets; all being flavoenzymes, or enzymes that contain flavin adenine dinucleotide (FAD). Our laboratory was also able to develop an azide derivative of EN-460, PB-EN-10, that showed similar effects . The tool compound EN460 and its azide derivative PB-EN-10 are shown below in Figure 4. Having direct interactions with PDI during oxidative
protein folding it seems feasible that PDI could also be
targeted to inhibited ERO1α mediated biological functions.
PDI has also been shown to be a potential target in multiple
myeloma. Targeting PDI provides its’ own challenges as it
has multiple isoforms being a family with greater than 20
members, and due to the multiple redox active cysteine
residues present [95-98]. PDI inhibition currently via
small molecules occurs through covalent catalysis and includes the following tool set 16F16, PACMA31, KSC-
34, E61, and E64FC26 [99-102]. Despite multiple known inhibitors against PDI, none have entered clinical trials for the treatment of cancer at this time. ERO1α and PDI could be good targets in cancer indications if specificity could be achieved toward both enzymes, as PDI inhibitors tend to hit all PDI family members and ERO1α inhibitors have the tendency to target other flavoenzymes. In conclusion ERO1α is emerging as an attractive target for the treatment of cancer. Supporting evidence that credentials the target described above includes i) clinical data indicating that increased expression of the enzyme is a poor prognostic indicator in multiple cancer indications and ii) genetic strategies utilizing shRNA indicate that reducing the expression of ERO1Lα inhibits growth and metastasis using both in vitro and in vivo model systems. However,
delineation of the therapeutic window will require a drug
discovery campaign to elucidate more specific and potent
inhibitors to allow for further validation of the target.
5U54GM104942-04 (Hodder), R44-CA221554 (Hazlehurst) PI NCI, and NCI 1R01CA195727-01 (Hazlehurst). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
- Abbosh C, Birkbak NJ, Swanton C. Early stage NSCLC—
challenges to implementing ctDNA-based screening and
MRD detection. Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology. 2018
- Chaudhuri AA, Chabon JJ, Lovejoy AF, Newman AM,
Stehr H, Azad TD, et al. Early detection of molecular
residual disease in localized lung cancer by circulating
tumor DNA profiling. Cancer Discovery. 2017 Dec
- Nair RR, Tolentino J, Hazlehurst LA. The bone marrow
microenvironment as a sanctuary for minimal residual
disease in CML. Biochemical Pharmacology. 2010 Sep
- Ootsuka S, Asami S, Sasaki T, Yoshida Y, Nemoto N,
Shichino H, et al. Useful markers for detecting minimal
residual disease in cases of neuroblastoma. Biological and
Pharmaceutical Bulletin. 2008 Jun 1;31(6):1071-4.
- Schoenfeld AJ, Hellmann MD. Acquired resistance
to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Cancer Cell. 2020 Apr
- Bewry NN, Nair RR, Emmons MF, Boulware D,
Pinilla-Ibarz J, Hazlehurst LA. Stat3 contributes to
resistance toward BCR-ABL inhibitors in a bone marrow
microenvironment model of drug resistance. Molecular
Cancer Therapeutics. 2008 Oct 1;7(10):3169-75.
- Osipov A, Saung MT, Zheng L, Murphy AG. Small molecule
immunomodulation: the tumor microenvironment and
overcoming immune escape. Journal for Immunotherapy
of Cancer. 2019 Dec 1;7(1):224.
- Westrate LM, Lee JE, Prinz WA, Voeltz GK. Form
follows function: the importance of endoplasmic reticulum
shape. Annual Review of Biochemistry. 2015 Jun 2;84:791-
- Palade GE. Studies on the endoplasmic reticulum:
II. Simple dispositions in cells in situ. The Journal
of Biophysical and Biochemical Cytology. 1955 Nov
- Palade GE, Porter KR. Studies on the endoplasmic
reticulum: I. Its identification in cells in situ. The Journal
of Experimental Medicine. 1954 Nov 30;100(6):641.
- Porter KR, Palade GE. Studies on the endoplasmic
reticulum: III. Its form and distribution in striated muscle
cells. The Journal of Cell Biology. 1957 Mar 25;3(2):269-
- Mazzarello P, Calligaro A, Vannini V, Muscatello U.
The sarcoplasmic reticulum: its discovery and rediscovery.
Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 2003 Jan;4(1):69-
- Schwarz DS, Blower MD. The endoplasmic reticulum:
structure, function and response to cellular signaling.
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences. 2016 Jan 1;73(1):79-94.
- Moilanen A, Korhonen K, Saaranen MJ, Ruddock LW.
Molecular analysis of human Ero1 reveals novel regulatory
mechanisms for oxidative protein folding. Life Science
Alliance. 2018 Jun 1;1(3).
- Benham AM, Cabibbo A, Fassio A, Bulleid N, Sitia R,
Braakman I. The CXXCXXC motif determines the folding,
structure and stability of human Ero1-Lα. The EMBO
Journal. 2000 Sep 1;19(17):4493-502.
- Cabibbo A, Pagani M, Fabbri M, Rocchi M, Farmery
MR, Bulleid NJ, et al. ERO1-L, a human protein that favors
disulfide bond formation in the endoplasmic reticulum.
Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2000 Feb 18;275(7):4827-
- Frand AR, Kaiser CA. The ERO1 gene of yeast is
required for oxidation of protein dithiols in the endoplasmic
reticulum. Molecular Cell. 1998 Jan 1;1(2):161-70.
- Pagani M, Fabbri M, Benedetti C, Fassio A, Pilati S,
Bulleid NJ, et al. Endoplasmic reticulum oxidoreductin
1-Lβ (ERO1-Lβ), a human gene induced in the course
of the unfolded protein response. Journal of Biological
Chemistry. 2000 Aug 4;275(31):23685-92.
- Pollard MG, Travers KJ, Weissman JS. Ero1p: a novel
and ubiquitous protein with an essential role in oxidative
protein folding in the endoplasmic reticulum. Molecular
Cell. 1998 Jan 1;1(2):171-82.
- Bass R, Ruddock LW, Klappa P, Freedman RB. A major
fraction of endoplasmic reticulum-located glutathione
is present as mixed disulfides with protein. Journal of
Biological Chemistry. 2004 Feb 13;279(7):5257-62.
- Dixon BM, Heath SH, Kim R, Suh JH, Hagen TM.
Assessment of endoplasmic reticulum glutathione redox
status is confounded by extensive ex vivo oxidation.
Antioxidants & Redox Signaling. 2008 May 1;10(5):963-
- Hwang CJ, Sinskey AJ, Lodish HF. Oxidized redox
state of glutathione in the endoplasmic reticulum. Science.
1992 Sep 11;257(5076):1496-502.
- Tu BP, Weissman JS. Oxidative protein folding in
eukaryotes mechanisms and consequences. Journal of Cell
Biology. 2004 Feb 2;164(3):341-6.
- Yadav U, Rani V, Deep G, Singh RK, Palle K. Oxidative
stress in metabolic disorders: pathogenesis, prevention,
- Ron D, Walter P. Signal integration in the endoplasmic
reticulum unfolded protein response. Nature reviews
Molecular Cell Biology. 2007 Jul;8(7):519-29.
- Rashid HO, Yadav RK, Kim HR, Chae HJ. ER stress:
Autophagy induction, inhibition and selection. Autophagy.
2015 Nov 2;11(11):1956-77.
- Behrends C, Sowa ME, Gygi SP, Harper JW. Network
organization of the human autophagy system. Nature.
- Li X, Zhu F, Jiang J, Sun C, Zhong Q, Shen M, et
al. Simultaneous inhibition of the ubiquitin-proteasome
system and autophagy enhances apoptosis induced by
ER stress aggravators in human pancreatic cancer cells.
Autophagy. 2016 Sep 1;12(9):1521-37.
- Dumartin L, Alrawashdeh W, Trabulo SM, Radon
TP, Steiger K, Feakins RM, et al. ER stress protein AGR2
precedes and is involved in the regulation of pancreatic
cancer initiation. Oncogene. 2017 Jun;36(22):3094-103.
- Serrano-Negrón JE, Zhang Z, Rivera-Ruiz AP,
Banerjee A, Romero-Nutz EC, Sánchez-Torres N, et al. Tunicamycin-induced ER stress in breast cancer cells
neither expresses GRP78 on the surface nor secretes it into
the media. Glycobiology. 2018 Feb;28(2):61-8.
- Zhang Y, Liu R, Ni M, Gill P, Lee AS. Cell surface
relocalization of the endoplasmic reticulum chaperone and
unfolded protein response regulator GRP78/BiP. Journal
of Biological Chemistry. 2010 May 14;285(20):15065-75.
- Cubillos-Ruiz JR, Bettigole SE, Glimcher LH.
Tumorigenic and immunosuppressive effects of
endoplasmic reticulum stress in cancer. Cell. 2017 Feb
- Rutkowski DT, Arnold SM, Miller CN, Wu J, Li J,
Gunnison KM, et al. Adaptation to ER stress is mediated
by differential stabilities of pro-survival and pro-apoptotic
mRNAs and proteins. PLoS Biol. 2006 Nov 7;4(11):e374.
- Wu J, Ruas JL, Estall JL, Rasbach KA, Choi JH, Ye L,
et al. The unfolded protein response mediates adaptation
to exercise in skeletal muscle through a PGC-1α/ATF6α
complex. Cell Metabolism. 2011 Feb 2;13(2):160-9.
- Travers KJ, Patil CK, Wodicka L, Lockhart DJ,
Weissman JS, Walter P. Functional and genomic analyses
reveal an essential coordination between the unfolded
protein response and ER-associated degradation. Cell.
2000 Apr 28;101(3):249-58.
- Hayes KE, Batsomboon P, Chen WC, Johnson BD,
Becker A, Eschrich S, et al. Inhibition of the FAD containing
ER oxidoreductin 1 (Ero1) protein by EN-460 as a strategy
for treatment of multiple myeloma. Bioorganic & Medicinal
Chemistry. 2019 Apr 15;27(8):1479-88.
- Kukita K, Tamura Y, Tanaka T, Kajiwara T, Kutomi
G, Saito K, et al. Cancer-associated oxidase ERO1-α
regulates the expression of MHC class I molecule via
oxidative folding. The Journal of Immunology. 2015 May
- Kutomi G, Tamura Y, Tanaka T, Kajiwara T, Kukita
K, Ohmura T, et al. Human endoplasmic reticulum
oxidoreductin 1-α is a novel predictor for poor prognosis
of breast cancer. Cancer Science. 2013 Aug;104(8):1091-6.
- Tanaka T, Kutomi G, Kajiwara T, Kukita K, Kochin
V, Kanaseki T, et al. Cancer-associated oxidoreductase
ERO1-α drives the production of VEGF via oxidative
protein folding and regulating the mRNA level. British
Journal of Cancer. 2016 May;114(11):1227-34.
- Yang S, Yang C, Yu F, Ding W, Hu Y, Cheng F,
et al. Endoplasmic reticulum resident oxidase ERO1-
Lalpha promotes hepatocellular carcinoma metastasis
and angiogenesis through the S1PR1/STAT3/VEGF-A
pathway. Cell Death & Disease. 2018 Oct 30;9(11):1-4.
- Inaba K, Masui S, Iida H, Vavassori S, Sitia R,
Suzuki M. Crystal structures of human Ero1α reveal the
mechanisms of regulated and targeted oxidation of PDI.
The EMBO Journal. 2010 Oct 6;29(19):3330-43.
- Alanen HI, Williamson RA, Howard MJ, Hatahet FS,
Salo KE, Kauppila A, et al. ERp27, a new non-catalytic
endoplasmic reticulum-located human protein disulfide
isomerase family member, interacts with ERp57. Journal
of Biological Chemistry. 2006 Nov 3;281(44):33727-38.
- Gross E, Sevier CS, Heldman N, Vitu E, Bentzur M,
Kaiser CA, et al. Generating disulfides enzymatically:
reaction products and electron acceptors of the endoplasmic
reticulum thiol oxidase Ero1p. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences. 2006 Jan 10;103(2):299-304.
- Hatahet F, Ruddock LW. Protein disulfide isomerase:
a critical evaluation of its function in disulfide bond
formation. Antioxidants & Redox Signaling. 2009 Nov
- Sevier CS, Kaiser CA. Disulfide transfer between two
conserved cysteine pairs imparts selectivity to protein
oxidation by Ero1. Molecular Biology of the Cell. 2006
- Sevier CS, Kaiser CA. Conservation and diversity of the
cellular disulfide bond formation pathways. Antioxidants
& Redox Signaling. 2006 May 1;8(5-6):797-811.
- Fagioli C, Mezghrani A, Sitia R. Reduction of
interchain disulfide bonds precedes the dislocation of Ig-μ
chains from the endoplasmic reticulum to the cytosol for
proteasomal degradation. Journal of Biological Chemistry.
2001 Nov 2;276(44):40962-7.
- Mezghrani A, Fassio A, Benham A, Simmen T,
Braakman I, Sitia R. Manipulation of oxidative protein
folding and PDI redox state in mammalian cells. The
EMBO Journal. 2001 Nov 15;20(22):6288-96.
- Shimizu Y, Hendershot LM. Oxidative folding:
cellular strategies for dealing with the resultant equimolar
production of reactive oxygen species. Antioxidants &
Redox Signaling. 2009 Sep 1;11(9):2317-31.
- Karala AR, Lappi AK, Saaranen MJ, Ruddock LW.
Efficient peroxide-mediated oxidative refolding of a
protein at physiological pH and implications for oxidative
folding in the endoplasmic reticulum. Antioxidants &
Redox Signaling. 2009 May 1;11(5):963-70.
- Karala AR, Psarrakos P, Ruddock LW, Klappa P.
Protein disulfide isomerases from C. elegans are equally
efficient at thiol-disulfide exchange in simple peptidebased
systems but show differences in reactivity towards
protein substrates. Antioxidants & Redox Signaling. 2007
- Zhang J, Zhu Q, Wang XE, Yu J, Chen X, Wang J, et
al. Secretory kinase Fam20C tunes endoplasmic reticulum
redox state via phosphorylation of Ero1α. The EMBO
Journal. 2018 Jul 13;37(14):e98699.
- Tagliabracci VS, Engel JL, Wen J, Wiley SE, Worby
CA, Kinch LN, et al. Secreted kinase phosphorylates
extracellular proteins that regulate biomineralization.
Science. 2012 Jun 1;336(6085):1150-3.
- Tagliabracci VS, Pinna LA, Dixon JE. Secreted
protein kinases. Trends in Biochemical Sciences. 2013 Mar
- Zhang L, Niu Y, Zhu L, Fang J, Wang L, Wang CC.
Different interaction modes for protein-disulfide isomerase
(PDI) as an efficient regulator and a specific substrate of
endoplasmic reticulum oxidoreductin-1α (Ero1α). Journal
of Biological Chemistry. 2014 Nov 7;289(45):31188-99.
- Gilady SY, Bui M, Lynes EM, Benson MD, Watts R,
Vance JE, et al. Ero1α requires oxidizing and normoxic
conditions to localize to the mitochondria-associated
membrane (MAM). Cell Stress and Chaperones. 2010 Sep
- Takei N, Yoneda A, Sakai-Sawada K, Kosaka M,
Minomi K, Tamura Y. Hypoxia-inducible ERO1α promotes
cancer progression through modulation of integrin-β1
modification and signalling in HCT116 colorectal cancer
cells. Scientific Reports. 2017 Aug 24;7(1):1-1.
- Anelli T, Alessio M, Bachi A, Bergamelli L, Bertoli
G, Camerini S, et al. Thiol-mediated protein retention in
the endoplasmic reticulum: the role of ERp44. The EMBO
journal. 2003 Oct 1;22(19):5015-22.
- Szyma?ski J, Janikiewicz J, Michalska B, Patalas-
Krawczyk P, Perrone M, Zió?kowski W, et al. Interaction of
mitochondria with the endoplasmic reticulum and plasma
membrane in calcium homeostasis, lipid trafficking
and mitochondrial structure. International Journal of
Molecular Sciences. 2017 Jul;18(7):1576.
- Tanaka T, Kutomi G, Kajiwara T, Kukita K, Kochin
V, Kanaseki T, et al. Cancer-associated oxidoreductase
ERO1-α promotes immune escape through up-regulation
of PD-L1 in human breast cancer. Oncotarget. 2017 Apr
- Lee S, Lee E, Ko E, Ham M, Lee HM, Kim ES, et al.
Tumor-associated macrophages secrete CCL2 and induce
the invasive phenotype of human breast epithelial cells
through upregulation of ERO1-α and MMP-9. Cancer
Letters. 2018 Nov 28;437:25-34.
- Chang LC, Hsieh MT, Yang JS, Lu CC, Tsai FJ,
Tsao JW, et al. Effect of bis (hydroxymethyl) alkanoate
curcuminoid derivative MTH-3 on cell cycle arrest, apoptotic and autophagic pathway in triple-negative breast
adenocarcinoma MDA-MB-231 cells: An in vitro study.
International Journal of Oncology. 2017 Dec 31;52(1):67-76.
- Wang Y, Zhang L, He Z, Deng J, Zhang Z, Liu
L, et al. Tunicamycin induces ER stress and inhibits
tumorigenesis of head and neck cancer cells by inhibiting
N-glycosylation. American Journal of Translational
- Wang PF, Veine DM, Ahn SH, Williams CH. A stable
mixed disulfide between thioredoxin reductase and its
substrate, thioredoxin: preparation and characterization.
Biochemistry. 1996 Apr 16;35(15):4812-9.
- Goldberg MS. Improving cancer immunotherapy
through nanotechnology. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2019
- Steven A, Fisher SA, Robinson BW. Immunotherapy
for lung cancer. Respirology. 2016 Jul;21(5):821-33.
- Apolo AB, Infante JR, Balmanoukian A, Patel MR,
Wang D, Kelly K, et al. Avelumab, an anti–programmed
death-ligand 1 antibody, in patients with refractory
metastatic urothelial carcinoma: results from a
multicenter, phase ib study. Journal of Clinical Oncology.
2017 Jul 1;35(19):2117.
- Patel SP, Kurzrock R. PD-L1 expression as a predictive
biomarker in cancer immunotherapy. Molecular Cancer
Therapeutics. 2015 Apr 1;14(4):847-56.
- Zang X, Allison JP. The B7 family and cancer therapy:
costimulation and coinhibition. Clinical Cancer Research.
2007 Sep 15;13(18):5271-9.
- Freeman GJ, Long AJ, Iwai Y, Bourque K,
Chernova T, Nishimura H, et al. Engagement of the PD-1
immunoinhibitory receptor by a novel B7 family member
leads to negative regulation of lymphocyte activation.
The Journal of Experimental Medicine. 2000 Oct
- Keir ME, Liang SC, Guleria I, Latchman YE, Qipo A,
Albacker LA, et al. Tissue expression of PD-L1 mediates
peripheral T cell tolerance. Journal of Experimental
Medicine. 2006 Apr 17;203(4):883-95.
- Talmadge JE, Gabrilovich DI. History of myeloidderived
suppressor cells. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2013
- Gabrilovich D, Ishida T, Oyama T, Ran S, Kravtsov V,
Nadaf S, et al. Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Inhibits
the Development of Dendritic Cells and Dramatically Affects the Differentiation of Multiple Hematopoietic
Lineages In Vivo: Presented in part at the Keystone
Symposium “Cellular and Molecular Biology of Dendritic
Cells,” Santa Fe, NM, March 3-9, 1998, and at the annual
meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research,
March 28-April 1, 1998. Blood, The Journal of the American
Society of Hematology. 1998 Dec 1;92(11):4150-66.
- Gabrilovich DI, Bronte V, Chen SH, Colombo MP,
Ochoa A, Ostrand-Rosenberg S, et al. The terminology
issue for myeloid-derived suppressor cells. Cancer
Research. 2007 Jan 1;67(1):425-.
- Koehn BH, Apostolova P, Haverkamp JM, Miller
JS, McCullar V, Tolar J, et al. GVHD-associated,
inflammasome-mediated loss of function in adoptively
transferred myeloid-derived suppressor cells. Blood, The
Journal of the American Society of Hematology. 2015 Sep
- Marigo I, Bosio E, Solito S, Mesa C, Fernandez A,
Dolcetti L, et al. Tumor-induced tolerance and immune
suppression depend on the C/EBPβ transcription factor.
Immunity. 2010 Jun 25;32(6):790-802.
- Asano Y, Yokoyama T, Shibata S, Kobayashi S,
Shimoda K, Nakashima H, et al. Effect of the chimeric
soluble granulocyte colony-stimulating factor receptor on
the proliferation of leukemic blast cells from patients with
acute myeloblastic leukemia. Cancer Research. 1997 Aug
- Chakraborty A, Guha S. Granulocyte colonystimulating
factor/granulocyte colony-stimulating factor
receptor biological axis promotes survival and growth of
bladder cancer cells. Urology. 2007 Jun 1;69(6):1210-5.
- Joshita S, Nakazawa K, Sugiyama Y, Kamijo A,
Matsubayashi K, Miyabayashi H, Furuta K, Kitano K,
Kawa S. Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor-producing
pancreatic adenosquamous carcinoma showing aggressive
clinical course. Internal Medicine. 2009;48(9):687-91.
- Savarese TM, Mitchell K, McQuain C, Campbell CL,
Guardiani R, Wuu J, et al. Coexpression of granulocyte
colony stimulating factor and its receptor in primary ovarian
carcinomas. Cancer letters. 2001 Jan 10;162(1):105-15.
- Abrams SI, Waight JD. Identification of a G-CSFGranulocytic
MDSC axis that promotes tumor progression.
Oncoimmunology. 2012 Jul 1;1(4):550-1.
- Waight JD, Hu Q, Miller A, Liu S, Abrams SI. Tumorderived
G-CSF facilitates neoplastic growth through a
granulocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cell-dependent
mechanism. PloS one. 2011 Nov 16;6(11):e27690.
- Pedersen CC, Borup R, Fischer-Nielsen A, Mora-
Jensen H, Fossum A, Cowland JB, et al. Changes in
gene expression during G-CSF–induced emergency
granulopoiesis in humans. The Journal of Immunology.
2016 Sep 1;197(5):1989-99.
- Kajiwara T, Tanaka T, Kukita K, Kutomi G, Saito K,
Okuya K, et al. Hypoxia augments MHC class I antigen
presentation via facilitation of ERO1-α-mediated oxidative
folding in murine tumor cells. European Journal of
Immunology. 2016 Dec;46(12):2842-51.
- Neefjes J, Jongsma ML, Paul P, Bakke O. Towards a
systems understanding of MHC class I and MHC class II
antigen presentation. Nature Reviews Immunology. 2011
- Vyas JM, Van der Veen AG, Ploegh HL. The known
unknowns of antigen processing and presentation. Nature
Reviews Immunology. 2008 Aug;8(8):607-18.
- Hughes EA, Hammond C, Cresswell P. Misfolded
major histocompatibility complex class I heavy chains
are translocated into the cytoplasm and degraded by the
proteasome. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences. 1997 Mar 4;94(5):1896-901.
- Koopmann JO, Albring J, Hüter E, Bulbuc N, Spee
P, Neefjes J, et al. Export of antigenic peptides from the
endoplasmic reticulum intersects with retrograde protein
translocation through the Sec61p channel. Immunity.
2000 Jul 1;13(1):117-27.
- Gess B, Hofbauer KH, Wenger RH, Lohaus
C, Meyer HE, Kurtz A. The cellular oxygen tension
regulates expression of the endoplasmic oxidoreductase
ERO1-Lα. European Journal of Biochemistry. 2003
- May D, Itin A, Gal O, Kalinski H, Feinstein E, Keshet
E. Ero1-L α plays a key role in a HIF-1-mediated pathway
to improve disulfide bond formation and VEGF secretion
under hypoxia: implication for cancer. Oncogene. 2005
- Mueller SN, Ahmed R. High antigen levels are the
cause of T cell exhaustion during chronic viral infection.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2009
- Richter K, Brocker T, Oxenius A. Antigen amount
dictates CD 8+ T-cell exhaustion during chronic viral infection
irrespective of the type of antigen presenting cell. European
Journal of Immunology. 2012 Sep;42(9):2290-304.
- Blais JD, Chin KT, Zito E, Zhang Y, Heldman
N, Harding HP, et al. A small molecule inhibitor of
endoplasmic reticulum oxidation 1 (ERO1) with selectively
reversible thiol reactivity. Journal of Biological Chemistry.
2010 Jul 2;285(27):20993-1003.
- Edman JC, Ellis L, Blacher RW, Roth RA, Rutter
WJ. Sequence of protein disulphide isomerase and
implications of its relationship to thioredoxin. Nature.
1985 Sep 19;317(6034):267-70.
- Foster CK, Thorpe C. Challenges in the evaluation
of thiol-reactive inhibitors of human protein disulfide
Isomerase. Free Radical Biology and Medicine. 2017 Jul
- Watanabe MM, Laurindo FR, Fernandes DC. Methods
of measuring protein disulfide isomerase activity: a critical
overview. Frontiers in Chemistry. 2014 Sep 3;2:73.
- Yang S, Shergalis A, Lu D, Kyani A, Liu Z, Ljungman
M, et al. Design, synthesis, and biological evaluation of
novel allosteric protein disulfide isomerase inhibitors.
Journal of Medicinal Chemistry. 2019 Feb 13;62(7):3447-
- Cole KS, Grandjean JM, Chen K, Witt CH, O’Day J,
Shoulders MD, et al. Characterization of an A-site selective
protein disulfide isomerase A1 inhibitor. Biochemistry.
2018 Mar 9;57(13):2035-43.
- Hoffstrom BG, Kaplan A, Letso R, Schmid RS, Turmel
GJ, Lo DC, et al. Inhibitors of protein disulfide isomerase
suppress apoptosis induced by misfolded proteins. Nature
Chemical Biology. 2010 Dec;6(12):900-6.
- Robinson RM, Reyes L, Duncan RM, Bian H, Strobel
ED, Hyman SL, et al. Tuning isoform selectivity and
bortezomib sensitivity with a new class of alkenyl indene
PDI inhibitor. European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry.
2020 Jan 15;186:111906.
- Xu S, Butkevich AN, Yamada R, Zhou Y, Debnath
B, Duncan R, et al. Discovery of an orally active smallmolecule
irreversible inhibitor of protein disulfide
isomerase for ovarian cancer treatment. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences. 2012 Oct 2;109(40):16348-
- Kim KM, An AR, Park HS, Jang KY, Moon WS,
Kang MJ, et al. Combined expression of protein disulfide
isomerase and endoplasmic reticulum oxidoreductin 1 α is
a poor prognostic marker for non small cell lung cancer.
Oncology Letters. 2018 Nov 1;16(5):5753-60.