VHL и HIF в светлоклеточной RCC

Для перевода нажмите

VHL and HIF in clear cell renal cell carcinoma: molecular abnormalities and potential clinical applications

Ronald M. Bukowski , Robert A. Figlin, Robert J. Motzer (Eds). Renal cell carcinoma. Molecular targets and clinical applications. 3 Ed. Springer Science+Business Media New York (2015)


Von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) disease (also known as VHL syndrome) is a hereditary, autosomal dominant, neoplastic disease caused by germline mutations in the VHL tumour suppressor gene [1]. Patients inherit a single faulty copy of the gene, but the development of disease depends on spontaneous inactivation or loss of the second, wild-type VHL allele. VHL disease is associated with clear cell renal cell carcinomas (ccRCCs), central nervous system and retinal haemangioblastomas, phaeochromocytomas and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours, in addition to pancreatic cysts, endolymphatic sac tumours and epididymal papillary cystadenomas.

Two key observations led groups to question whether mutations within the VHL gene are also responsible for the development of sporadic ccRCC. First, the leading cause of death in patients suffering from VHL disease is ccRCC [2]. Second, the reintroduction of wild-type, but not mutant, VHL into RCC cell lines that lack the protein has no demonstrable effect on their growth in vitro but inhibits their ability to form tumours in nude mice [3–5]. Subsequently, it became clear that most sporadic ccRCCs do exhibit VHL alterations [6–9]. Consistent with the two-hit hypothesis of the tumour suppressor gene theory [10], biallelic inactivation of VHL occurs in the majority of sporadic ccRCCs due to a combination of somatic mutations, VHL promoter hypermethylation (which effectively turns off gene expression) and loss of heterozygosity (LOH) by allele deletion. In those ccRCCs which harbour VHL mutations, VHL is mutated ubiquitously in all areas of the tumour, supporting a key driver role for VHL mutations in the pathogenesis of most ccRCCs [11]. This is in contrast to mutations in other proposed driver genes which are often not detectable across every region of the tumour.

The compelling correlation between VHL inactivation and the development of ccRCC has been the subject of extensive research for almost 20 years, resulting in a heightened appreciation of the intricate relationship between the tumour endothelial vascular network and ccRCC inception and progression. In turn, this has facilitated the development of a variety of targeted therapies for ccRCC which not only reduce tumour burden but also significantly improve the clinical outcome in patients with advanced disease.

In this chapter, we examine in detail the role of the VHL gene and protein in ccRCC, alongside that of its main downstream target, hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF).

VHL gene and protein

The VHL gene is located on 3p25, has been evolutionarily conserved and consists of 854 nucleotides in three exons [12] (Fig. 4.1). An alternative splice variant that lacks exon 2 has been described but is thought to lack tumour suppression activity [7]. As a result of two alternative in-frame start codons, two pVHL isoforms exist in the cell: a 213-amino acid, 30 kDa form (pVHL30), and a 160-amino acid, 19 kDa form (pVHL19) [5, 13, 14]. pVHL19 lacks a 53-amino acid N-terminal pentameric acid repeat domain and seems to predominate in many tissues. Since both isoforms behave similarly in biochemical and functional assays and possess tumour suppressor activity in vivo [5], the term pVHL is used to describe both these proteins generically. Though pVHL shuttles between the nucleus and the cytoplasm, under steady-state conditions, most of the protein is located in the cytoplasm [4, 15–22]. Some pVHL is also found in mitochondria and associated with the endoplasmic reticulum [23, 24].

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) 4.1

Fig. 4.1. VHL gene and protein structure. The VHL gene consists of 854 nucleotides in three exons. Two pVHL isoforms, pVHL19 and pVHL30, exist as a result of two alternative in-frame start codons. pVHL19 lacks an N-terminal (GXEEX) repeat domain, but both isoforms possess tumour suppressor activity in vivo

pVHL structure

pVHL consists of two tightly coupled domains, a and β (Fig. 4.2). The β domain consists of a 7-stranded β-sandwich (amino acids 63–154) and an a-helix (residues 193–204) and has the properties of a substrate docking site [25]. The a domain, residues 155–192, consists of three a-helices and binds elongin C; an a-helix of elongin C completes a folded leaf four-helix structure instigated by the three Pvhl  a-domain helices [25]. In turn, this nucleates a complex containing elongin B, cullin 2 (Cul2) and RING finger protein Rbx1 (VCB-CR complex) [17, 25–28]. The elongin B/elongin C complex thus acts as an adaptor that links a substrate-recognition subunit (pVHL β domain) to heterodimers of Cul2 and Rbx1. pVHL is directly stabilised by associating with elongins B and C, and in turn elongins B and C are stabilised through their interactions with each other and pVHL [29]. The entire pVHL-elongin complex is thus resistant to proteasomal degradation. In contrast, VHL proteins harbouring mutations which disrupt elongin binding are unstable and rapidly degraded by the proteasome. Structurally, the VCB-CR complex resembles yeast Skp1-Cdc53-F-Box protein (SCF) ubiquitin ligases, and functionally, both the VCB-CR and SCF complexes have ubiquitin ligase activity and are capable of targeting proteins for proteasomal degradation [30, 31].

pVHL and hypoxia-inducible factors

The best-documented function of pVHL relates to its role as the substrate-recognition component of the VCB-CR E3 ubiquitin ligase complex. This complex is best known for its ability to target hypoxia-inducible factors (HIFs) for polyubiquitination and proteasomal degradation [32, 33] (Fig. 4.3). The alpha subunit of HIF interacts exclusively with the beta domain of pVHL, binding alongside the β-sandwich [34, 35] (Fig. 4.2). This binding is dependent on the hydroxylation of one of two conserved proline residues within HIFα by prolyl hydroxylases (PHDs) 1–3, which require oxygen as a co-substrate and are thus only active under normoxic conditions [35–39] (Fig. 4.4). Prolyl hydroxylation of HIFα enables its recognition and ubiquitination by the VCB-CR complex, and polyubiquitinated HIFs are recognised and degraded by the cellular proteasome (Fig. 4.3). Under hypoxic physiological conditions (or in the absence of functional pVHL), HIFα accumulates and forms heterodimers with HIF1Β. These heterodimers translocate to the nucleus where they bind to hypoxia response elements that contain the consensus sequence 5’RCGTG-3′ [40]. Based on genome-wide chromatin immunoprecipitation combined with DNA sequencing or mRNA microarrays, the number of direct HIF target genes is currently greater than 800 [41, 42]; many of these genes promote adaptation to acute or chronic hypoxia [43]. A list of selected HIF-induced genes with their functions is shown in Table 4.1. HIFs also indirectly regulate gene expression by transactivating genes encoding microRNAs [44] and chromatin-modifying enzymes [41, 43, 45].

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) 4.2

Fig. 4.2. Ribbon diagrams illustrating the secondary structure of the VHL-elongin C-elongin B complex and interactions with HIFα. (a) Secondary structure of the VHL-elongin C-elongin B complex. pVHL (pink) consists of two tightly coupled domains, α and β. The β domain consists of a 7-stranded β-sandwich and an α-helix and has the properties of a substrate docking site. The α domain, residues 155–192, consists of three α-helices and binds elongin C (blue). The H4 helix of elongin C fits into an extended groove formed by the H1, H2 and H3 helices of the VHL a domain. The VHL-elongin C complex nucleates a complex containing elongin B (green), cullin 2 (Cul2) (not shown) and RING finger protein Rbx1 (not shown) (VCB-CR complex). (b) The HIFα hydroxyproline binding pocket of pVHL. A 15-amino acid portion of HIFα (yellow) adopts an extended beta strand-like conformation and interacts exclusively with the beta domain of pVHL (pink) binding alongside the beta sandwich. (b) Key interactions between pVHL and the HIFα hydroxyproline (HYP). The hydroxyproline of HIF binds in a pocket on pVHL lined by residues W88, Y98, S111, H115 and W117. The hydroxyl group of S111 and the H115 imidazole amino group serve as hydrogen-bonding partners to the HYP564 hydroxyl group. All of the residues that form the pocket are frequently mutated in ccRCC

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) 4.3

Fig. 4.3. Oxygen-dependent HIF regulation. In normoxic conditions, HIFα is hydroxylated by prolyl hydroxylases (PHDs) 1–3. Prolyl hydroxylated HIFα is recognised by the VHL-elongin C-elongin B-cullin 2-Rbx1 (VCB-CR) E3 ubiquitin ligase complex and targeted for ubiquitination and proteasomal degradation. In hypoxic conditions, prolyl hydroxylases 1–3 are inactive. HIFα therefore accumulates and forms heterodimers with HIF1Β which translocate to the nucleus, bind to hypoxia response elements and induce transcription of genes involved in adaptations to hypoxia. Though HIF1α and HIF2α have significant overlap in function, they are not functionally redundant and activate different pathways to different extents

HIF thus plays a critical role in cellular adaptation to reduced oxygen tension; functional pVHL is necessary to switch off this adaptation under normoxic conditions. The loss of pVHL function, occurring, for example, secondary to biallelic inactivation of the VHL gene, impairs HIFα destabilisation. This promotes inappropriate activation of downstream target genes which would normally only be activated under hypoxic conditions and thereby contributes directly to tumorigenesis. This phenomenon provides an explanation for why pVHL-defective tumours including haemangioblastomas, phaeochromocytomas and ccRCCs are sometimes associated with paraneoplastic erythrocytosis [46]. In keeping with the notion that the regulation of HIFα is the key tumour suppressor function of pVHL, a large proportion of disease-associated VHL mutations are predicted to and have been demonstrated to abolish the interaction between pVHL and HIF [34, 35, 47] (Table 4.4).

Other than HIFα, additional potential pVHL ubiquitination substrates, including atypical protein kinase C [48] and the large subunit of RNA polymerase II [49], have been described (reviewed within [32, 50–52]), though their significance in ccRCC tumorigenesis is uncertain.

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) 4.4

Fig. 4.4. HIF transcription factors. HIF proteins are members of the basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH per-Arnt-SIM (PAS) family of DNA-binding transcription factors. The bHLH and PAS domains are involved in DNA binding and heterodimerisation; the oxygen-dependent degradation (ODD) domain is required for oxygen-dependent hydroxylation and degradation; and the N-terminal and C-terminal transactivation domains (NTAD and CTAD, respectively) are required for transcriptional activation. HIF1α and HIF2α both have two transcriptional activation domains. HIF1Β has just one transcriptional activation domain. The hydroxylation of conserved proline residues in the ODD of HIFα proteins by oxygen-dependent prolyl hydroxylase enzymes (PHDs) is required for pVHL to bind and degrade HIFα subunits under normoxic conditions. Hypoxia limits PHD activity. Hypoxia also inhibits hydroxylation of a conserved asparagine in the CTAD by factor-inhibiting HIF1 (FIH1); this blocks the interaction between HIFα and the transcriptional co-activators p300/CBp. FIH1 hydroxylates HIF2α at a lower efficiency (broken arrow) than HIF1α (unbroken arrow). HIF3α undergoes extensive mRNA splicing; many of the ensuing splice variants (e.g. IPAS) lack a transactivation domain and function as dominant-negative regulators of HIFs

The HIF transcription factors

Three HIFα family members (HIF1α, HIF2α, HIF3α) and two HIFβ family members (HIF1Β and HIF2β) exist (HIFβ is often referred to as ARNT [aryl hydrocarbon receptor nuclear translocator]) (reviewed in [40]). While HIF1α is ubiquitously expressed, the expression of HIF2α is restricted to endothelial, lung, renal and hepatic cells. HIF proteins are part of the basic helix-loop-helix PER-ARNT-SIM (PAS) family of DNA-binding transcription factors (Fig. 4.4). HIF1α and HIF2α both have two transcriptional activation domains: the N-terminal transactivation domain (NTAD) and the C-terminal transactivation domain (CTAD) [52, 53].

Table 4.1. Selected shared and unique target genes regulated by HIF1α and HIF2α in ccRCC

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.1

In contrast, HIF3α undergoes extensive mRNA splicing; many of the ensuing splice variants lack a transactivation domain and can competitively inhibit transcriptional activation by HIF1α and HIF2α [54–57], although little is yet known about the impact of HIF3α on hypoxic tumour progression.

HIF1α, but not HIF2α, can also be recognised by at least two hydroxylation-insensitive ubiquitin ligase complexes that do not contain pVHL [58, 59] (Fig. 4.5). Firstly, HIF-αssociated factor (HAF) binds and destabilises HIF1α under normoxic and hypoxic conditions in a pVHL-independent, proteasome-dependent manner, but has no effect on HIF2α levels. Instead, HAF binds HIF2α at a distinct C-terminal region and promotes HIF2α transcriptional activity, effectively switching cells from an HIF1α to an HIF2α transcriptional programme. Secondly, heat shock protein 70 (HSP70) and carboxyl terminus of Hsc70-interacting protein (CHIP), a recently identified E3 ubiquitin ligase, bind and degrade HIF1α (but not HIF2α) under conditions of prolonged hypoxia in cultured cells [58, 60]. In addition, the hydroxylation of HIFα can occur on a conserved asparaginyl residue within the CTAD by the asparaginyl hydroxylase factor-inhibiting HIF1 (FIH1). This hydroxylation prevents its interaction with the transcriptional co-activator p300 and thereby impairs CTAD activity [61–63]. Though the asparaginyl hydroxylation reaction also requires molecular oxygen, FIH1 remains active at intermediate levels of hypoxia which would render the prolyl hydroxylases inactive [64]. On the whole, FIH1 seems to play a role in fine-tuning the hypoxic response [65, 66]. The HIF1α CTAD is more sensitive to FIH1 than the HIF2α CTAD [67, 68]. Consequently, different HIF target genes exhibit different sensitivities to FIH1 inhibition, presumably resulting from their relative dependency on HIF1α versus HIF2α, and/or on NTAD versus CTAD activity. Interestingly, some HIF target genes are induced by HIF in a broad variety of cells and tissues, while others are more constrained. For example, the expression of erythropoietin in adults is principally restricted to specialised cells in the kidney.

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) 4.5a

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) 4.5b

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) 4.5c

Fig. 4.5. Role of VHL, HIF1α and HIF2α in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. (a) In normoxic conditions, pVHL inhibits activity of both HIF1α and HIF2α by targeting them for ubiquitination and degradation. Evidence suggests that on balance, HIF2α is a renal oncoprotein which promotes growth of ccRCC, while HIF1α is a renal tumour suppressor which inhibits growth of ccRCC. Biallelic loss of VHL secondary to a combination of mutation, promoter methylation and/or LOH results in increased HIF1α and HIF2α levels. (b) Loss of HIF1α’s tumour-suppressive activity relative to HIF2α’s oncoprotein activity may result from the following: (1) Reduced HIF1α expression or activity secondary to 14q deletion, deletion of the HIF1α locus or loss-of-function mutations in HIF1α. (2) The greater sensitivity of HIF1α to FIH1 compared to HIF2α. HIF1α would therefore theoretically be silenced by FIH1 in VHL null cells unless those cells were profoundly hypoxic. (3) HIF-αssociated factor (HAF) binds and destabilises HIF1α but promotes HIF2α activity. (4) Heat shock protein 70 (HSP70) and carboxyl terminus of Hsc70-interacting protein (CHIP) bind and degrade HIF1α but not HIF2α. The gene sets regulated by HIF1α and HIF2α overlap but are not entirely congruent. HIF1α targets may be biased towards ccRCC tumour suppressors, while HIF2α targets might be biased towards ccRCC oncoproteins. (c) Alternatively, it is possible that the differences between HIF1α and HIF2α result from differential regulation of HIF target genes. For example, in some systems, while HIF1α suppresses c-Myc activity, HIF2α enhances c-Myc activity. Similarly, HIF1α enhances and HIF2α suppresses p53 function

HIF2α is more oncogenic than HIF1α

Both HIF1α and HIF2α are stabilised and activated by hypoxia and dimerise with HIF1β. Likewise, both isoforms activate transcription of target genes by binding to the same hypoxia response element. However, although significant overlap in their function exists, HIF1α and HIF2α are not functionally redundant. Array studies indicate that while HIF1α induces apoptotic pathways not targeted by HIF2α and preferentially drives the expression of genes involved in the glycolytic pathway, HIF2α preferentially promotes growth and angiogenesis [69–71]. Furthermore, the relative contributions of the two paralogs to the control of specific HIF target genes can differ in different cellular contexts. For example, VEGF is primarily regulated by HIF2α in pVHL-defective renal carcinoma cells but by HIF1α in breast cancer cells [71].

Moreover, in vitro and cell line xenograft studies suggest that although HIF2α is both necessary and sufficient for the growth of transformed RCC cell lines, HIF1α is not (reviewed in [72, 73]). There are four lines of evidence for this. First, all VHL null ccRCC cell lines examined to date express HIF2α, while not all express HIF1α [74, 75]. Second, the downregulation of HIF2α expression (using short hairpin RNAs delivered by a viral vector) in human VHL null RCC cells is sufficient to prevent tumour formation in nude mice [76, 77]. Conversely, the overproduction of HIF2α but not HIF1α can override pVHL’s tumour suppressor activity in such xenograft assays [70, 76, 78]. Third, in animal models, HIF2α variants that lack prolyl hydroxylation sites (and cannot therefore be targeted for ubiquitination by the E3m ubiquitin ligase complex) prevent tumour inhibition by pVHL, whereas analogous HIF1α variants do not [78, 79]. Finally, the levels of HIF2α are highest in cells engineered to produce variants of pVHL associated with type 1 and type 2B VHL disease (associated with a high risk of RCC), intermediate in cells with forms of pVHL linked with type 2A VHL disease (associated with a low risk of RCC) and essentially normal in cells with pVHL mutations seen in type 2C disease (which are not associated with ccRCC) [80, 81]. HIF2α seems to be both necessary and sufficient for much of the pathology that has been described in genetically engineered mouse models in which VHL has been inactivated in specific tissues [82–86]. Interestingly, HIF2α polymorphisms have recently been linked to the risk of developing kidney cancer in the general population [87].

HIF1α is a renal tumour suppressor gene

Four further lines of evidence suggest that HIF1α is not merely dispensable in the context of ccRCC but actually functions as a tumour suppressor gene. First, targeted exon sequencing of ccRCC has shown rare inactivating mutations in HIF1α [88], and copy-number analyses of RCC cell lines and primary tumours suggest that the HIF1α locus is frequently lost, either alone or along with the long arm of chromosome 14 (14q) where the HIF1α gene resides [75]. The loss of chromosome 14q in this setting is associated with a poor prognosis [89, 90]. In other cases, alternative mRNA splicing around deleted HIF1α exonic sequences leads to the production of aberrant HIF1α isoforms [75]. Second, though all VHL-defective ccRCCs overexpress HIF2α, approximately one third of these tumours also lack HIF1α expression [74]. Third, functional in vitro and in vivo studies suggest that the overexpression of HIF1α in VHL wild-type cells restrains tumour growth, whereas the suppression of HIF1α in VHL-deficient cells enhances tumour growth [75, 91]. Finally, though uncommon, HIF1α mutations have been described in ccRCC. These include missense mutations which compromise HIF1α’s ability to suppress proliferation when reintroduced into ccRCC cell lines that lack endogenous, wild-type, HIF1α [75, 77, 88].

In keeping with these findings, many ccRCCs produce no, or very low, levels of HIF1α, and 14q-deleted tumours exhibit a transcriptional signature indicative of decreased HIF1α activity [74, 75, 92]. However, in contrast to ccRCC cell lines, ccRCC tumours often appear to retain a wild-type HIF1α allele [75], suggesting that HIF1α haploinsufficiency is sufficient to promote tumorigenesis in vivo. Since many ccRCC cell lines are established from metastatic lesions, it is possible that reduction to nullizygosity is a late event in renal carcinoma and thus underrepresented in primary tumours, particularly in patients with early disease who have undergone a nephrectomy with curative intent.

Collectively, these observations suggest that while HIF1α is a tumour suppressor gene in renal cancer development and is one of the relevant targets of the 14q deletions that are typical of ccRCC, HIF2α is the key driver of renal cancer progression.

Differences between HIF1α and HIF2α

Explanations for the difference in oncogenicity between HIF2α and HIF1α may relate to the relative resistance of the HIF2α CTAD to FIH1 compared with the HIF1α CTAD; HIF2α may be able to escape from proteins such as FIH1 that would otherwise limit HIFα activity in cells lacking VHL (Fig. 4.5). In contrast, the HIF1α CTAD would theoretically be silenced by FIH1 in VHL null ccRCC cells, unless the cells were severely hypoxic. A transcriptionally inactive HIF1α could, in principle, act as a dominant negative, by competitively displacing HIF2α, which is relatively insensitive to FIH1, from specific HIF target genes. In support of this theory, some HIF target genes are paradoxically increased when HIF1α is downregulated in VHL null RCC cells [70], and the HIF2α NTAD and CTAD cooperate to promote renal tumorigenesis in vivo [68]. The differential sensitivities of HIF1α and HIF2α to HAF, HSP70 and CHIP may also play a role.

Alternatively, it is possible that some genes that are preferentially activated by HIF2α relative to HIF1α are particularly oncogenic. One which has attracted significant interest relates to the opposing roles of HIF1α and HIF2α in the regulation of c-Myc activity; while HIF1α suppresses c-Myc activity, HIF2α promotes the transactivation or transrepression of c-Myc-specific target genes [74, 93, 94]. In keeping with this notion, RCC tumours that exclusively express HIF2α have increased proliferation rates [74]. Intriguingly, a subset of ccRCC tumours seem to have copynumber amplification of 8q24 where c-Myc resides [95].

Similarly, HIF target genes that are regulated primarily by HIF1α may suppress ccRCC growth. For example, HIF1α enhances and HIF2α suppresses p53 function [96, 97]. Other potential tumour suppressor genes that are regulated by HIF1α in VHL null ccRCCs include BNIP3, REDD1, TXNIP and ZAC1 [75]. Interestingly, ZAC1 maps to chromosome 6q23, which is often deleted in VHL-associated renal cancers, haemangioblastomas and phaeochromocytomas. Other potential tumour suppressor genes that are regulated by HIF1α in VHL null ccRCCs include BNIP3, REDD1, TXNIP and ZAC1 [75]. Interestingly, ZAC1 maps to chromosome 6q23, which is often deleted in VHL-associated renal cancers, haemangioblastomas and phaeochromocytomas [98, 99].

HIF-independent functions of pVHL (Table 4.2)

Despite pVHL’s well-characterised role in targeting HIFs for polyubiquitination and proteasomal degradation, evidence has accrued to indicate that pVHL also has functions independent of HIF1α and HIF2α that may be important for its tumour suppressor action. These include the assembly and regulation of the extracellular matrix, microtubule stabilisation and maintenance of the primary cilium, regulation of apoptosis, control of cell senescence and transcriptional regulation (Table 4.2).

Table 4.2. Mechanisms that involve pVHL

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.2

These roles are less thoroughly characterised than those that involve HIFs, and many have been discovered through biochemical interactions. Nonetheless, gene expression studies also support the notion that there are HIF-independent gene expression changes induced by VHL loss [100, 101], though to what extent the HIFindependent functions of pVHL cooperate with HIF dysregulation in ccRCC tumorigenesis currently remains unknown.

VHL and regulation of the extracellular matrix

One of the better characterised, though still incompletely understood, HIFαindependent roles of pVHL is its effect on the assembly of the extracellular matrix (ecm). The ecm is a complex structural component, composed of proteoglycans, hyaluronic acid and glycoproteins such as fibronectin and collagen [102]. The disruption of its architecture has been associated with tumour growth, angiogenesis and metastasis, and pVHL plays an important role in its regulation. pVHL interacts directly with fibronectin and collagen IV, and all pVHL mutants tested to date fail to bind fibronectin and collagen IV and lose the ability to assemble an ecm [80, 81, 103–108]. The inability of VHL-deficient cells to bind ecm components is not mediated by HIF [103, 107, 109] and does not require binding to the other components of the pVHL complex such as elongins B and C and cullin 2.

The inactivation of the VHL-ecm assembly pathway results in highly vascularised tumours with a remodelled fibronectin and collagen IV matrix and increased invasive capacity [106], and it has been speculated that ecm remodelling may promote angiogenesis by providing a path for blood vessels to in?ltrate tumours, thereby supporting tumorigenicity. This is in contrast to inactivation of the VHLHIFα regulation pathway, which results in tumours with high VEGF levels but decreased angiogenesis, a tightly assembled fibronectin and collagen IV matrix and low invasive capacity.

The interaction of pVHL with fibronectin is mediated by pVHL neddylation [108] which acts as a molecular switch in conferring selectivity to fibronectin binding over CUL2 [110]. The interaction of pVHL with collagen IV is dependent on endoplasmic reticulum hydroxylation [105] and is competed by hydroxylated, but not unmodified, HIF1α peptides, implying that this interaction requires the hydroxyproline binding pocket in the β domain of pVHL. pVHL does not affect fibronectin and collagen IV production or secretion and does not result in collagen IV proteasomal degradation [105, 106].

It is well recognised that tumour cell invasion is dependent on the adhesion and proteolytic remodelling of the ecm, and it is now known that pVHL influences both these processes. VHL promotes E-cadherin transcription through HIF-dependent mechanisms [104], and inactivation of pVHL results in downregulation of the adherens junction protein E-cadherin [111]. VHL inactivation also leads to downregulation of the tight junction proteins occludin and claudin in an E-cadherin-independent manner [112], and pVHL has been reported to downregulate integrins in an HIFα-independent manner [113]. As a consequence of these mechanisms, pVHL inactivation results in the disruption of both adherens and tight junctions. Cells lacking pVHL also fail to form β1 ?brillar adhesions, which may contribute to the increased cell motility and invasiveness seen in the absence of a functional pVHL [114].

VHL also regulates the matrix metalloproteinases, a family of matrix-degrading enzymes involved in ecm turnover. Firstly, HIF2α has been shown to influence RCC cell invasiveness by regulating membrane type 1 MMP expression [115, 116]. Secondly, the loss of VHL-ECM pathway regulation in RCC cells results in increased cell invasiveness and activation of MMP-2 [106]. Compared to VHL WT ccRCC cell lines, VHL null ccRCC cells show increased invasiveness in growth factor-reduced Matrigel, overproduce MMP-2 and MMP-9 and display an extensive branching morphogenesis phenotype in response to hepatocyte growth factor/ scatter factor [117]. MMP-induced proteolytic remodelling of the ecm has been shown to expose cryptic sites in collagen IV which are required for in vivo angiogenesis [118].

As yet, the precise mechanisms of the interplay between pVHL, the ecm and suppression of tumorigenesis, angiogenesis and invasiveness are not resolved. In particular, how an intracellular protein such as pVHL can modulate the assembly of the extracellular ecm components remains to be elucidated. pVHL may mediate fibronectin and collagen IV modification to allow their proper assembly into the ecm. Loss of these interactions resulting from loss of VHL would lead to an aberrant ecm, activation of MMPs, release of ecm-sequestered growth factors and stimulation of tumorigenesis, angiogenesis and invasion. The disruption of integrins and cell adhesion molecule regulation would further enhance the invasive RCC phenotype. In principle, a more complete understanding of the mechanisms of ecm regulation by pVHL could lead to novel therapies for patients with ccRCC, though extensive future work in this field is required.

Microtubule stabilisation and maintenance of the primary cilium

pVHL can also associate with microtubules [119]. This association has been reported to result in microtubule stabilisation [119] and directional growth of microtubules towards the cell periphery [120] and appears to be independent of pVHL’s ability to downregulate HIF or its ubiquitin ligase function. In turn, this may explain the loss of primary cilia seen in renal cysts from VHL disease patients and ccRCC cell lines devoid of functional pVHL [120–122]. The primary cilium is a specialised structure on the cell surface that acts as an antenna of the cell and regulates the transduction of both chemical and mechanical signals [123]. The ciliary axoneme is composed of microtubules that are arranged out from the basal body or mother centriole; thus, microtubule dynamics and formation and maintenance of the primary cilium are intimately linked.

An interaction between pVHL and the Par3-Par6-atypical protein kinase C polarity complex has been suggested as a mechanism for linking polarity pathways to microtubule capture and ciliogenesis [120]. The phosphorylation of pVHL by glycogen synthase kinase 3β (GSK3β) has been reported to prevent pVHL from stabilising microtubules, without disrupting their interaction with pVHL [119]. This phosphorylation occurs on Ser68, after a priming phosphorylation at Ser72 by an unidentified kinase. One hypothesis is that GSK3β maintains cilia independently of pVHL. However, when GSK3β is inactivated, pVHL is active and can regulate the microtubules and primary cilia independently of GSK3 [119]. Interestingly, a pVHL variant with phosphomimetic substitutions at Ser68 and Ser72 was also impaired with respect to HIF polyubiquitination, suggesting GSK3β may regulate more than one pVHL function. In keeping with the notion that GSK3β and pVHL redundantly maintain primary cilia, it appears that the PTEN tumour suppressor protein cooperates with pVHL to suppress cyst development in the kidney [124]; the combined loss of VHL and PTEN in a genetically engineered mouse model cooperate to promote renal and genital tract cysts. pVHL’s effects on microtubule dynamics appear to be HIF independent, though some studies suggest that HIF dysregulation may play at least a partial role in the loss of microtubule stability imparted by VHL inactivation [121, 122, 125].

Surprisingly, pVHL’s ability to stabilise microtubules is lost in VHL mutations that predispose to the development of haemangioblastomas and phaeochromocytomas, but not those associated with the development of ccRCC [119]. This apparent paradox, whereby VHL mutants predisposing to RCC maintain the ability to regulate microtubule dynamics, is perplexing. It has been suggested that renal cysts which develop secondary to the loss of primary cilia on renal tubular cells lack significant malignant potential and that the majority of ccRCCs associated with VHL disease may arise without a preceding cystic phase [126]. This speculation is not proven, though, to some extent, it is in keeping with the observation that patients with polycystic kidney disease, despite having large numbers of renal cysts, are not clearly at a significantly higher risk of developing ccRCC [127].

Regulation of apoptosis

In comparison to the majority of other tumour types, ccRCCs are insensitive to cytotoxic chemotherapies. Failure of cytotoxic chemotherapy is tightly associated with failure of p53-mediated apoptosis [128]. However, p53 mutations or loss is rare in ccRCC [129–131]. Subsequently, groups have considered whether HIF or pVHL is able to influence p53 function or activate alternative anti-apoptotic pathways in ccRCC.

Indeed, pVHL loss has been demonstrated to result in p53 inactivation by both HIF-dependent and HIF-independent effects. Firstly, HIF can directly bind to and modulate p53 activity [132–134]. Secondly, pVHL has been shown to directly associate with and stabilise p53 by suppressing Mdm2-mediated ubiquitination and nuclear export of p53 and by subsequently recruiting p53-modifying enzymes, resulting in an increase in its transcriptional activity [135]. VHL-deleted RCC cells show attenuated apoptosis and abnormal cell cycle arrest upon DNA damage, which normalises on restoration of pVHL [136].

Resistance to chemotherapy-induced apoptosis is also mediated through the nuclear factor kB (NF-kB) pathway. pVHL has been shown to facilitate TNFα-induced cytotoxicity in RCC cells, at least in part, through the downregulation of NF-kB activity and subsequent attenuation of anti-apoptotic proteins c-FLIP, survivin, c-IAP-1 and c-IAP-2 [137, 138]. pVHL’s effect on NF-kB is at least in part dependent on HIF signalling [139]. In addition, pVHL can modulate NF-kB activity directly by serving as an adaptor that promotes the inhibitory phosphorylation of the NF-kB agonist CARD9 by casein kinase 2 [140].

Interestingly, 11 % of apparently sporadic phaeochromocytomas (defined by a lack of a family history or a spectrum of tumours suggestive of VHL disease) are actually due to occult germline mutations of VHL [141]. However, somatic VHL mutations are uncommon in truly sporadic phaeochromocytomas. Furthermore, type 2C VHL disease mutations (which are associated only with phaeochromocytomas and not with other tumour types) retain their ability to downregulate HIFα [80, 81], suggesting that the development of VHL-associated phaeochromocytomas is related to an HIF-independent function of pVHL. Phaeochromocytomas derive from sympathetic neuronal precursor cells, many of which undergo c-Jun-dependent apoptosis during normal development as nerve growth factor (NGF) becomes limiting. Phaeochromocytoma-associated VHL mutations result in the HIF-independent accumulation of JUNB, which is known to blunt neuronal apoptosis during NGF withdrawal [142]. Failure of developmental apoptosis may thus play a role in the development of phaeochromocytomas in patients inheriting phaeochromocytomaassociated VHL mutations.

Control of cell senescence

Cellular senescence is the phenomenon of irreversible growth arrest in response to DNA damage and is an important in vivo tumour suppressor mechanism [143]. Studies have shown that the stabilisation of HIF occurring as a consequence of physiological oxygenation can extend the replicative lifespan of cells in culture [144, 145]. However, acute VHL inactivation, which would also result in the stabilisation of HIFα, has been shown to cause a senescent-like phenotype in vitro and in vivo [146]. Interestingly, this phenotype was independent of p53 and HIF but dependent on the retinoblastoma protein (Rb) and the SWItch/Sucrose NonFermentable SWI2/SNF2 chromatin remodeller p400. This finding is somewhat surprising, since the induction of senescence would be expected to restrict the development of renal carcinoma in vivo. A subsequent study demonstrated that the induction of senescence secondary to VHL loss occurs under atmospheric conditions (21 % O2), but not under physiological oxygenation (2–5 % O2), suggesting that VHL inactivation sensitises cells to oxidative stress [147]. The authors suggest that in vivo oxygenation may promote a tolerance of VHL loss in renal epithelia, which may allow cells to progress further towards a transformed state.

Transcriptional regulation

VHL has been shown to mediate the ubiquitination of the large subunit of RNA polymerase II, Rpb1, in response to oxidative stress, in a manner dependent on the hydroxylation of a specific proline [49, 148]. VHL has also been suggested to regulate transcription through a controlling influence on the RNA-binding protein HuR [149–151] and has been reported to bind the SP1 transcription factor [152–154].

VHL proteostasis

It has long been known that the proper folding and functionality of pVHL requires its tight association with elongins B and C to form the VCB complex and that failure of correct folding and interaction with elongins B and C results in the proteolytic degradation of pVHL [29].

Following synthesis on ribosomes, nascent VHL is shuttled from the ribosomal machinery with the assistance of heat shock protein 70 (HSP70) [155]. Formation of the VCB complex is then mediated by the chaperonin TCP-1 ring complex (TRiC; also called chaperonin-containing TCP-1 [CCT]) [155], a hetero-oligomeric complex which consists of two stacked rings with a central chamber in which unfolded polypeptides bind and fold [156]. TRiC facilitates VHL folding, thereby enabling its association with elongins B and C to form the VCB complex which develops while VHL is bound to TRiC [155]. Upon the formation of a mature VCB complex, pVHL is released from TRiC.

The binding of pVHL to TRiC occurs at amino acids 114–119 and 148–155 (called Box 1 and Box 2, respectively) [157]. These two motifs are located in adjacent strands of the β domain, and both harbour tumour-associated mutations (e.g. W117A) that disrupt the association of pVHL with TRiC and lead to misfolding of newly translated pVHL and the absence of a mature VCB complex in the cell [158, 159]. Failure to generate a properly folded pVHL or a mature VCB results in the degradation of pVHL through the ubiquitin-proteasome system. pVHL degradation specifically requires another chaperone, Hsp90, which does not participate in pVHL folding [160]. Since distinct chaperone pathways mediate the folding and quality control of pVHL, an enhanced understanding of the mechanisms by which destabilised pVHL mutants are targeted for proteasomal degradation may lead to strategies for refolding and stabilisation of pVHL, to allow its incorporation into the VCB complex and potential restoration of its tumour suppressor activity. Bortezomib and MG132 are both capable of increasing VHL levels, and a cell-based Prestwick compound screen has identified several compounds that upregulate VHL-W117A in VHL-W117A-infected cell lines [161]. Further work is underway to analyse the functional consequence of pVHL upregulation using these compounds, as well as attempt to identify new compounds which rectify the interaction between point-mutated pVHL and the chaperones and chaperonins, and it is conceivable that such compounds may resuscitate the function of pVHL and thereby alter the disease phenotype and provide clinical benefit for patients with lesions possessing certain missense VHL mutations.

Genotype-phenotype correlations in von hippel-lindau disease

In VHL disease, there is clear evidence for strong genotype-phenotype correlations with specific classes of VHL mutations predisposing to different spectrums of morbidity and mortality (reviewed within [1], Table 4.3). While true null VHL alleles (i.e. large genomic deletions, frameshift mutations or nonsense mutations) are associated with a low risk of phaeochromocytoma (type 1 VHL disease), the majority of VHL mutations identified in families with an increased risk of phaeochromocytoma (type 2 VHL disease) are missense mutations. Type 2 VHL disease is further subdivided into type 2A (low risk of ccRCC), type 2B (high risk of ccRCC) and type 2C (phaeochromocytoma but no other manifestations of VHL disease). Subsequent analysis has suggested that surface amino acid substitutions confer a higher phaeochromocytoma risk than substitution of amino acids buried deep within the protein core [162].

Furthermore, the risk of developing ccRCC in VHL disease appears to be linked to the degree to which HIF activity is compromised ([47, 80, 81, 163, 164]. While type 1 and type 2B mutations (which are associated with a high risk of developing ccRCC) are grossly defective with respect to HIF regulation, type 2A mutations

Table 4.3. Genotype-phenotype correlations in VHL disease

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.3

(associated with a low risk of ccRCC) appear to be far less compromised with respect to HIFα regulation. Perhaps the clearest demonstration of this phenomenon is seen by undertaking a detailed biochemical analysis of the two most frequent type 2A mutations, Y98H and Y112H, in comparison to type 2B mutations in the same residues, Y98N and Y112N [47]. While none of these mutations affected the assembly of the VCB complex, the type 2A mutant proteins exhibited higher stabilities at physiological temperature and higher binding affinities for HIF1α compared with the type 2B mutant proteins. Consistent with these results, the type 2A but not type 2B mutant VHL proteins retained significant ubiquitin ligase activity towards HIF1α in vitro [47].

Fascinatingly, individuals with homozygosity for the germline R200W VHL mutation develop Chuvash polycythaemia, a rare benign congenital erythrocytosis with no associated cancer risk [165, 166].

Therapeutic implications of pVHL in ccRCC

It has long been known that angiogenesis is a critical component for malignant tumour progression [167]. This observation coupled with the hypervascular nature of ccRCCs led to intense interest in the molecular mechanisms of angiogenesis in ccRCCs. It is in this context that the discovery of the VHL gene and the identification of its critical role in regulating the HIF-mediated response to hypoxia have facilitated the dramatic recent shift in paradigm for the treatment of ccRCC. As described earlier, the inactivation of VHL triggers pro-angiogenic mechanisms through the activation of HIF with subsequent activation of transcription of many pro-angiogenic factors including the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) family of proteins and TGFα. Numerous subtypes of VEGF exist (including VEGF-Agreed, VEGF-B, VEGF-C, VEGF-D, VEGF-E and placenta growth factor-1) (reviewed within [168]). Most of these are regulated by pVHL and HIF and play key roles in angiogenesis by binding to cell membrane-associated tyrosine kinases, the VEGF receptors. The binding of VEGF ligand to its receptor initiates the activation of downstream signalling pathways which ultimately lead to endothelial cell activation, proliferation, migration and survival.

Drugs which modulate the VHL-HIF-VEGF pathway have proven benefit in treating ccRCC and are now the standard of care for patients with metastatic disease, with established superiority over cytokine therapies (reviewed within [72, 169–171]. Such drugs include sunitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib and axitinib (multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitors which inhibit the VEGFRs among others), inhibitors of the mTOR pathway such as temsirolimus and everolimus and the monoclonal anti-VEGF antibody bevacizumab. The mechanisms of action, benefits and toxicities of these drugs are detailed further in chapter x.

In general, these targeted therapies increase progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo or immunotherapy [171]. However, very few trials have performed a direct head-to-head comparison of different targeted therapies or investigated which agents are most suitable for particular patient types, for example, patients at different levels of risk or different ages. The development of validated predictive and prognostic markers would be particularly valuable to optimise clinical management strategies and enhance clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness. In ccRCC, the most widely used prognostic and predictive tools are based around the Motzer criteria or the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk status [172], which were developed in the immunotherapy era. In 2009, Heng et al. [173] conducted a large multi-centre study of 645 patients to better define the prognostic indicators for overall survival in mccRCC patients treated with VEGF-targeted therapy. They showed that six factors (performance status, haemoglobin levels, serum calcium concentration, time from diagnosis, neutrophil count and platelet count) could segregate patients into three prognostic categories: favourable, intermediate and poor prognosis groups. This model has since been externally validated and performs favourably compared with the MSKCC model [174]. However, even this model performs only moderately well (concordance index for overall survival 0.71), begging the question as to whether it is possible to achieve better discrimination in outcomes.

On this note, it is highly likely that the addition of patient-specific or tumourspecific genetic biomarkers could help. These biomarkers can be broadly classified as prognostic markers (those mainly associated with the course or outcome of a disease) or predictive markers, which can be used to identify subpopulations of patients who are most likely to respond to a given therapy. Increasingly, treatments for other cancers are targeted to patients with alterations in specific molecular pathways known to be important in the pathogenesis of these tumours (reviewed within [175]). For example, a breast cancer with amplification of HER2 might be treated with the anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody trastuzumab or the HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor lapatinib. In contrast, there are currently no validated molecular markers used to guide therapeutic decisions in ccRCC. We now discuss whether VHL mutational status may be a clinically useful genetic biomarker in sporadic ccRCC.

Functional loss of VHL in sporadic ccRCC

The reported incidence of somatic VHL gene mutations in sporadic ccRCC varies from 18 % to 91 % in various studies [79, 176–191]. The reported frequency on COSMIC at the time of writing is 1,485/3,479 ccRCC samples (46.8 %), though this includes many older studies which used less sensitive sequencing methods [129]. In addition, the methylation of VHL resulting in gene silencing occurs in between 5 and 30 % of sporadic ccRCC cases, and LOH occurs in up to 98 % of sporadic ccRCC cases [7, 188]. The wide variation in the reported prevalence of mutations may be explained by numerous confounding factors including the patient population examined, tumour histopathology, ratio of tumour to normal DNA in a sample and the method and depth of sequencing. As methods for detecting VHL gene alterations improve, the reported frequency of mutations in VHL is increasing.

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) 4.6

Fig. 4.6. Spectrum of missense mutations in sporadic ccRCC. Distribution of coding mutations in VHL found in sporadic ccRCC samples as listed on COSMIC on 17 July 2013. The amino acid positions at which mutations were most commonly found are highlighted

Over 900 different mutations have been identified in sporadic ccRCC and VHL disease [129, 159]. More than half of these are frameshift and nonsense mutations which are likely to cause the loss of pVHL function. However, in total, nearly 200 different missense mutations have been described in sporadic ccRCC. Since both pVHL19 and pVHL30 possess tumour suppressor activity in vivo, it is unsurprising that mutations are rare in the first 53 amino acids [5]. Otherwise, missense mutations are distributed fairly evenly across the three exons of VHL, with no dramatic hotspots for mutations (Fig. 4.6).

Dissecting the impact of missense mutations

The simplest assumption is that all missense mutations disable pVHL’s activity in equal amounts. However, numerous published studies which have examined the functional effects of VHL missense mutations in vitro and in cell culture systems demonstrate that this is not the case (Table 4.4). In fact, experimental data suggest that the impact of missense mutations on the function of pVHL is highly diverse, ranging from imperceptible to complete functional loss, particularly with respect to stability of the VCB complex and effects on HIFα ubiquitination and degradation. Interestingly, some mutations selectively influence HIF1α and HIF2α degradation [192].

To date, the preponderance of evidence can classify most missense mutations into four clear classes: (1) mutations which interfere with the binding of VHL to HIFα (e.g. Y98H, Y112H) [34, 35, 47], (2) mutations which inhibit the interaction between pVHL and elongins B and C (e.g. L158P, C162F and R167W) [17, 29, 80, 81, 193, 194], (3) mutations which inhibit the interaction with TRiC (e.g. G114R and A149P) [157] and (4) mutations which severely destabilise pVHL (e.g. G93D, W117R, L101P) [192]. However, not all mutations fit into this classification system; indeed, there are a significant number of mutations described in sporadic ccRCC which appear to behave similarly to wild-type pVHL with respect to HIFα regulation and formation of the VCB complex [192] (Table 4.4). The most likely explanation is that these mutations are simply passenger mutations which don’t influence tumour growth, though the possibility remains that they may somehow interfere with HIFα-independent functions of pVHL.

Table 4.4. Functional effects of missense VHL mutations as determined experimentally

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.4

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.4-2

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.4-3

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.4-4

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.4-5

Mutations in non-coding regions of VHL

There is accumulating evidence that somatic mutations in non-coding regions of DNA may be pathogenic in other tumour types [195–208]. Furthermore, recent studies report that changes in the non-coding regions of VHL may have important physiological effects [209], suggesting that mutations in non-coding regions of VHL may be important physiologically. To date, there are 75 confirmed somatic variants (of which 47 are unique) in non-coding regions of VHL in tumour samples listed on COSMIC as of 13 June 2013 [129], and an additional study reports 49 somatic variants in non-coding regions of VHL in 37/128 sporadic ccRCC patients [293].

VHL as a biomarker in ccRCC

For several years, groups have been addressing the question as to whether VHL mutational status, namely, the presence or absence of mutation, the type of mutation/alteration or the effect of the mutation/alteration on the function of pVHL, is a useful biomarker in ccRCC. Are so-called “loss-of-function” mutations, such as nonsense or frameshift mutations, associated with a different prognosis to missense mutations, some of which appear to cause minimal changes in VHL function? Can VHL mutational status be used to predict response to treatment? Finally, do mutations in non-coding regions of VHL have important functional effects?

VHL alterations as potential prognostic markers in ccRCC

Numerous studies have investigated whether or not functional loss of VHL may influence prognosis in ccRCCs (Table 4.5). ccRCCs in VHL disease have an earlier age of onset than cases of sporadic ccRCC. However, they also appear to grow more slowly than cases of sporadic ccRCC and are associated overall with a better prognosis [210, 211]. However, while the results of some studies appear to support this hypothesis in principle [182, 187, 188, 212], others have found no association between the presence or absence of VHL alterations and prognosis or other adverse clinicopathological features ([79, 176, 178, 179, 181, 183–186 189–192, 213]), and one study reported that VHL mutation/hypermethylation was associated with advanced tumour stage [177] (Table 4.5). Overall, there is certainly no clear evidence that the presence or absence of VHL mutations per se influences the outcome in sporadic ccRCC.

Table 4.5. VHL alterations as potential prognostic markers in sporadic ccRCC

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.5

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.5-2

In part, the conflicting results may be explained by different methods used to assess the presence or absence of alterations, with not all studies assessing for the presence or absence of hypermethylation. Furthermore, different studies have included different patient populations with tumours of varying stages and grades. The majority of studies have used scanning techniques such as denaturing highperformance liquid chromatography or single-strand conformational polymorphism, followed by annotation of variants using Sanger sequencing. However, newer scanning techniques such as endonuclease scanning, and the incorporation of next-generation sequencing techniques with greater sensitivity and depth, may be more sensitive, and it is likely that the true prevalence of VHL alterations is higher than previously suspected [181]. Including multiplex-ligation-dependent probe amplification and Southern blotting to detect copy-number changes in the VHL gene in the search for alterations may also increase the detected frequency of alterations, and it is possible that non-coding alterations in VHL may also have physiological significance.

Many groups have done further analyses on subgroups of VHL mutations to try and determine if the type or nature of mutation is associated with prognosis. For example, are mutations which would be predicted to result in complete loss of pVHL function, such as nonsense or frameshift mutations, associated with a worse prognosis than missense mutations, some of which may only mildly affect pVHL’s function? Alternatively, could nonsense mutations perhaps result in more aggressive tumours, perhaps due to retained “partial” activity of pVHL? Of course, categorising mutations in this way does not take into account the diverse effects of missense mutations on the function of pVHL (Table 4.4). While some missense mutations, even those distant from specific binding sites such as the HIF binding site, can have serious functional effects by globally destabilising protein folding, others seem to have little or no effect on pVHL’s function. The position of a missense mutation within the gene may therefore also be important prognostically. However, at present, there is no reliable way to easily discriminate between passenger mutations which do not influence tumour growth and driver mutations which do. The impact of individual missense mutations on either HIF regulation or other pro-tumorigenic activities thus remains largely uncertain, and the diverse spectrum of mutations presents a significant barrier to understanding the functional effects of missense mutations and other loss-of-function type events. In this respect, the development of validated in silico tools which can accurately predict the functional effects of missense mutations may be of benefit.

Consequently, it has proven difficult to develop a rational way of categorising mutations within VHL, and various groups have elected to use different classification systems. While some have divided mutations into “loss-of-function” mutations predicted to alter the open reading frame of VHL and “non-loss-of-function” mutations not predicted to alter the open reading frame [183], [184], others have classified mutations either according to their impact on the DNA sequence (frameshift/ missense/nonsense) or their location within the gene (e.g. exon number) or protein (e.g. deep/surface amino acids). To date, only one group has attempted to discriminate between those missense mutations with functional consequences and those without [192]; they subgrouped VHL missense mutations into predicted destabilising and neutral missense mutations using in silico prediction tools and in vitro assays but report no differing effects on patient outcome.

In VHL disease, there is an intimation that mean age of onset is earlier and agerelated risk of ccRCC is higher in patients with frameshift or nonsense mutations than in those with deletions or missense mutations that disrupt the structural integrity of pVHL [162]. Another study of VHL disease patients reported an increased frequency of renal involvement in cases with a truncating mutation or large rearrangement than in those with missense mutations [214]. Subsequently, some have speculated that truncating mutations may be associated with the expression of a truncated gene product that has retained a β-domain HIF binding site but not a functional a-domain elongin C binding site [162]. Such a mutant protein might compete with wild-type pVHL to bind the HIFα subunits in normal renal cells, thereby protecting it from degradation. Further support for such a “dominant-negative” hypothesis comes from a study of sporadic ccRCC which reported a trend towards a worse prognosis for truncations resulting in late termination (termed as after codon 123) compared to truncations resulting in early termination (before codon 123) [188].

Mutations prior to codon 123 would be expected to disrupt the HIFα binding site, while later truncations may leave an intact HIFα binding site but disrupt the elongin C binding site and thus potentially protect HIFα from degradation.

In sporadic ccRCC, there are a handful of studies which suggest that nonsense mutations may be associated with worse prognosis and adverse pathological features [179, 181, 183]. Analysis of VHL mutations as part of a large kidney cancer case-control study suggested that nonsense mutations were significantly associated with increased grade and lymph node positivity and that these mutations were more prevalent among M1 than M0 cases [181]. Another study of 113 ccRCCs subdivided VHL mutations into “loss-of-function” mutations predicted to alter the open reading frame of VHL and “DNA sequence variants of unknown biological consequence” (in-frame, missense, silent or intronic mutations) [183]. Though “loss-of-function” mutations were not associated with tumour phenotype (grade, stage or metastasis), there was a significantly worse prognosis in tumours with “loss-of-function” mutations leading to truncated pVHL than in tumours with no mutations or mutations with unknown consequences for pVHL structure and function. However, on multivariate analysis, only histological grade and pT stage were independent predictors of adverse outcome, though this may simply reflect the small sample size. It should be noted that the prevalence of VHL mutations reported in this study was only 34 %, which is lower than that described in the majority of studies. Another small study of 56 patients found that loss-of-function mutations were associated with significantly decreased progression-free survival and overall survival [179].

It is not uncommon for a single tumour to have multiple VHL mutations with the reported prevalence of this up to 8 % in two studies [183, 215]. Multiple mutations of VHL within the same tumour have been described in up to 42 % of patients exposed to trichloroethylene [216]. Though one study reported that late-stage metastatic lesions had more double mutations than M0 or Mx cases [181], other studies have not replicated these findings.

VHL alterations as potential predictive markers

As yet, only a few studies have examined a role for VHL as a potential predictive marker in ccRCC, largely because it is only recently that effective treatment options have come into widespread use (Table 4.6). One of the major hurdles relates to the collection of adequate quality tissue for DNA extraction and sequencing; the majority of clinical trials collect formalin-?xed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue rather than fresh frozen tissue, and the quality of DNA extracted from FFPE tissue is generally inferior to that acquired from fresh frozen tissue. As such, the frequency of VHL mutations reported in many of these studies is lower than might be expected, implying a possible skewing of the results.

A recently reported study analysed 78 tumour tissue samples from a cohort of 225 metastatic clear cell RCC patients who received pazopanib, a standard first-line VEGF-targeted agent, as part of a clinical trial [217]. The authors evaluated the association of several components of the VHL-HIF pathway (VHL gene inactivation [mutation and/or methylation], HIF1α and HIF2α immunohistochemistry staining and HIF1α transcriptional signature) with best overall response rate to pazopanib and progression-free survival. 70/78 (90 %) of patients had VHL mutations or methylation. Neither VHL gene status nor HIF1α or HIF2α protein expression or HIF1α gene expression signature was associated with clinical outcome to pazopanib.

The phase III Treatment Approaches in Renal Cancer Global Evaluation Trial (TARGET) randomised 903 patients with advanced ccRCC to sorafenib or placebo. VHL mutational status was available for 134 patients (though only 48 patients had all three coding exons of VHL successfully sequenced), and no correlation between VHL mutational status and sorafenib benefit was found [218].

One of the biggest earlier studies included 123 patients with metastatic ccRCC who had received treatment with sunitinib (51 %), sorafenib (23 %), axitinib (12 %) and bevacizumab (14 %) as part of a clinical trial [219]. The incidence of VHL mutations in this group of patients was 49 %, with 78 % of these classified as “lossof-function” mutations (i.e. frameshift, nonsense, splice and in-frame deletions/ insertions). In addition, 10 % of patients had promoter methylation, though these patients were excluded from the analyses. Though there was no difference in response rate between patients with inactivated (mutated or methylated) VHL and those with wild-type VHL (41 % versus 31 %, p = 0.34), on subgroup analysis, patients with “loss-of-function” mutations had a significantly higher response rate than those with wild-type VHL (52 % versus 31 %, p = 0.04). This remained an independent predictor of response on multivariate analysis, even after adjusting for the specific anti-VEGF drug used. Further analyses showed that while patients who received sunitinib or axitinib had significant responses independent of VHL status, no responses (0/21) were seen in patients with wild-type VHL treated with bevacizumab or sorafenib. At present, the survival data are immature. A separate small study of ccRCC patients treated with first-line sunitinib found no association between VHL alterations and response to sunitinib [220].

Table 4.6. VHL alterations as potential predictive markers (all studies of patients with metastatic ccRCC)

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.6

These results at first appear to challenge those of previous studies, suggesting that “loss-of-function” mutations are associated with adverse outcomes. This may be because the advent of VEGF-targeted therapy means that patients who once had the worst outlook no longer do. The authors speculated that the differential effect of VHL mutations on therapeutic response could be explained either if sunitinib and axitinib have additional non-VHL-related inhibitory mechanisms on ccRCC or perhaps have superior inhibition of the VEGF receptor compared with bevacizumab and sorafenib. A subset of the data included in this analysis had previously been analysed and reported retrospectively in a study of 43 patients with metastatic ccRCC who received therapy with sunitinib, axitinib or interferon-a plus bevacizumab [221]. In this report, there was no association between the presence of a VHL mutation or methylation and objective response rate or tumour shrinkage, and VHL alterations did not impact upon overall survival.

A very small study of 13 patients included in a phase II study testing the efficacy of axitinib found no correlation between the somatic mutational status of the VHL gene and the objective response to axitinib [222]. However, this was a tiny study which did not analyse the methylation status of the VHL promoter, and among the 13 patients, only two showed the presence of sequence variants, suggesting the patient cohort within this study may not be entirely representative of the usual ccRCC population. There is very little work examining VHL mutational status as a predictive marker for response to mTOR-directed therapy, though a retrospective analysis on a subset of patients (n = 20) enrolled within a phase II trial of temsirolimus in advanced ccRCC found no correlation between VHL mutational status and response to temsirolimus [223]. VHL alterations were not associated with response to immunotherapy in a retrospective analysis of 56 patients [179].

Categorising VHL mutations according to their functional effects

The preponderance of evidence suggests that not all VHL mutations are equal and that, in fact, a significant percentage of mutations described in sporadic ccRCC may simply be passenger mutations. Designing a system of categorising VHL mutations, perhaps by using in silico prediction tools to predict the effect of the mutation on the function of pVHL, may allow us to use this information practically to separate highand low-risk patient groups and select patients appropriately for targeted therapies.

Is VHL alone too simplistic?

As our understanding of the finer details of the molecular pathways downstream of VHL expands, various groups are investigating whether a combination of VHL mutational status and other molecular markers may prove more useful as prognostic markers than VHL alone. For example, one study reported that low CAIX expression and absence of VHL gene mutation are associated with aggressive clinicopathological features and poor survival of ccRCC [182], and another study by the same authors reported that the absence of VHL gene alteration, or altered VHL and high VEGF expression, is associated with poor survival [212].

An alternative way of classifying VHL-deficient tumours was described by Gordan et al. [74] who analysed VHL genotype, HIF1α, HIF2α and c-myc expression in 160 primary tumours. Based on immunohistochemical assays and mRNA profiling, they subdivided the tumours into three groups with distinct molecular characteristics: (1) tumours with wild-type VHL alleles and undetectable HIFα protein expression (designated VHL WT), (2) VHL-deficient tumours expressing detectable HIF1α and HIF2α proteins (designated H1H2) and (3) VHL-deficient tumours expressing HIF2α exclusively (designated H2). H2 tumours displayed enhanced c-Myc activity and higher rates of proliferation relative to H1H2 tumours regardless of stage and also displayed increased expression of genes involved in DNA repair, decreased levels of endogenous DNA damage and fewer genomic copy-number changes. In contrast, H1H2 and VHL WT tumours displayed increased activation of Akt/mTOR and ERK/MAPK1 growth factor signalling pathways and increased expression of glycolytic genes relative to H2 tumours. This study argues for the existence of two biologically distinct types of VHL-deficient ccRCCs: those that produce HIF1α and those that don’t.

Recent studies have used biologically driven clustering to define two robust subgroups of ccRCC, ccA and ccB, that are highly dichotomous by molecular phenotype and cancer-specific survival [224]. ccA and ccB subtypes do not appear to be divided based on the expression of defined VHL or HIF profiles; however, a smaller, third subtype of tumours had a WT VHL signature and indications of variant histologies [225]. Other studies have identified transcript patterns related to the expression of HIF1α and HIF2α [74, 95] and genetic sequence [88].

VHL and chromatin-remodelling genes

Studies of kidney cancers arising in VHL patients suggest that VHL inactivation in human kidneys leads to preneoplastic cysts but is not sufficient for malignant transformation [226, 227]. This explains why a mouse model of ccRCC does not exist today. Malignant transformation seems to require the accumulation of additional genetic and possibly epigenetic changes. Recently, genomic sequence analysis has identified several genes that are frequently mutated in ccRCC. These include polybromo 1 (PBRM1), SET domain containing 2 (SETD2), BRCA1-associated protein-1 (BAP1) (all of which lie on a relatively small, 43 Mb region of chromosome 3p and are therefore potentially deleted alongside VHL in tumours with 3p loss) and lysine (K)-specific demethylase 5C (JARID1c). It is likely that these genes function in pathways which would otherwise limit transformation driven by VHL loss. In this respect, acute VHL loss leads to senescence in many cell types [146, 147]. Interestingly, pVHL inactivation leads to the induction of JARID1c which then acts to block the proliferation in this setting [228].

It has been proposed that ccRCC development may evolve along two different paths [190]. Following a VHL mutation and the loss of 3p which is frequently observed, mutations in the remaining PBRM1 or BAP1 allele may lead to tumours with different characteristics. Interestingly, in the mouse, Vhl is on a different chromosome to that of Pbrm1 and Bap1; thus, the loss of heterozygosity of the mouse Vhl region would not simultaneously inactivate one copy of Pbrm1 and Bap1. If this model is correct, simultaneous inactivation of Vhl and either Pbrm1 or Bap1 in the mouse should lead to the development of ccRCC.

It will be interesting to see whether subtypes of VHL alterations are linked in any way to mutations in chromatin-remodelling genes and whether these changes link to therapeutic response. As therapeutic strategies improve and specifically achieve more successful inhibition of VEGF activity and/or replacement of pVHL activity, closer correlations between drug responses and VHL alterations may be detected. A deeper understanding of VHL targets other than HIFα and particularly how VHL cooperates with BAP1, PBRM1 and other genes to cause ccRCC may ultimately lead to the identification of additional biomarkers and potentially novel therapeutic strategies.

HIFα as a biomarker in ccRCC

Many studies have investigated whether HIF1α or HIF2α is a useful prognostic marker in ccRCC (Table 4.7). Several earlier studies linked the expression of HIF1α to poor prognosis in ccRCC, though more recent studies suggest that the relative expression of HIF1α and HIF2α may be more important [74, 229]. A subset of ccRCC tumours seem to have copy-number amplification of 8q24, where c-Myc resides [95]. Since HIF1α acts to suppress c-Myc activity while HIF2α promotes the transactivation or transrepression of c-Myc-specific target genes [74, 93, 94], it would be interesting for future studies to look at the expression of these genes in combination, particularly in conjunction with the mutational status of VHL, PBRM1 and BAP1.

Only a few studies have evaluated HIF expression as a predictor of response to targeted therapies (Table 4.7). Pretreatment HIF levels were associated with response to sunitinib in a cohort of 43 metastatic ccRCC patients [230], and positive HIF1α and HIF2α protein expression was reported to be an independent predictor of outcome for VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy in 71 patients with metastatic ccRCC [231]. However, another study reported that the loss of chromosome14 or 14q(HIF1α locus) was not correlated with clinical response to pazopanib [232], and a very recent study found no association between HIF1α (65 samples) and HIF2α (66 samples) protein levels and overall response rate or progression-free survival to pazopanib [217].

Table 4.7. HIF1α and HIF2α as potential biomarkers in ccRCC

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.7

_Renal Cell Carcinoma  Molecular Targets and Clinical Applications (2015) T 4.7-2

Targeting HIF2α

Since HIF2α seems to be an oncogene in ccRCC, targeting HIF2α would seem to be a sensible therapeutic strategy for ccRCC. However, with the exception of the steroid hormone receptors, targeting DNA-binding transcription factors with drug-like small organic molecules has historically been relatively unsuccessful. Despite this, several potential strategies to inhibit HIF2α have been identified. Proof-of-concept experiments intimate that, in principle, it may be possible to target HIF2α with DNA-binding polyamides that disrupt the HIFα-DNA interface, though at present the bioavailability of such agents is inadequate [233–235]. Acriflavine is a small molecule that inhibits the ability of HIF1α and HIF2α to dimerise with HIF1Β and has been shown to inhibit tumour growth and vascularisation [236]. Alternatively, if reliable methods for systemic delivery of siRNA become available, siRNA targeting of HIF2α may become a future therapeutic option. Two groups have been screening for drugs that, at least indirectly, inhibit HIF2α in VHL null ccRCC cells, though the specificity of these compounds remains to be established [237–240].

Many other compounds are also known to indirectly inhibit HIFα, including mTOR inhibitors, HSP90 inhibitors and HDAC inhibitors [241]. Unfortunately, the two currently used rapamycin-like mTOR inhibitors, everolimus and temsirolimus, primarily inhibit mTOR in the TORC1 complex and have less activity against mTOR present in the TORC2 complex [242]. The inhibition of TORC1 inhibits HIF1α more than HIF2α [243] and can also paradoxically increase upstream receptor tyrosine kinase signalling due to a loss of TORC1-dependent negative feedback pathways [244, 245, 246].

Of course, many of the drugs currently used to treat ccRCC in the clinic indirectly inhibit HIF2α by inhibiting the action of one of its most tumorigenic downstream targets, VEGF. These include bevacizumab, sunitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib and axitinib.

pVHL and synthetic lethality

Two genes are synthetic lethal if mutation of either alone is compatible with viability but mutation of both leads to death [247]. Synthetic lethality thus provides a framework to discover drugs that might preferentially kill cancer cells harbouring a cancer-relevant gene yet leave normal cells unharmed. To date, the results from two synthetic lethality screens attempting to target VHL-deficient cells have been reported. Firstly, a cell-based small-molecule synthetic lethality screen identified a compound, STF-62247, that selectively induces autophagic cell death in VHLdeficient cells but not in those expressing wild-type VHL [248]. From the same screen, a second compound, STF-31, was identified that inhibits glucose uptake by the Glut1 transporter and exhibits enhanced cytotoxicity against VHL-deficient ccRCC [249]. Secondly, an shRNA screen targeting 88 kinases reported that silencing of CDK6, MET and MEK1 preferentially inhibited the growth of VHL null cells compared with their wild-type pVHL-reconstituted counterparts [250]. Interestingly, in both screens, the selective killing of cells lacking VHL was HIF independent, suggesting that therapies targeting these pathways may cooperate with those targeting HIF. Another study showed that the lack of a functional VHL gene product sensitises renal cell carcinoma cells to the apoptotic effects of the protein synthesis inhibitor verrucarin A [251].

VHL, HIFα and metastasis

Since the main tumour-suppressive function of VHL is its role in mediating the degradation of HIF2α, and since at least one HIF2α target gene, chemokine (C-X-C motif) receptor 4 (CXCR4), is a direct mediator of metastatic colonisation [252, 253], it has previously been suggested that loss of VHL might directly lead to metastatic tumour phenotypes through HIF activation [253]. However, even though CXCR4 expression correlates with metastasis in ccRCC [253–255], as described above, VHL mutation has not convincingly been shown to correlate with poor disease outcome and metastatic disease.

Therefore, Massaguй and colleagues examined whether the increased expression of CXCR4 and other potential metastatic genes downstream of the VHL-HIF axis occurs as a result of epigenetic changes. They selected highly metastatic subpopulations of the VHL-deficient ccRCC 786-0 cell line (which was originally established from a patient with metastatic disease) through tail vein injection into immunocompromised mice. Using genome-wide transcription profiling, they identified 155 genes associated with the metastatic phenotype of these cell variants. They then refined this gene set to a core set of 50 genes (termed the renal cancer metastasis signature 50 (RMS50)) that are also expressed in ccRCC gene expression profiles that form the GSE2109 data set in the Gene Expression Omnibus.

Additional gene expression profiling studies showed that a subset of these genes responded to VHL inactivation and were transcriptional targets of HIF2α. Focusing on the two most prominent pro-metastatic VHL-HIF target genes, they showed that the loss of polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2)-dependent histone H3 Lys27 trimethylation (H3K27me3) activates HIF-driven chemokine (C-X-C motif) receptor 4 (CXCR4) expression in support of chemotactic cell invasion, whereas the loss of DNA methylation enables HIF-driven cytohesin 1-interacting protein (CYTIP) expression to protect cancer cells from death cytokine signals.

Previously, the pathways that drive metastasis have been considered to be separate from tumour-initiating functions [256]. In contrast, this study suggests that metastasis in ccRCC is based on an epigenetically expanded output of the tumour-initiating pathway, namely, loss of VHL function.

HIF- and hypoxia-mediated epigenetic regulation

As discussed in high-throughput genetic studies of RCC have identified recurrent mutations in genes encoding several epigenetic regulators, including PBRM1, SETD2, JARID1c, KDM6A and MLL2 (reviewed in [257]). Interestingly, the hypoxia response pathway has been shown to have a direct effect on histone modification. Firstly, HIF has been shown to directly activate several chromatin demethylases, including KDM3A, KDM4B, KDM4C and KDM5B [41, 258–260]. Secondly, VHL inactivation has been shown to decrease H3K4Me3 levels through an HIF-dependent increase in the expression of JARID1c (an H3K4 Me3 demethylase) expression. The re-expression of pVHL in VHL-deficient cell lines reduces HIFα expression, resulting in decreased levels of JARID1c with a consequential increase in levels of H3K4me3 [228].

In contrast, hypoxia may also increase methylation through HIF-independent mechanisms; histone demethylases are members of the dioxygenase superfamily, which require oxygen for activity, and hypoxia suppresses JARID1A (KDM5A) activity, resulting in increased H3K4me3 levels [261]. The loss of demethylases, and by implication, increased histone methylation, may thus be part of a hypoxia phenotype that is selected for in ccRCC. This hypoxia phenotype, which is mimicked by VHL loss, would also be mimicked by the loss of histone demethylase activity resulting from inactivating mutations.

Chromatin organisation also influences HIF function, and it seems that HIF is preferentially targeted to previously nucleosome-depleted chromatin regions [262]. SWI/SNF has also been shown to regulate the cellular response to hypoxia by regulating HIF1α transcriptional activity [263].

As yet, the extent to which mutations of epigenetic regulators influence chromatin or HIF targeting is unknown. Since hypoxia directly influences demethylase activity, the relationship between epigenetic variation and HIF targeting might well differ depending on the conditions of hypoxia in primary cells and the context of specific epigenetic alterations in tumour cells.


VHL and HIF are undoubtedly key players in ccRCC pathogenesis. The loss of VHL with consequent deregulation of HIFα and its downstream targets is an early event for the majority of patients with ccRCC. In this disease, HIF2α acts as an oncoprotein, while HIF1α acts as a tumour suppressor. This knowledge underpins the rationale behind the development of drugs that inhibit HIF or selected HIF targets for the treatment of ccRCC. As our understanding of ccRCC biology continues to evolve rapidly, we must amalgamate the wealth of newly acquired information regarding chromatin-remodelling genes and ccRCC metabolics with the existing data regarding VHL and HIF in ccRCC. The challenge now is to establish a road map of tumour ontogeny for precursor lesions and early ccRCC and to clarify the mechanisms of tumour progression for more advanced disease. Studies of genomics, transcriptomics, epigenetic data and molecular biology must be co-ordinated and targeted. International collaboration and communication among experts is vital to ensure this information is used and interpreted as efficiently and effectively as possible.


  1. Kaelin Jr WG. Molecular basis of the VHL hereditary cancer syndrome. Nat Rev Cancer. 2002;2(9):673–82.
  2. Maher ER, et al. Clinical features and natural history of von Hippel-Lindau disease. Q J Med. 1990;77(283):1151–63.
  3. Gnarra JR, et al. Molecular cloning of the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor gene and its role in renal carcinoma. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1996;1242(3):201–10.
  4. Iliopoulos O, et al. Tumour suppression by the human von Hippel-Lindau gene product. Nat Med. 1995;1(8):822–6.
  5. Schoenfeld A, Davidowitz EJ, Burk RD. A second major native von Hippel-Lindau gene product, initiated from an internal translation start site, functions as a tumor suppressor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998;95(15):8817–22.
  6. Foster K, et al. Somatic mutations of the von Hippel-Lindau disease tumour suppressor gene in non-familial clear cell renal carcinoma. Hum Mol Genet. 1994;3(12):2169–73.
  7. Gnarra JR, et al. Mutations of the VHL tumour suppressor gene in renal carcinoma. Nat Genet. 1994;7(1):85–90.
  8. Shuin T, et al. Results of mutation analyses of von Hippel-Lindau disease gene in Japanese patients: comparison with results in United States and United Kingdom. Acta Urol Jpn. 1995;41(9):703–7.
  9. Whaley JM, et al. Germ-line mutations in the von Hippel-Lindau tumor-suppressor gene are similar to somatic von Hippel-Lindau aberrations in sporadic renal cell carcinoma. Am J Hum Genet. 1994;55(6):1092–102.
  10. Knudson Jr AG. Mutation and cancer: statistical study of retinoblastoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1971;68(4):820–3.
  11. Gerlinger M, et al. Intratumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multiregion sequencing. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(10):883–92.
  12. Latif F, et al. Identification of the von Hippel-Lindau disease tumor suppressor gene. Science. 1993;260(5112):1317–20.
  13. Blankenship C, et al. Alternate choice of initiation codon produces a biologically active product of the von Hippel Lindau gene with tumor suppressor activity. Oncogene. 1999;18(8):1529–35.
  14. Iliopoulos O, Ohh M, Kaelin Jr WG. pVHL19 is a biologically active product of the von Hippel-Lindau gene arising from internal translation initiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998;95(20):11661–6.
  15. Bonicalzi ME, et al. Role of exon 2-encoded beta -domain of the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein. J Biol Chem. 2001;276(2):1407–16.
  16. Corless CL, et al. Immunostaining of the von Hippel-Lindau gene product in normal and neoplastic human tissues. Hum Pathol. 1997;28(4):459–64.
  17. Duan DR, et al. Characterization of the VHL tumor suppressor gene product: localization, complex formation, and the effect of natural inactivating mutations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995;92(14):6459–63.
  18. Groulx I, Bonicalzi ME, Lee S. Ran-mediated nuclear export of the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein occurs independently of its assembly with cullin-2. J Biol Chem. 2000;275(12):8991–9000.
  19. Groulx I, Lee S. Oxygen-dependent ubiquitination and degradation of hypoxia-inducible factor requires nuclear-cytoplasmic traf?cking of the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein. Mol Cell Biol. 2002;22(15):5319–36.
  20. Lee S, et al. Transcription-dependent nuclear-cytoplasmic traf?cking is required for the function of the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein. Mol Cell Biol. 1999;19(2):1486–97.
  21. Los M, et al. Expression pattern of the von Hippel-Lindau protein in human tissues. Lab Invest. 1996;75(2):231–8.
  22. Ye Y, et al. Subcellular localization of the von Hippel-Lindau disease gene product is cell cycle-dependent. Int J Cancer. 1998;78(1):62–9.
  23. Schoenfeld AR, Davidowitz EJ, Burk RD. Endoplasmic reticulum/cytosolic localization of von Hippel-Lindau gene products is mediated by a 64-amino acid region. Int J Cancer. 2001;91(4):457–67.
  24. Shiao YH, et al. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor targets to mitochondria. Cancer Res. 2000;60(11):2816–9.
  25. Stebbins CE, Kaelin Jr WG, Pavletich NP. Structure of the VHL-ElonginC-ElonginB complex: implications for VHL tumor suppressor function. Science. 1999;284(5413):455–61.
  26. Kamura T, et al. Rbx1, a component of the VHL tumor suppressor complex and SCF ubiquitin ligase. Science. 1999;284(5414):657–61.
  27. Kibel A, et al. Binding of the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein to Elongin B and C. Science. 1995;269(5229):1444–6.
  28. Lonergan KM, et al. Regulation of hypoxia-inducible mRNAs by the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein requires binding to complexes containing elongins B/C and Cul2. Mol Cell Biol. 1998;18(2):732–41.
  29. Schoenfeld AR, Davidowitz EJ, Burk RD. Elongin BC complex prevents degradation of von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor gene products. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000;97(15): 8507–12.
  30. Iwai K, et al. Identification of the von Hippel-lindau tumor-suppressor protein as part of an active E3 ubiquitin ligase complex. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999;96(22):12436–41.
  31. Lisztwan J, et al. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein is a component of an E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase activity. Genes Dev. 1999;13(14):1822–33.
  32. Kaelin WG. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein: roles in cancer and oxygen sensing. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 2005;70:159–66.
  33. Kaelin WG. Von Hippel-Lindau disease. Annu Rev Pathol. 2007;2:145–73.
  34. Hon WC, et al. Structural basis for the recognition of hydroxyproline in HIF-1 alpha by pVHL. Nature. 2002;417(6892):975–8.
  35. Min JH, et al. Structure of an HIF-1αlpha -pVHL complex: hydroxyproline recognition in signaling. Science. 2002;296(5574):1886–9.
  36. Bruick RK, McKnight SL. A conserved family of prolyl-4-hydroxylases that modify HIF. Science. 2001;294(5545):1337–40.
  37. Ivan M, et al. HIFαlpha targeted for VHL-mediated destruction by proline hydroxylation: implications for O2 sensing. Science. 2001;292(5516):464–8.
  38. Jaakkola P, et al. Targeting of HIF-αlpha to the von Hippel-Lindau ubiquitylation complex by O2-regulated prolyl hydroxylation. Science. 2001;292(5516):468–72.
  39. Yu F, et al. HIF-1αlpha binding to VHL is regulated by stimulus-sensitive proline hydroxylation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98(17):9630–5.
  40. Semenza GL. Hypoxia-inducible factors: mediators of cancer progression and targets for cancer therapy. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2012;33(4):207–14.
  41. Xia X, et al. Integrative analysis of HIF binding and transactivation reveals its role in maintaining histone methylation homeostasis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106(11):4260–5.
  42. Schodel J, et al. High-resolution genome-wide mapping of HIF-binding sites by ChIP-seq. Blood. 2011;117(23):e207–17.
  43. Semenza GL. Oxygen sensing, homeostasis, and disease. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(6): 537–47.
  44. Crosby ME, et al. Emerging roles of microRNAs in the molecular responses to hypoxia. Curr Pharm Des. 2009;15(33):3861–6.
  45. Wu MZ, et al. Interplay between HDAC3 and WDR5 is essential for hypoxia-induced epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Mol Cell. 2011;43(5):811–22.
  46. Golde DW, et al. Polycythemia: mechanisms and management. Ann Intern Med. 1981;95(1): 71–87.
  47. Knauth K, et al. Renal cell carcinoma risk in type 2 von Hippel-Lindau disease correlates with defects in pVHL stability and HIF-1αlpha interactions. Oncogene. 2006;25(3):370–7.
  48. Okuda H, et al. Direct interaction of the beta-domain of VHL tumor suppressor protein with the regulatory domain of atypical PKC isotypes. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1999;263(2):491–7.
  49. Kuznetsova AV, et al. Von Hippel-Lindau protein binds hyperphosphorylated large subunit of RNA polymerase II through a proline hydroxylation motif and targets it for ubiquitination. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100(5):2706–11.
  50. Kaelin Jr WG. The von hippel-lindau tumor suppressor protein: an update. Methods Enzymol. 2007;435:371–83.
  51. Kaelin Jr WG. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein and clear cell renal carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13(2 Pt 2):680–4.
  52. Kaelin Jr WG. Kidney cancer: now available in a new ?avor. Cancer Cell. 2008;14(6):423–4.
  53. Kaelin Jr WG. The von Hippel-Lindau tumour suppressor protein: O2 sensing and cancer.
  54. Nat Rev Cancer. 2008;8(11):865–73.
  55. Makino Y, et al. Inhibitory PAS domain protein (IPAS) is a hypoxia-inducible splicing variant of the hypoxia-inducible factor-3alpha locus. J Biol Chem. 2002;277(36):32405–8.
  56. Makino Y, et al. Inhibitory PAS domain protein is a negative regulator of hypoxia-inducible gene expression. Nature. 2001;414(6863):550–4.
  57. Maynard MA, et al. Human HIF-3alpha4 is a dominant-negative regulator of HIF-1 and is down-regulated in renal cell carcinoma. FASEB J. 2005;19(11):1396–406.
  58. Maynard MA, et al. Multiple splice variants of the human HIF-3 alpha locus are targets of the von Hippel-Lindau E3 ubiquitin ligase complex. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(13):11032–40.
  59. Bento CF, et al. The chaperone-dependent ubiquitin ligase CHIP targets HIF-1αlpha for degradation in the presence of methylglyoxal. PLoS One. 2010;5(11):e15062.
  60. Koh MY, Darnay BG, Powis G. Hypoxia-associated factor, a novel E3-ubiquitin ligase, binds and ubiquitinates hypoxia-inducible factor 1alpha, leading to its oxygen-independent degradation. Mol Cell Biol. 2008;28(23):7081–95.
  61. Luo W, et al. Hsp70 and CHIP selectively mediate ubiquitination and degradation of hypoxiainducible factor (HIF)-1alpha but Not HIF-2αlpha. J Biol Chem. 2010;285(6):3651–63.
  62. Hewitson KS, et al. Hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) asparagine hydroxylase is identical to factor inhibiting HIF (FIH) and is related to the cupin structural family. J Biol Chem. 2002;277(29):26351–5.
  63. Lando D, et al. FIH-1 is an asparaginyl hydroxylase enzyme that regulates the transcriptional activity of hypoxia-inducible factor. Genes Dev. 2002;16(12):1466–71.
  64. Mahon PC, Hirota K, Semenza GL. FIH-1: a novel protein that interacts with HIF-1αlpha and VHL to mediate repression of HIF-1 transcriptional activity. Genes Dev. 2001;15(20):2675–86.
  65. Koivunen P, et al. Catalytic properties of the asparaginyl hydroxylase (FIH) in the oxygen sensing pathway are distinct from those of its prolyl 4-hydroxylases. J Biol Chem. 2004;279(11):9899–904.
  66. Dayan F, et al. The oxygen sensor factor-inhibiting hypoxia-inducible factor-1 controls expression of distinct genes through the bifunctional transcriptional character of hypoxiainducible factor-1alpha. Cancer Res. 2006;66(7):3688–98.
  67. Stolze IP, et al. Genetic analysis of the role of the asparaginyl hydroxylase factor inhibiting hypoxia-inducible factor (FIH) in regulating hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) transcriptional target genes [corrected]. J Biol Chem. 2004;279(41):42719–25.
  68. Bracken CP, et al. Cell-specific regulation of hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF)-1alpha and HIF-2alpha stabilization and transactivation in a graded oxygen environment. J Biol Chem. 2006;281(32):22575–85.
  69. Yan Q, et al. The hypoxia-inducible factor 2alpha N-terminal and C-terminal transactivation domains cooperate to promote renal tumorigenesis in vivo. Mol Cell Biol. 2007;27(6):2092–102.
  70. Hu CJ, et al. Differential roles of hypoxia-inducible factor 1alpha (HIF-1αlpha) and HIF-2alpha in hypoxic gene regulation. Mol Cell Biol. 2003;23(24):9361–74.
  71. Raval RR, et al. Contrasting properties of hypoxia-inducible factor 1 (HIF-1) and HIF-2 in von Hippel-Lindau-associated renal cell carcinoma. Mol Cell Biol. 2005;25(13):5675–86.
  72. Carroll VA, Ashcroft M. Role of hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF)-1alpha versus HIF-2αlpha in the regulation of HIF target genes in response to hypoxia, insulin-like growth factor-I, or loss of von Hippel-Lindau function: implications for targeting the HIF pathway. Cancer Res. 2006;66(12):6264–70.
  73. Kaelin Jr WG. Treatment of kidney cancer: insights provided by the VHL tumor-suppressor protein. Cancer. 2009;115(10 Suppl):2262–72.
  74. Smaldone MC, Maranchie JK. Clinical implications of hypoxia inducible factor in renal cell carcinoma. Urol Oncol. 2009;27(3):238–45.
  75. Gordan JD, et al. HIF-αlpha effects on c-Myc distinguish two subtypes of sporadic VHLdeficient clear cell renal carcinoma. Cancer Cell. 2008;14(6):435–46.
  76. Shen C, et al. Genetic and functional studies implicate HIF1αlpha as a 14q kidney cancer suppressor gene. Cancer Discov. 2011;1(3):222–35.
  77. Kondo K, et al. Inhibition of HIF2αlpha is sufficient to suppress pVHL-defective tumor growth. PLoS Biol. 2003;1(3):E83.
  78. Zimmer M, et al. Inhibition of hypoxia-inducible factor is sufficient for growth suppression of VHL-/tumors. Mol Cancer Res. 2004;2(2):89–95.
  79. Maranchie JK, et al. The contribution of VHL substrate binding and HIF1-alpha to the phenotype of VHL loss in renal cell carcinoma. Cancer Cell. 2002;1(3):247–55.
  80. Kondo K, et al. Inhibition of HIF is necessary for tumor suppression by the von HippelLindau protein. Cancer Cell. 2002;1(3):237–46.
  81. Clifford SC, et al. Contrasting effects on HIF-1αlpha regulation by disease-causing pVHL mutations correlate with patterns of tumourigenesis in von Hippel-Lindau disease. Hum Mol Genet. 2001;10(10):1029–38.
  82. Hoffman MA, et al. Von Hippel-Lindau protein mutants linked to type 2C VHL disease preserve the ability to downregulate HIF. Hum Mol Genet. 2001;10(10):1019–27.
  83. Kim WY, et al. Failure to prolyl hydroxylate hypoxia-inducible factor alpha phenocopies VHL inactivation in vivo. EMBO J. 2006;25(19):4650–62.
  84. Rankin EB, et al. Hypoxia-inducible factor-2 (HIF-2) regulates hepatic erythropoietin in vivo. J Clin Invest. 2007;117(4):1068–77.
  85. Rankin EB, et al. Inactivation of the arylhydrocarbon receptor nuclear translocator (Arnt) suppresses von Hippel-Lindau disease-associated vascular tumors in mice. Mol Cell Biol. 2005;25(8):3163–72.
  86. Rankin EB, et al. Hypoxia-inducible factor 2 regulates hepatic lipid metabolism. Mol Cell Biol. 2009;29(16):4527–38.
  87. Rankin EB, et al. Hypoxia-inducible factor-2 regulates vascular tumorigenesis in mice. Oncogene. 2008;27(40):5354–8.
  88. Purdue MP, et al. Genome-wide association study of renal cell carcinoma identifies two susceptibility loci on 2p21 and 11q13.3. Nat Genet. 2011;43(1):60–5.
  89. Dalgliesh GL, et al. Systematic sequencing of renal carcinoma reveals inactivation of histone modifying genes. Nature. 2010;463(7279):360–3.
  90. Klatte T, et al. Cytogenetic profile predicts prognosis of patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(5):746–53.
  91. Kroeger N, et al. Deletions of chromosomes 3p and 14q molecularly subclassify clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Cancer. 2013;119(8):1547–54.
  92. Biswas S, et al. Effects of HIF-1αlpha and HIF2αlpha on Growth and Metabolism of ClearCell Renal Cell Carcinoma 786-0 Xenografts. J Oncol. 2010;2010:757908.
  93. Monzon FA, et al. Chromosome 14q loss defines a molecular subtype of clear-cell renal cell carcinoma associated with poor prognosis. Modern Pathol. 2011;24(11):1470–9.
  94. Gordan JD, et al. HIF-2αlpha promotes hypoxic cell proliferation by enhancing c-myc transcriptional activity. Cancer Cell. 2007;11(4):335–47.
  95. Gordan JD, Simon MC. Hypoxia-inducible factors: central regulators of the tumor phenotype. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2007;17(1):71–7.
  96. Beroukhim R, et al. Patterns of gene expression and copy-number alterations in von-hippel lindau disease-associated and sporadic clear cell carcinoma of the kidney. Cancer Res. 2009;69(11):4674–81.
  97. Bertout JA, et al. HIF2αlpha inhibition promotes p53 pathway activity, tumor cell death, and radiation responses. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106(34):14391–6.
  98. Roberts AM, et al. Suppression of hypoxia-inducible factor 2alpha restores p53 activity via Hdm2 and reverses chemoresistance of renal carcinoma cells. Cancer Res. 2009;69(23):9056–64.
  99. Abdollahi A. LOT1 (ZAC1/PLAGL1) and its family members: mechanisms and functions. J Cell Physiol. 2007;210(1):16–25.
  100. Lemeta S, et al. Frequent loss of heterozygosity at 6q in pheochromocytoma. Hum Pathol. 2006;37(6):749–54.
  101. Jiang Y, et al. Gene expression profiling in a renal cell carcinoma cell line: dissecting VHL and hypoxia-dependent pathways. Mol Cancer Res. 2003;1(6):453–62.
  102. Zatyka M, et al. Identification of cyclin D1 and other novel targets for the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor gene by expression array analysis and investigation of cyclin D1 genotype as a modifier in von Hippel-Lindau disease. Cancer Res. 2002;62(13):3803–11.
  103. Singh P, Carraher C, Schwarzbauer JE. Assembly of fibronectin extracellular matrix. Annu
  104. Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2010;26:397–419.
  105. Tang N, et al. pVHL function is essential for endothelial extracellular matrix deposition. Mol
  106. Cell Biol. 2006;26(7):2519–30.
  107. Grosfeld A, et al. Interaction of hydroxylated collagen IV with the von hippel-lindau tumor suppressor. J Biol Chem. 2007;282(18):13264–9.
  108. Kurban G, et al. Collagen matrix assembly is driven by the interaction of von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein with hydroxylated collagen IV alpha 2. Oncogene. 2008;27(7): 1004–12.
  109. Kurban G, et al. Characterization of a von Hippel Lindau pathway involved in extracellular matrix remodeling, cell invasion, and angiogenesis. Cancer Res. 2006;66(3):1313–9.
  110. Ohh M, et al. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein is required for proper assembly of an extracellular fibronectin matrix. Mol Cell. 1998;1(7):959–68.
  111. Stickle NH, et al. pVHL modification by NEDD8 is required for fibronectin matrix assembly and suppression of tumor development. Mol Cell Biol. 2004;24(8):3251–61.
  112. Bishop T, et al. Genetic analysis of pathways regulated by the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor in Caenorhabditis elegans. PLoS Biol. 2004;2(10):e289.
  113. Russell RC, Ohh M. NEDD8 acts as a ‘molecular switch’ defining the functional selectivity of VHL. EMBO Rep. 2008;9(5):486–91.
  114. Evans AJ, et al. VHL promotes E2 box-dependent E-cadherin transcription by HIF-mediated regulation of SIP1 and snail. Mol Cell Biol. 2007;27(1):157–69.
  115. Harten SK, et al. Regulation of renal epithelial tight junctions by the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor gene involves occludin and claudin 1 and is independent of E-cadherin. Mol Biol Cell. 2009;20(3):1089–101.
  116. Ji Q, Burk RD. Downregulation of integrins by von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) tumor suppressor protein is independent of VHL-directed hypoxia-inducible factor alpha degradation. Biochem Cell Biol. 2008;86(3):227–34.
  117. Esteban-Barragan MA, et al. Role of the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor gene in the formation of beta1-integrin ?brillar adhesions. Cancer Res. 2002;62(10):2929–36.
  118. Petrella BL, Brinckerhoff CE. Tumor cell invasion of von Hippel Lindau renal cell carcinoma cells is mediated by membrane type-1 matrix metalloproteinase. Mol Cancer. 2006;5:66.
  119. Petrella BL, Lohi J, Brinckerhoff CE. Identification of membrane type-1 matrix metalloproteinase as a target of hypoxia-inducible factor-2 alpha in von Hippel-Lindau renal cell carcinoma. Oncogene. 2005;24(6):1043–52.
  120. Koochekpour S, et al. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor gene inhibits hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor-induced invasion and branching morphogenesis in renal carcinoma cells. Mol Cell Biol. 1999;19(9):5902–12.
  121. Xu J, et al. Proteolytic exposure of a cryptic site within collagen type IV is required for angiogenesis and tumor growth in vivo. J Cell Biol. 2001;154(5):1069–79.
  122. Hergovich A, et al. Regulation of microtubule stability by the von Hippel-Lindau tumour suppressor protein pVHL. Nat Cell Biol. 2003;5(1):64–70.
  123. Schermer B, et al. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein controls ciliogenesis by orienting microtubule growth. J Cell Biol. 2006;175(4):547–54.
  124. Esteban MA, et al. Regulation of E-cadherin expression by VHL and hypoxia-inducible factor. Cancer Res. 2006;66(7):3567–75.
  125. Lutz MS, Burk RD. Primary cilium formation requires von hippel-lindau gene function in renal-derived cells. Cancer Res. 2006;66(14):6903–7.
  126. Singla V, Reiter JF. The primary cilium as the cell’s antenna: signaling at a sensory organelle.
  127. 2006;313(5787):629–33.
  128. Frew IJ, et al. pVHL and PTEN tumour suppressor proteins cooperatively suppress kidney cyst formation. EMBO J. 2008;27(12):1747–57.
  129. Hergovich A, et al. Priming-dependent phosphorylation and regulation of the tumor suppressor pVHL by glycogen synthase kinase 3. Mol Cell Biol. 2006;26(15):5784–96.
  130. Li M, Kim WY. Two sides to every story: the HIF-dependent and HIF-independent functions of pVHL. J Cell Mol Med. 2011;15(2):187–95.
  131. Bonsib SM. Renal cystic diseases and renal neoplasms: a mini-review. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009;4(12):1998–2007.
  132. Johnstone RW, Rue?i AA, Lowe SW. Apoptosis: a link between cancer genetics and chemotherapy. Cell. 2002;108(2):153–64.
  133. COSMIC, Catalogue of Somatic Mutations in Cancer. Catalogue of somatic mutations in cancer. 130. Tomasino RM, et al. p53 expression in human renal cell carcinoma: an immunohistochemical study and a literature outline of the cytogenetic characterization. Pathologica. 1994;86(3):227–33.
  134. Vasavada SP, Novick AC, Williams BR. P53, bcl-2, and Bax expression in renal cell carcinoma. Urology. 1998;51(6):1057–61.
  135. An WG, et al. Inhibitors of transcription, proteasome inhibitors, and DNA-damaging drugs differentially affect feedback of p53 degradation. Exp Cell Res. 1998;244(1):54–60.
  136. Sanchez-Puig N, Veprintsev DB, Fersht AR. Binding of natively unfolded HIF-1αlpha ODD domain to p53. Mol Cell. 2005;17(1):11–21.
  137. Sendoel A, et al. HIF-1 antagonizes p53-mediated apoptosis through a secreted neuronal tyrosinase. Nature. 2010;465(7298):577–83.
  138. Roe JS, et al. p53 stabilization and transactivation by a von Hippel-Lindau protein. Mol Cell. 2006;22(3):395–405.
  139. Roe JS, Youn HD. The positive regulation of p53 by the tumor suppressor VHL. Cell Cycle. 2006;5(18):2054–6.
  140. Qi H, Ohh M. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein sensitizes renal cell carcinoma cells to tumor necrosis factor-induced cytotoxicity by suppressing the nuclear factorkappaB-dependent antiapoptotic pathway. Cancer Res. 2003;63(21):7076–80.
  141. An J, Fisher M, Rettig MB. VHL expression in renal cell carcinoma sensitizes to bortezomib (PS-341) through an NF-kappaB-dependent mechanism. Oncogene. 2005;24(9):1563–70.
  142. Pantuck AJ, et al. NF-kappaB-dependent plasticity of the epithelial to mesenchymal transition induced by Von Hippel-Lindau inactivation in renal cell carcinomas. Cancer Res. 2010;70(2):752–61.
  143. Yang H, et al. pVHL acts as an adaptor to promote the inhibitory phosphorylation of the NF-kappaB agonist Card9 by CK2. Mol Cell. 2007;28(1):15–27.
  144. Neumann HP, et al. Germ-line mutations in nonsyndromic pheochromocytoma. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(19):1459–66.
  145. Lee S, et al. Neuronal apoptosis linked to EglN3 prolyl hydroxylase and familial pheochromocytoma genes: developmental culling and cancer. Cancer Cell. 2005;8(2):155–67.
  146. Kim WY, Sharpless NE. VHL inactivation: a new road to senescence. Cancer Cell. 2008;13(4):295–7.
  147. Welford SM, et al. HIF1αlpha delays premature senescence through the activation of MIF. Genes Dev. 2006;20(24):3366–71.
  148. Bell EL, et al. Mitochondrial reactive oxygen species trigger hypoxia-inducible factordependent extension of the replicative life span during hypoxia. Mol Cell Biol. 2007;27(16):5737–45.
  149. Young AP, et al. VHL loss actuates a HIF-independent senescence programme mediated by Rb and p400. Nat Cell Biol. 2008;10(3):361–9.
  150. Welford SM, et al. Renal oxygenation suppresses VHL loss-induced senescence that is caused by increased sensitivity to oxidative stress. Mol Cell Biol. 2010;30(19):4595–603.
  151. Mikhaylova O, et al. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein and Egl-9-Type proline hydroxylases regulate the large subunit of RNA polymerase II in response to oxidative stress. Mol Cell Biol. 2008;28(8):2701–17.
  152. Danilin S, et al. Von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor gene-dependent mRNA stabilization of the survival factor parathyroid hormone-related protein in human renal cell carcinoma by the RNA-binding protein HuR. Carcinogenesis. 2009;30(3):387–96.
  153. Datta K, et al. Role of elongin-binding domain of von Hippel Lindau gene product on HuRmediated VPF/VEGF mRNA stability in renal cell carcinoma. Oncogene. 2005;24(53):7850–8.
  154. Galban S, et al. Influence of the RNA-binding protein HuR in pVHL-regulated p53 expression in renal carcinoma cells. Mol Cell Biol. 2003;23(20):7083–95.
  155. Rafty LA, Khachigian LM. von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein represses plateletderived growth factor B-chain gene expression via the Sp1 binding element in the proximal PDGF-B promoter. J Cell Biochem. 2002;85(3):490–5.
  156. Cohen HT, et al. An important von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor domain mediates Sp1binding and self-association. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1999;266(1):43–50.
  157. Mukhopadhyay D, et al. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor gene product interacts with Sp1 to repress vascular endothelial growth factor promoter activity. Mol Cell Biol.1997;17(9):5629–39.
  158. Feldman DE, et al. Formation of the VHL-elongin BC tumor suppressor complex is mediated by the chaperonin TRiC. Mol Cell. 1999;4(6):1051–61.
  159. Frydman J, et al. Function in protein folding of TRiC, a cytosolic ring complex containing TCP-1 and structurally related subunits. EMBO J. 1992;11(13):4767–78.
  160. Feldman DE, et al. Tumorigenic mutations in VHL disrupt folding in vivo by interfering with chaperonin binding. Mol Cell. 2003;12(5):1213–24.
  161. Nordstrom-O’Brien M, et al. Genetic analysis of von Hippel-Lindau disease. Hum Mutat. 2010;31(5):521–37.
  162. Beroud C, et al. Software and database for the analysis of mutations in the VHL gene. Nucleic Acids Res. 1998;26(1):256–8.
  163. McClellan AJ, Scott MD, Frydman J. Folding and quality control of the VHL tumor suppressor proceed through distinct chaperone pathways. Cell. 2005;121(5):739–48.
  164. Ding Z, et al. Agents that stabilize mutated von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) protein: results of a high-throughput screen to identify compounds that modulate VHL proteostasis. J Biomol Screen. 2012;17(5):572–80.
  165. Ong KR, et al. Genotype-phenotype correlations in von Hippel-Lindau disease. Hum Mutat. 2007;28(2):143–9.
  166. Cockman ME, et al. Hypoxia inducible factor-alpha binding and ubiquitylation by the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein. J Biol Chem. 2000;275(33):25733–41.
  167. Li L, et al. Hypoxia-inducible factor linked to differential kidney cancer risk seen with type 2A and type 2B VHL mutations. Mol Cell Biol. 2007;27(15):5381–92.
  168. Pastore YD, et al. Mutations in the VHL gene in sporadic apparently congenital polycythemia. Blood. 2003;101(4):1591–5.
  169. Ang SO, et al. Disruption of oxygen homeostasis underlies congenital Chuvash polycythemia. Nat Genet. 2002;32(4):614–21.
  170. Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis: therapeutic implications. N Engl J Med. 1971;285(21):1182–6.
  171. Cebe-Suarez S, Zehnder-Fjallman A, Ballmer-Hofer K. The role of VEGF receptors in angiogenesis; complex partnerships. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2006;63(5):601–15.
  172. Bastien L, et al. Targeted therapies in metastatic renal cancer in 2009. BJU Int. 2009;103(10):1334–42.
  173. Atkins MB, et al. Innovations and challenges in renal cancer: summary statement from the Third Cambridge Conference. Cancer. 2009;115(10 Suppl):2247–51.
  174. Escudier B, et al. Treatment selection in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: expert consensus. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2012;9(6):327–37.
  175. Motzer RJ, et al. Treatment outcome and survival associated with metastatic renal cell carcinoma of non-clear-cell histology. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(9):2376–81.
  176. Heng DY, et al. Prognostic factors for overall survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted agents: results from a large, multicenter study. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(34):5794–9.
  177. Heng DY, et al. External validation and comparison with other models of the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium prognostic model: a populationbased study. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(2):141–8.
  178. McLeod HL. Cancer pharmacogenomics: early promise, but concerted effort needed. Science. 2013;339(6127):1563–6.
  179. Banks RE, et al. Genetic and epigenetic analysis of von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) gene alterations and relationship with clinical variables in sporadic renal cancer. Cancer Res. 2006; 66(4):2000–11.
  180. Brauch H, et al. VHL alterations in human clear cell renal cell carcinoma: association with advanced tumor stage and a novel hot spot mutation. Cancer Res. 2000;60(7):1942–8.
  181. Gimenez-Bachs JM, et al. VHL protein alterations in sporadic renal cell carcinoma. Clin Oncol. 2007;19(10):784–9.
  182. Kim JH, et al. Somatic VHL alteration and its impact on prognosis in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Oncol Rep. 2005;13(5):859–64.
  183. Ma X, et al. VHL gene alterations in renal cell carcinoma patients: novel hotspot or founder mutations and linkage disequilibrium. Oncogene. 2001;20(38):5393–400.
  184. Nickerson ML, et al. Improved identification of von Hippel-Lindau gene alterations in clear cell renal tumors. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14(15):4726–34.
  185. Patard JJ, et al. Low CAIX expression and absence of VHL gene mutation are associated with tumor aggressiveness and poor survival of clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Int J Cancer. 2008;123(2):395–400.
  186. Schraml P, et al. VHL mutations and their correlation with tumour cell proliferation, microvessel density, and patient prognosis in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. J Pathol. 2002; 196(2):186–93.
  187. Smits KM, et al. Genetic and epigenetic alterations in the von hippel-lindau gene: the influence on renal cancer prognosis. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14(3):782–7.
  188. Suzuki H, et al. Mutational state of von Hippel-Lindau and adenomatous polyposis coli genes in renal tumors. Oncology. 1997;54(3):252–7.
  189. van Houwelingen KP, et al. Prevalence of von Hippel-Lindau gene mutations in sporadic renal cell carcinoma: results from The Netherlands cohort study. BMC Cancer. 2005;5:57.
  190. Yao M, et al. VHL tumor suppressor gene alterations associated with good prognosis in sporadic clear-cell renal carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94(20):1569–75.
  191. Young AC, et al. Analysis of VHL gene alterations and their relationship to clinical parameters in sporadic conventional renal cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15(24):7582–92.
  192. Hakimi AA, et al. Adverse outcomes in clear cell renal cell carcinoma with mutations of 3p21 epigenetic regulators BAP1 and SETD2: a report by MSKCC and the KIRC TCGA research network. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19(12):3259–67.
  193. Pena-Llopis S, et al. BAP1 loss defines a new class of renal cell carcinoma. Nat Genet. 2012;44(7):751–9.
  194. Varela I, et al. Exome sequencing identifies frequent mutation of the SWI/SNF complex gene PBRM1 in renal carcinoma. Nature. 2011;469(7331):539–42.
  195. Rechsteiner MP, et al. VHL gene mutations and their effects on hypoxia inducible factor HIFαlpha: identification of potential driver and passenger mutations. Cancer Res. 2011;71(16):5500–11.
  196. Kishida T, et al. Cellular proteins that bind the von Hippel-Lindau disease gene product: mapping of binding domains and the effect of missense mutations. Cancer Res. 1995;55(20):4544–8.
  197. Ohh M, et al. Synthetic peptides define critical contacts between elongin C, elongin B, and the von Hippel-Lindau protein. J Clin Invest. 1999;104(11):1583–91.
  198. Horn S, et al. TERT promoter mutations in familial and sporadic melanoma. Science. 2013;339(6122):959–61.
  199. Huang FW, et al. Highly recurrent TERT promoter mutations in human melanoma. Science. 2013;339(6122):957–9.
  200. Wang W, et al. A frequent somatic mutation in CD274 3′-UTR leads to protein over-expression in gastric cancer by disrupting miR-570 binding. Hum Mutat. 2012;33(3):480–4.
  201. Brewster BL, et al. Identification of ?fteen novel germline variants in the BRCA1 3’UTR reveals a variant in a breast cancer case that introduces a functional miR-103 target site. Hum Mutat. 2012;33(12):1665–75.
  202. Deqin M, et al. Somatic deletions of the polyA tract in the 3′ untranslated region of epidermal growth factor receptor are common in microsatellite instability-high endometrial and colorectal carcinomas. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2012;136(5):510–6.
  203. Shin J, et al. A del T poly T (8) mutation in the 3′ untranslated region (UTR) of the CDK2-AP1 gene is functionally significant causing decreased mRNA stability resulting in decreased CDK2-AP1 expression in human microsatellite unstable (MSI) colorectal cancer (CRC). Surgery. 2007;142(2):222–7.
  204. Arcaroli JJ, et al. Common PIK3CA mutants and a novel 3′ UTR mutation are associated with increased sensitivity to saracatinib. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18(9):2704–14.
  205. Anczukow O, et al. BRCA2 deep intronic mutation causing activation of a cryptic exon: opening toward a new preventive therapeutic strategy. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18(18):4903–9.
  206. Drori-Herishanu L, et al. An Intronic mutation is associated with prolactinoma in a young boy, decreased penetrance in his large family, and variable effects on MEN1 mRNA and protein. Horm Metab Res. 2009;41(8):630–4.
  207. Gatalica Z, et al. Novel intronic germline FLCN gene mutation in a patient with multiple ipsilateral renal neoplasms. Hum Pathol. 2009;40(12):1813–9.
  208. Harland M, et al. A deep intronic mutation in CDKN2A is associated with disease in a subset of melanoma pedigrees. Hum Mol Genet. 2001;10(23):2679–86.
  209. Majore S, et al. CDKN2A: the IVS2-105A/G intronic mutation found in an Italian patient affected by eight primary melanomas. J Invest Dermatol. 2004;122(2):450–1.
  210. Liu L, et al. Mutation of the CDKN2A 5′ UTR creates an aberrant initiation codon and predisposes to melanoma. Nat Genet. 1999;21(1):128–32.
  211. Scholl V, et al. Mutations within the 5′ region of FAS/CD95 gene in nodal diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma. 2007;48(5):957–63.
  212. Taylor C, et al. Determination of the consequences of VHL mutations on VHL transcripts in renal cell carcinoma. Int J Oncol. 2012;41:1229–40.
  213. Choyke PL, et al. The natural history of renal lesions in von Hippel-Lindau disease: a serial CT study in 28 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1992;159(6):1229–34.
  214. Neumann HP, Bender BU. Genotype-phenotype correlations in von Hippel-Lindau disease. J Intern Med. 1998;243(6):541–5.
  215. Patard JJ, et al. Absence of VHL gene alteration and high VEGF expression are associated with tumour aggressiveness and poor survival of renal-cell carcinoma. Br J Cancer. 2009;101(8):1417–24.
  216. Hakimi AA, et al. Clinical and pathologic impact of select chromatin-modulating tumor suppressors in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol. 2012;63(1):848–54.
  217. Gallou C, et al. Genotype-phenotype correlation in von Hippel-Lindau families with renal lesions. Hum Mutat. 2004;24(3):215–24.
  218. Yang K, et al. Novel somatic mutations in the VHL gene in Swedish archived sporadic renal cell carcinomas. Cancer Lett. 1999;141(1–2):1–8.
  219. Brauch H, et al. Trichloroethylene exposure and specific somatic mutations in patients with renal cell carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91(10):854–61.
  220. Choueiri TK et al. The role of aberrant VHL/HIF pathway elements in predicting clinical outcome to pazopanib therapy in patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2013
  221. Pena C, et al. Biomarkers predicting outcome in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: results from sorafenib phase III treatment approaches in renal cancer global evaluation trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16(19):4853–63.
  222. Choueiri TK, et al. von Hippel-Lindau gene status and response to vascular endothelial growth factor targeted therapy for metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2008;180(3):860–5. discussion 865–6.
  223. Garcia-Donas J, et al. Prospective study assessing hypoxia-related proteins as markers for the outcome of treatment with sunitinib in advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(9):2409–14.
  224. Rini BI, et al. Clinical response to therapy targeted at vascular endothelial growth factor in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: impact of patient characteristics and Von Hippel-Lindau gene status. BJU Int. 2006;98(4):756–62.
  225. Gad S, Sultan-Amar V, Meric JB, Izzedine H, Khayat D, Richard D, Rixe O. Somatic von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) gene analysis and clinical outcome under antiangiogenic treatment in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: preliminary results. Target Oncol. 2007;2(1):3–6.
  226. Cho D, et al. Potential histologic and molecular predictors of response to temsirolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2007;5(6):379–85.
  227. Brannon AR, et al. Molecular stratification of clear cell renal cell carcinoma by consensus clustering reveals distinct subtypes and survival patterns. Genes Cancer. 2010;1(2):152–63.
  228. Brannon AR, et al. Meta-analysis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma gene expression defines a variant subgroup and identifies gender influences on tumor biology. Eur Urol. 2012;61(2):258–68.
  229. Mandriota SJ, et al. HIF activation identifies early lesions in VHL kidneys: evidence for sitespecific tumor suppressor function in the nephron. Cancer Cell. 2002;1(5):459–68.
  230. Montani M, et al. VHL-gene deletion in single renal tubular epithelial cells and renal tubular cysts: further evidence for a cyst-dependent progression pathway of clear cell renal carcinoma in von Hippel-Lindau disease. Am J Surg Pathol. 2010;34(6):806–15.
  231. Niu X, et al. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein regulates gene expression and tumor growth through histone demethylase JARID1C. Oncogene. 2012;31(6):776–86.
  232. Biswas S, et al. CD31 angiogenesis and combined expression of HIF-1αlpha and HIF-2αlpha are prognostic in primary clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (CC-RCC), but HIFαlpha transcriptional products are not: implications for antiangiogenic trials and HIFαlpha biomarker studies in primary CC-RCC. Carcinogenesis. 2012;33(9):1717–25.
  233. Patel P, et al. Hypoxia inducible factor (HIF) 1 alpha and 2 alpha levels in cell lines and human tumour predicts response to sunitinib in renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(Suppl):Abstract 5008.
  234. Saez M, et al. Hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) 1a and 2a as predictive markers of outcome to VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:Abstract 4630.
  235. Hudes GR, Pei J, Liu Y, Gagnon RC, Carpenter C, et al. Correlation of chromosome (Chr) 14 loss and 5q gain with outcomes of pazopanib treatment in patients (pts) with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) (abstract). J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:4605.
  236. Nickols NG, et al. Modulating hypoxia-inducible transcription by disrupting the HIF-1-DNA interface. ACS Chem Biol. 2007;2(8):561–71.
  237. Viger A, Dervan PB. Exploring the limits of benzimidazole DNA-binding oligomers for the hypoxia inducible factor (HIF) site. Bioorg Med Chem. 2006;14(24):8539–49.
  238. Vinson C. A rationally designed small molecule that inhibits the HIF-1αlpha-ARNT heterodimer from binding to DNA in vivo. Sci STKE. 2005;2005(284):pe23.
  239. Lee K, et al. Acriflavine inhibits HIF-1 dimerization, tumor growth, and vascularization. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106(42):17910–5.
  240. Zimmer M, et al. Small-molecule inhibitors of HIF-2α translation link its 5’UTR ironresponsive element to oxygen sensing. Mol Cell. 2008;32(6):838–48.
  241. Bokesch HR, et al. A new hypoxia inducible factor-2 inhibitory pyrrolinone alkaloid from roots and stems of Piper sarmentosum. Chem Pharm Bull. 2011;59(9):1178–9.
  242. Grkovic T, et al. Identification and evaluation of soft coral diterpenes as inhibitors of HIF-2alpha induced gene expression. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2011;21(7):2113–5.
  243. Woldemichael GM, et al. Development of a cell-based reporter assay for screening of inhibitors of hypoxia-inducible factor 2-induced gene expression. J Biomol Screen. 2006;11(6):678–87.
  244. Kim WY, Kaelin Jr WG. Molecular pathways in renal cell carcinoma – rationale for targeted treatment. Semin Oncol. 2006;33(5):588–95.
  245. Guertin DA, Sabatini DM. Defining the role of mTOR in cancer. Cancer Cell. 2007;12(1):9–22.
  246. Toschi A, et al. Differential dependence of hypoxia-inducible factors 1 alpha and 2 alpha on mTORC1 and mTORC2. J Biol Chem. 2008;283(50):34495–9.
  247. O’Reilly KE, et al. mTOR inhibition induces upstream receptor tyrosine kinase signaling and activates Akt. Cancer Res. 2006;66(3):1500–8.
  248. Tremblay F, Marette A. Amino acid and insulin signaling via the mTOR/p70 S6 kinase pathway. A negative feedback mechanism leading to insulin resistance in skeletal muscle cells. J Biol Chem. 2001;276(41):38052–60.
  249. Cho DC, et al. The efficacy of the novel dual PI3-kinase/mTOR inhibitor NVP-BEZ235 compared with rapamycin in renal cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16(14):3628–38.
  250. Kaelin Jr WG. The concept of synthetic lethality in the context of anticancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2005;5(9):689–98.
  251. Turcotte S, et al. A molecule targeting VHL-deficient renal cell carcinoma that induces autophagy. Cancer Cell. 2008;14(1):90–102.
  252. Chan DA, et al. Targeting GLUT1 and the Warburg effect in renal cell carcinoma by chemical synthetic lethality. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3(94):94ra70.
  253. Bommi-Reddy A, et al. Kinase requirements in human cells: III. Altered kinase requirements in VHL-/cancer cells detected in a pilot synthetic lethal screen. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105(43):16484–9.
  254. Woldemichael GM, et al. Lack of a functional VHL gene product sensitizes renal cell carcinoma cells to the apoptotic effects of the protein synthesis inhibitor verrucarin A. Neoplasia. 2012;14(8):771–7.
  255. Muller A, et al. Involvement of chemokine receptors in breast cancer metastasis. Nature. 2001;410(6824):50–6.
  256. Staller P, et al. Chemokine receptor CXCR4 downregulated by von Hippel-Lindau tumour suppressor pVHL. Nature. 2003;425(6955):307–11.
  257. D’Alterio C, et al. Differential role of CD133 and CXCR4 in renal cell carcinoma. Cell Cycle. 2010;9(22):4492–500.
  258. D’Alterio C, et al. Concomitant CXCR4 and CXCR7 expression predicts poor prognosis in renal cancer. Curr Cancer Drug Targets. 2010;10(7):772–81.
  259. Nguyen DX, Bos PD, Massague J. Metastasis: from dissemination to organ-specific colonization. Nat Rev Cancer. 2009;9(4):274–84.
  260. Brugarolas J. PBRM1 and BAP1 as novel targets for renal cell carcinoma. Cancer J. 2013;19(4):324–32.
  261. Wellmann S, et al. Hypoxia upregulates the histone demethylase JMJD1A via HIF-1. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2008;372(4):892–7.
  262. Beyer S, et al. The histone demethylases JMJD1A and JMJD2B are transcriptional targets of hypoxia-inducible factor HIF. J Biol Chem. 2008;283(52):36542–52.
  263. Krieg AJ, et al. Regulation of the histone demethylase JMJD1A by hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha enhances hypoxic gene expression and tumor growth. Mol Cell Biol. 2010;30(1):344–53.
  264. Zhou X, et al. Hypoxia induces trimethylated H3 lysine 4 by inhibition of JARID1A demethylase. Cancer Res. 2010;70(10):4214–21.
  265. Xia X, Kung AL. Preferential binding of HIF-1 to transcriptionally active loci determines cell-type specific response to hypoxia. Genome Biol. 2009;10(10):R113.
  266. Kenneth NS, et al. SWI/SNF regulates the cellular response to hypoxia. J Biol Chem. 2009;284(7):4123–31.
  267. Miller F, et al. Inactivation of VHL by tumorigenic mutations that disrupt dynamic coupling of the pVHL.hypoxia-inducible transcription factor-1alpha complex. J Biol Chem. 2005;280(9):7985–96.
  268. Bangiyeva V, et al. Differences in regulation of tight junctions and cell morphology between VHL mutations from disease subtypes. BMC Cancer. 2009;9:229.
  269. Russell RC, et al. Loss of JAK2 regulation via a heterodimeric VHL-SOCS1 E3 ubiquitin ligase underlies Chuvash polycythemia. Nat Med. 2011;17(7):845–53.
  270. Knauth K, et al. VHL mutations linked to type 2C von Hippel-Lindau disease cause extensive structural perturbations in pVHL. J Biol Chem. 2009;284(16):10514–22.
  271. Thoma CR, et al. VHL loss causes spindle misorientation and chromosome instability. Nat Cell Biol. 2009;11(8):994–1001.
  272. Chung J, et al. Homotypic association between tumour-associated VHL proteins leads to the restoration of HIF pathway. Oncogene. 2006;25(21):3079–83.
  273. Rathmell WK, et al. In vitro and in vivo models analyzing von Hippel-Lindau disease-specific mutations. Cancer Res. 2004;64(23):8595–603.
  274. Hansen WJ, et al. Diverse effects of mutations in exon II of the von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) tumor suppressor gene on the interaction of pVHL with the cytosolic chaperonin and pVHLdependent ubiquitin ligase activity. Mol Cell Biol. 2002;22(6):1947–60.
  275. Domene C, Illingworth CJ. Effects of point mutations in pVHL on the binding of HIF-1αlpha. Proteins. 2012;80(3):733–46.
  276. Hacker KE, Lee CM, Rathmell WK. VHL type 2B mutations retain VBC complex form and function. PLoS One. 2008;3(11):e3801.
  277. Pause A, et al. The von Hippel-Lindau tumor-suppressor gene product forms a stable complex with human CUL-2, a member of the Cdc53 family of proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997;94(6):2156–61.
  278. Lee CM, et al. VHL Type 2B gene mutation moderates HIF dosage in vitro and in vivo. Oncogene. 2009;28(14):1694–705.
  279. Calzada MJ, et al. von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein regulates the assembly of intercellular junctions in renal cancer cells through hypoxia-inducible factor-independent mechanisms. Cancer Res. 2006;66(3):1553–60.
  280. Ohh M, et al. Ubiquitination of hypoxia-inducible factor requires direct binding to the beta-domain of the von Hippel-Lindau protein. Nat Cell Biol. 2000;2(7):423–7.
  281. Esteban MA, et al. Formation of primary cilia in the renal epithelium is regulated by the von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor protein. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006;17(7):1801–6.
  282. Kondo K, et al. Comprehensive mutational analysis of the VHL gene in sporadic renal cell carcinoma: relationship to clinicopathological parameters. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2002;34(1):58–68.
  283. Hutson TE, et al. Efficacy and safety of pazopanib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(3):475–80.
  284. Muriel Lopez C, et al. Prognostic factors in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2012;10(4):262–70.
  285. Schultz L, et al. Immunoexpression status and prognostic value of mTOR and hypoxiainduced pathway members in primary and metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinomas. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011;35(10):1549–56.
  286. Ku JH, et al. Expression of hypoxia inducible factor-1alpha and 2alpha in conventional renal cell carcinoma with or without sarcomatoid differentiation. Urol Oncol. 2011;29(6):731–7.
  287. Dorevic G, et al. Hypoxia inducible factor-1alpha correlates with vascular endothelial growth factor A and C indicating worse prognosis in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2009;28:40.
  288. Figlin RA, et al. Analysis of PTEN and HIF-1αlpha and correlation with efficacy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma treated with temsirolimus versus interferon-alpha. Cancer. 2009;115(16):3651–60.
  289. Klatte T, et al. Molecular signatures of localized clear cell renal cell carcinoma to predict disease-free survival after nephrectomy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prevent. 2009;18(3): 894–900.
  290. Sandlund J, et al. Hypoxia-inducible factor-2alpha mRNA expression in human renal cell carcinoma. Acta Oncol. 2009;48(6):909–14.
  291. Minardi D, et al. Prognostic role of tumor necrosis, microvessel density, vascular endothelial growth factor and hypoxia inducible factor-1alpha in patients with clear cell renal carcinoma after radical nephrectomy in a long term follow-up. Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol. 2008;21(2):447–55.
  292. Klatte T, et al. Hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13(24):7388–93.
  293. Di Cristofano C, et al. Nuclear expression of hypoxia-inducible factor-1alpha in clear cell renal cell carcinoma is involved in tumor progression. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31(12): 1875–81.
  294. Lidgren A, et al. Hypoxia-inducible factor 1alpha expression in renal cell carcinoma analyzed by tissue microarray. Eur Urol. 2006;50(6):1272–7.
  295. Lidgren A, et al. The expression of hypoxia-inducible factor 1alpha is a favorable independent prognostic factor in renal cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(3):1129–35.
  296. Gossage, L. et al. Clinical and pathological impact of VHL, PBRM1, BAP1, SETD2, KDM6A, and JARID1c in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Genes Chromosomes Cancer.2014;53:38–51. doi: 10.1002/gcc.22116