In the early 1980s, I did a post-doc in Dundee, Scotland, with
Philip Cohen—now Sir Philip. When I was in Cohen’s lab, I was
given the job of purifying a novel protein kinase, which was quite
difficult in those days. Had I known there were 500 of them, I
wouldn’t have attacked it, but I had the naiveté of youth. I
purified this protein kinase, called GSK3, which was thought to be
regulated by insulin. Cohen spent a long time working on this. But
when I left Dundee, I didn’t want to have anything to do with
insulin signaling. I wanted to establish my own identity and I
started to get into the world of molecular biology and cloning of
protein kinases. At the beginning, there were only around 10 of
them, and then after the orgy of PCR, as one Nobel laureate called
it, we ended up identifying 518. During this period I discovered
what turned out to be a novel kinase, which is now known as PKB or
AKT. There’s a European name and an American name.
There are two names for the same molecule?
Well, we discovered it first in Basel and, in parallel, a man
called Steve Staal, working at NIH, was working on a retrovirus
isolated from a mouse tumor and this was called v-akt. In 1991, we
published our cloning of PKB as a novel kinase related to PKA and
PKC, and within a year, the v-akt sequence was published. It was
found to be an oncogenic form of PKB, so the two worlds collided,
and that’s why it has two names. We were screening for PKA cDNAs
and we picked up one that looked like PKA, and that turned out to be
a distinct gene, so we carried on working on it.
|

“...this PIK3/PKB signaling pathway is a major pathway in human cancers.”
|
|
The point is nothing really happened for a while. There were only
two labs in the world working on this, my lab and Phil Tsichlis’s.
In truth, we actually identified the PKB cDNA around 1986 and we
were so impressed by it that we left it in the fridge for a couple
of years. We didn’t know how to handle a new kinase. In 1995,
there were many seminal papers produced. One was by Franke and
Tsichlis, another from Burgering and Coffer, and this was when the
whole world came together; it was realized that PKB was downstream
of another major player called PI3kinase—PI3K. This was a lipid
kinase, attached to tyrosine kinase receptors. Previous to the work
in 1995, there was no known downstream target for PI3K, yet it was
one of the first proteins that was activated by receptor tyrosine
kinases which sit at the cell membrane.
There’s one other piece to this that also came together at this
point. This is the pleckstrin homology domain. Somebody worked out
that maybe the pleckstrin homology domain binds PIP3, and this
turned out to be the crucial ingredient in this pathway. When you
activate receptor tyrosine kinase, you elevate PIP3 in the membrane,
and this leads to PKB being recruited to the membrane and activated.
This filled a big hole in the signal transduction pathway when it
was reported in 1995.
At that time I went to Dundee to interview a Ph.D. student and
Philip Cohen was there and for old times’ sake he showed me new
data on GSK3 and how it was regulated by insulin. And he said that
he was purifying the upstream kinase. This is when I told him that
we had a kinase regulated by insulin and I suggested to him that he
check for this to save himself the next year or two purifying the
unknown kinase. We had a very good antibody to it, and when I got
back we sent it to him and he tested it in the purification and
there it was: PKB was the upstream kinase of GSK3. So we were able
to connect the signaling pathway from insulin receptor through
PI3kinase through PKB and then to GSK3. This was quite a
breakthrough at the time.
How quickly did this progress once you met with Cohen in Dundee
in 1995?
We started to collaborate on this on June 15th and we
worked very intensely and actually published the paper on December
24th of the same year. So we conceived the experiments,
did them and wrote the paper and published it in Nature all
within six months.
Why do you think the paper has been so highly cited?
This was a major step forward for the insulin-signaling field.
And it was first and came out of nowhere. That’s why it’s so
highly cited. That was the first substrate for PKB and it led to
probably 50 to 70 other proteins being identified as substrates for
PKB and established PKB as a major signaling molecule. So it went
from being an orphan kinase—not having a substrate or a signaling
pathway—to being center stage, and an oncogene. So the whole field
exploded in 1995. It went from about 10 papers in ‘95 to maybe
10,000 papers now, nearly all of which list PKB/AKT as an important
component.
How did you know PKB was regulated by insulin?
We had done some early experiments in the lab. We were searching
for a pathway for this orphan kinase, and one of the classical
things you throw on cells is insulin, growth factors, serum, all
sorts of things. And we had a very good antibody; we could immuno-precipitate
it and measure its activity.
Were you aware of how big this was going to be when you were
working on the paper?
Not really. It was a bit of a whirlwind. It was only in the next
two years that we realized how mega it was. It had all the
components and then suddenly there it was; the components had all
come together and we had a major story and a major impact on signal
transduction for the next 10 years.
Did you stay working with PKB/AKT?
Yes. From 1990 to 1995, this was a minor activity in my lab.
There was just one student, one post-doc, working on it. Then in
1995, when we found out the PIK3-insulin connection, I rapidly
shifted more of my people in the lab to work on it so we could stay
current. We had to keep up with all the other people who suddenly
joined in. One minute you’re alone and the next minute you’re
surrounded by people. Now about two-thirds of the work in the lab is
on PKB/AKT and this pathway.
How has your PKB/AKT research evolved since that 1995 paper?
We’ve been trying to establish the molecular mechanism for
activating the kinase. We worked some of this out with Philip Cohen
and Dario Alessi. All three of us have benefited from this protein.
We worked out that PKB was regulated by multi-site phosphorylation.
There were some competing mechanisms proposed, but our mechanism is
the one that stood the test of time and it made many antibody
companies quite rich, because of the phospho-specific antibodies
they made to the sites we identified that control the activity. Then
it was a race to find the upstream kinases in between PIK3 and PKB,
which were eventually found.
It’s still not nailed down completely, but we have contributed
to this by identifying PDK1 as a master regulatory kinase that
regulates PKB and also several other kinases. So it’s a kinase
that regulates a kinase that regulates a kinase. It’s a bit like a
loop. Meanwhile, the second phosphorylation of PKB has been a
controversial issue, but we think that maybe there is some order in
this field now. We found that members of the PIKK family of kinases
regulate PKB, as well. So it has to get two signals: one from PDK1
and one from the PIKK family and they phosphorylate different sites
on PKB.
We also had a collaboration with David Barford in London, and
David was able to work out the crystal structure of PKB in its
inactive and active state. And we showed that how this multi-site
phosphorylation led from a partially-disordered structure to an
ordered structure and approximately a 1000-fold increase in
activity, which is the pivotal event in this signaling pathway.
Where is the research going from here?
Now we’ve moved from this cell culture work and this signaling
pathway, which has grown to gigantic proportions, into the area of
studying the kinase in the animal. We have started to do mouse
genetics, and we knocked out the three different isoforms of PKB to
establish the true in vivo function. In the cell culture
system you can make predictions of how it works and when it works,
but to really show that the signal pathway works in a whole organism
you have to knock out or ablate the genes. We’ve done that in all
three isoforms of PKB and the result is three different phenotypes.
What are the different phenotypes, and what do they tell you?
If you knock out PKB alpha, you end up with about 30% of the mice
dead. The ones that survive are small and stay small. So this looks
like a condition of intrauterine growth retardation. It’s probably
due to the fact that PKB plays major a role in the placenta and in
angiogenesis of the placenta. So the embryos are a little bit
starved, which is not a good thing. We’re currently looking to see
what happens to these mice in adulthood. They stay small but they
have difficulties breeding. So this starvation of the womb is
imprinted for the rest of their life.
In Philadelphia, Morris Birnbaum knocked out PKB-beta and this
mouse is normal size, but it develops a kind of diabetic phenotype
when it ages; it becomes insulin resistant. So this brings us back
to insulin signaling. Then we also knocked out the third isoform,
PKB gamma. These mice are normal size, but they actually have
problems with post-natal brain development. They end up with a brain
about 25% smaller than the normal mouse brain. They may have
additional problems: basically their brain has fewer cells in it and
the cells are smaller.
Now we’ve gone onto the second generation and made double
knockouts and we’re attempting triple knockouts so we can work out
all the in vivo roles of PKB. And these mice all have
additional phenotypes, as well.
The other major thing is that this PIK3/PKB signaling pathway is
a major pathway in human cancers. So many of the mutations lead to
activation of this pathway, which helps a cell become cancerous. Now
that we have described much of the normal physiology, we also need
to describe the pathophysiology and to find a therapy to
down-regulate this cancer-forming pathway, which is prevalent in
about 10 or 15 different cancers, probably more. We need a drug,
basically. This is what the big aim is: to find a drug to the PI3K
pathway and turn it off in tumor cells.
So if you lower insulin levels you deactivate PIK3 and reduce
its oncogenic properties?
Yes. What we want to do for therapy would be to turn down the
pathway and not interfere with normal insulin signaling. In effect,
we’re now doing what they call systems biology, where we look at
the whole organism and try to understand the problem that way,
rather than the reductionist approach, where we look at small
components. Now that we’ve mapped many of the signaling pathways,
we can stand back and look to see how they’re affected in our
organisms and interpret how they’re working in the
pathophysiological states—in Type 2 diabetes, for instance, where
there are very high circulating insulin levels, and so insulin can
change from a hormone that regulates your glucose uptake to actually
function as growth factor. And this is what makes this work so
important now from a clinical point of view.