Review



ml792  (Selleck Chemicals)


Bioz Verified Symbol Selleck Chemicals is a verified supplier
Bioz Manufacturer Symbol Selleck Chemicals manufactures this product  
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
  • 93

    Structured Review

    Selleck Chemicals ml792
    Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 attenuates TGFβ 2 -driven epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) and prevents anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. (A) FHL124 lens epithelial cells (LECs) were treated with 0.1% DMSO, 10 μM <t>ML792,</t> and 10 μM Ginkgolic acid (GA), along with or without the treatment of 10 ng/mL TGFβ 2 for 24 h. Immunoblot analysis of EMT markers, fibronectin, Collagen I, SLUG, and SNAIL proteins was performed. β-Tubulin served as the loading control. (B) Densitometric quantification of (A). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (C–F) Global SUMOylation profiling in treatment groups from (A). (C) SUMO1 conjugate immunoblot. (E) SUMO2/3 conjugate immunoblot. (D, F) Quantification analysis of SUMOylation levels (normalized to GAPDH and β-tubulin). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G) Ex vivo rat lens organ culture model. Macroscopic lens opacity assessment after 7-day treatments: vehicle (0.1% DMSO), TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), and TGFβ 2 plus ML792. Bottom: histopathological analysis (hematoxylin-eosin staining) and fibrotic marker immunohistochemistry staining (fibronectin/α-SMA). Scar bar: 200 μm. (H, I) Immunoblot validation of fibrotic markers in lens epithelium from (G). GAPDH served as the loading control. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (J) In vivo therapeutic efficacy in C57BL/6J mice: intracameral injection into the anterior ocular chamber with vehicle (0.1% DMSO diluted in PBS) and ML792 (10 μM diluted in PBS) administered immediately post-capsular injury ( n = 6 biological replicates/group). 7-day endpoints: slit-lamp imaging (red arrow indicated plaques; scale bar: 0.5 mm) and immunohistochemistry staining of α-SMA protein (scale bar: 200 μm). (K, L) Immunoblot analysis of SUMOylation status in murine lens epithelium from the therapeutic intervention groups described in (J). (M) Densitometric quantification of SUMO conjugation levels (SUMO1, SUMO2/3). Data were normalized to β-tubulin and GAPDH. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.01. (N, O) Immunoblot analysis of fibrotic markers (fibronectin/α-SMA) in murine lens epithelium from (J), followed by densitometric quantification. GAPDH served as the loading control. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.
    Ml792, supplied by Selleck Chemicals, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 18 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ml792/ML792/pmc12886541-35-23-25
    Average 93 stars, based on 18 article reviews
    ml792 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    93/100 stars

    Images

    1) Product Images from "Blockage of SUMO E1 enzyme inhibits ocular lens fibrosis by mediating SMAD4 SUMOylation"

    Article Title: Blockage of SUMO E1 enzyme inhibits ocular lens fibrosis by mediating SMAD4 SUMOylation

    Journal: Genes & Diseases

    doi: 10.1016/j.gendis.2025.101827

    Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 attenuates TGFβ 2 -driven epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) and prevents anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. (A) FHL124 lens epithelial cells (LECs) were treated with 0.1% DMSO, 10 μM ML792, and 10 μM Ginkgolic acid (GA), along with or without the treatment of 10 ng/mL TGFβ 2 for 24 h. Immunoblot analysis of EMT markers, fibronectin, Collagen I, SLUG, and SNAIL proteins was performed. β-Tubulin served as the loading control. (B) Densitometric quantification of (A). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (C–F) Global SUMOylation profiling in treatment groups from (A). (C) SUMO1 conjugate immunoblot. (E) SUMO2/3 conjugate immunoblot. (D, F) Quantification analysis of SUMOylation levels (normalized to GAPDH and β-tubulin). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G) Ex vivo rat lens organ culture model. Macroscopic lens opacity assessment after 7-day treatments: vehicle (0.1% DMSO), TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), and TGFβ 2 plus ML792. Bottom: histopathological analysis (hematoxylin-eosin staining) and fibrotic marker immunohistochemistry staining (fibronectin/α-SMA). Scar bar: 200 μm. (H, I) Immunoblot validation of fibrotic markers in lens epithelium from (G). GAPDH served as the loading control. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (J) In vivo therapeutic efficacy in C57BL/6J mice: intracameral injection into the anterior ocular chamber with vehicle (0.1% DMSO diluted in PBS) and ML792 (10 μM diluted in PBS) administered immediately post-capsular injury ( n = 6 biological replicates/group). 7-day endpoints: slit-lamp imaging (red arrow indicated plaques; scale bar: 0.5 mm) and immunohistochemistry staining of α-SMA protein (scale bar: 200 μm). (K, L) Immunoblot analysis of SUMOylation status in murine lens epithelium from the therapeutic intervention groups described in (J). (M) Densitometric quantification of SUMO conjugation levels (SUMO1, SUMO2/3). Data were normalized to β-tubulin and GAPDH. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.01. (N, O) Immunoblot analysis of fibrotic markers (fibronectin/α-SMA) in murine lens epithelium from (J), followed by densitometric quantification. GAPDH served as the loading control. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 attenuates TGFβ 2 -driven epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) and prevents anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. (A) FHL124 lens epithelial cells (LECs) were treated with 0.1% DMSO, 10 μM ML792, and 10 μM Ginkgolic acid (GA), along with or without the treatment of 10 ng/mL TGFβ 2 for 24 h. Immunoblot analysis of EMT markers, fibronectin, Collagen I, SLUG, and SNAIL proteins was performed. β-Tubulin served as the loading control. (B) Densitometric quantification of (A). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (C–F) Global SUMOylation profiling in treatment groups from (A). (C) SUMO1 conjugate immunoblot. (E) SUMO2/3 conjugate immunoblot. (D, F) Quantification analysis of SUMOylation levels (normalized to GAPDH and β-tubulin). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G) Ex vivo rat lens organ culture model. Macroscopic lens opacity assessment after 7-day treatments: vehicle (0.1% DMSO), TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), and TGFβ 2 plus ML792. Bottom: histopathological analysis (hematoxylin-eosin staining) and fibrotic marker immunohistochemistry staining (fibronectin/α-SMA). Scar bar: 200 μm. (H, I) Immunoblot validation of fibrotic markers in lens epithelium from (G). GAPDH served as the loading control. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (J) In vivo therapeutic efficacy in C57BL/6J mice: intracameral injection into the anterior ocular chamber with vehicle (0.1% DMSO diluted in PBS) and ML792 (10 μM diluted in PBS) administered immediately post-capsular injury ( n = 6 biological replicates/group). 7-day endpoints: slit-lamp imaging (red arrow indicated plaques; scale bar: 0.5 mm) and immunohistochemistry staining of α-SMA protein (scale bar: 200 μm). (K, L) Immunoblot analysis of SUMOylation status in murine lens epithelium from the therapeutic intervention groups described in (J). (M) Densitometric quantification of SUMO conjugation levels (SUMO1, SUMO2/3). Data were normalized to β-tubulin and GAPDH. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.01. (N, O) Immunoblot analysis of fibrotic markers (fibronectin/α-SMA) in murine lens epithelium from (J), followed by densitometric quantification. GAPDH served as the loading control. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.

    Techniques Used: Inhibition, Western Blot, Control, Ex Vivo, Organ Culture, Staining, Marker, Immunohistochemistry, Biomarker Discovery, In Vivo, Drug discovery, Injection, Imaging, Conjugation Assay

    ML792 disrupts SMAD4 SUMOylation-dependent nuclear translocation in TGFβ 2 -stimulated lens epithelial cells (LECs). (A – F) FHL124 LECs were treated with or without TGFβ2 (10 ng/mL, 2 h). Triple immunofluorescence staining of SMAD4 (green), SUMO1 (red)/SUMO2/3 (red), and DAPI (nuclei, blue) shows spatiotemporal dynamics of SMAD4-SUMO colocalization. (A, D) SMAD4-SUMO1/SUMO2/3 immunofluorescence staining and colocalization scatterplot. (B, E) Pearson's r analysis of colocalization performed by Image J. n = 9 replicates per group. (C, F) Quantification of nuclear SMAD4 intensity. n = 30 cells in (C) and n = 44 cells in (F). Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G, H) Flag-SMAD4 immunoprecipitation in engineered FHL124 LECs overexpressing Flag-SMAD4. Treatments were 0.1% DMSO, TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), or their combination for 2 h. (G, H) Whole-cell lysates were blotted with anti-Flag and anti-SMAD4 (INPUT). Cell lysates were immunoprecipitated with anti-Flag, followed by SUMO1 immunoblotting (G) and SUMO2/3 immunoblotting (H). (I, J) Subcellular fractionation analysis. (I) Immunoblots of cytoplasmic/nuclear SMAD4 after 8 h treatments in FHL12.4 LECs. (J) Quantification was normalized to GAPDH (cytoplasm) and lamin A/C (nucleus). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗∗ P < 0.01 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (K, L) SMAD4 nuclear translocation analysis. (K) Triple immunofluorescence staining SMAD4 (red), F-actin (Phalloidin, green), and DAPI (nuclei, blue) in LECs treated as indicated in (I). Scar bar: 20 μm. (L) Nuclear SMAD4 fluorescence intensity quantification. n = 30 cells per group. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.
    Figure Legend Snippet: ML792 disrupts SMAD4 SUMOylation-dependent nuclear translocation in TGFβ 2 -stimulated lens epithelial cells (LECs). (A – F) FHL124 LECs were treated with or without TGFβ2 (10 ng/mL, 2 h). Triple immunofluorescence staining of SMAD4 (green), SUMO1 (red)/SUMO2/3 (red), and DAPI (nuclei, blue) shows spatiotemporal dynamics of SMAD4-SUMO colocalization. (A, D) SMAD4-SUMO1/SUMO2/3 immunofluorescence staining and colocalization scatterplot. (B, E) Pearson's r analysis of colocalization performed by Image J. n = 9 replicates per group. (C, F) Quantification of nuclear SMAD4 intensity. n = 30 cells in (C) and n = 44 cells in (F). Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G, H) Flag-SMAD4 immunoprecipitation in engineered FHL124 LECs overexpressing Flag-SMAD4. Treatments were 0.1% DMSO, TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), or their combination for 2 h. (G, H) Whole-cell lysates were blotted with anti-Flag and anti-SMAD4 (INPUT). Cell lysates were immunoprecipitated with anti-Flag, followed by SUMO1 immunoblotting (G) and SUMO2/3 immunoblotting (H). (I, J) Subcellular fractionation analysis. (I) Immunoblots of cytoplasmic/nuclear SMAD4 after 8 h treatments in FHL12.4 LECs. (J) Quantification was normalized to GAPDH (cytoplasm) and lamin A/C (nucleus). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗∗ P < 0.01 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (K, L) SMAD4 nuclear translocation analysis. (K) Triple immunofluorescence staining SMAD4 (red), F-actin (Phalloidin, green), and DAPI (nuclei, blue) in LECs treated as indicated in (I). Scar bar: 20 μm. (L) Nuclear SMAD4 fluorescence intensity quantification. n = 30 cells per group. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.

    Techniques Used: Translocation Assay, Immunofluorescence, Staining, Immunoprecipitation, Western Blot, Fractionation, Fluorescence

    Mechanistic schema of SUMO E1-mediated SMAD4 SUMOylation in lens fibrogenesis. In TGFβ/SMAD signaling, the SAE1/UBA2 heterodimer (SUMO E1) catalyzes SMAD4 SUMOylation at Lys113/159 residues, enhancing nucleocytoplasmic trafficking efficiency of the SMAD complex. SUMOylated SMAD4 accumulates in the nucleus, stabilizing the transcriptional machinery of epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT)-related genes ( e.g. , SNAIL , SLUG , FN1 , COL1A1 ), thereby amplifying fibrotic gene expression. Sustained SUMOylation drives lens epithelial cell (LEC) transdifferentiation, characterized by α-SMA expression and extracellular matrix overproduction, culminating in anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 by ML792 blocks SMAD4 SUMOylation, disrupting nuclear translocation and abrogating pro-fibrotic transcriptional programs.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Mechanistic schema of SUMO E1-mediated SMAD4 SUMOylation in lens fibrogenesis. In TGFβ/SMAD signaling, the SAE1/UBA2 heterodimer (SUMO E1) catalyzes SMAD4 SUMOylation at Lys113/159 residues, enhancing nucleocytoplasmic trafficking efficiency of the SMAD complex. SUMOylated SMAD4 accumulates in the nucleus, stabilizing the transcriptional machinery of epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT)-related genes ( e.g. , SNAIL , SLUG , FN1 , COL1A1 ), thereby amplifying fibrotic gene expression. Sustained SUMOylation drives lens epithelial cell (LEC) transdifferentiation, characterized by α-SMA expression and extracellular matrix overproduction, culminating in anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 by ML792 blocks SMAD4 SUMOylation, disrupting nuclear translocation and abrogating pro-fibrotic transcriptional programs.

    Techniques Used: Gene Expression, Expressing, Inhibition, Translocation Assay

    Related Articles

    Ubiquitin Proteomics:

    Article Title: Arsenic induces two different interaction modes of SUMO with promyelocytic leukemia (PML) proteins
    Article Snippet: Sodium m -arsenite and IFNα2a were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). .. ML792 (SUMO E1 inhibitor) and TAK243 (ubiquitin E1 inhibitor) were purchased from MedKoo Bioscience (Morrisville, NC) and Selleckchem (Houston, TX), respectively. .. A BCA protein assay kit was obtained from Pierce-ThermoFisher (Rockford, MA).

    Article Title: Biological differences in promyelocytic leukemia (PML) proteins between PML-nuclear bodies (PML-NBs) and extranuclear PML bodies (EnPBs) in arsenite-exposed cells
    Article Snippet: BCA protein assay kit was obtained from Thermo Fisher (Waltham, MA). .. ML792 (SUMO E1 inhibitor) and TAK294 (ubiquitin E1 inhibitor) were obtained from MedKoo Bioscience (Morrisville, NC) and Selleckchem (Houston, TX), respectively. ..



    Similar Products

    95
    MedChemExpress ml792
    Ml792, supplied by MedChemExpress, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 95/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ml792/ML-792/pm40744335-43-8-9
    Average 95 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    ml792 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    95/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    93
    Selleck Chemicals ml792
    Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 attenuates TGFβ 2 -driven epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) and prevents anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. (A) FHL124 lens epithelial cells (LECs) were treated with 0.1% DMSO, 10 μM <t>ML792,</t> and 10 μM Ginkgolic acid (GA), along with or without the treatment of 10 ng/mL TGFβ 2 for 24 h. Immunoblot analysis of EMT markers, fibronectin, Collagen I, SLUG, and SNAIL proteins was performed. β-Tubulin served as the loading control. (B) Densitometric quantification of (A). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (C–F) Global SUMOylation profiling in treatment groups from (A). (C) SUMO1 conjugate immunoblot. (E) SUMO2/3 conjugate immunoblot. (D, F) Quantification analysis of SUMOylation levels (normalized to GAPDH and β-tubulin). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G) Ex vivo rat lens organ culture model. Macroscopic lens opacity assessment after 7-day treatments: vehicle (0.1% DMSO), TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), and TGFβ 2 plus ML792. Bottom: histopathological analysis (hematoxylin-eosin staining) and fibrotic marker immunohistochemistry staining (fibronectin/α-SMA). Scar bar: 200 μm. (H, I) Immunoblot validation of fibrotic markers in lens epithelium from (G). GAPDH served as the loading control. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (J) In vivo therapeutic efficacy in C57BL/6J mice: intracameral injection into the anterior ocular chamber with vehicle (0.1% DMSO diluted in PBS) and ML792 (10 μM diluted in PBS) administered immediately post-capsular injury ( n = 6 biological replicates/group). 7-day endpoints: slit-lamp imaging (red arrow indicated plaques; scale bar: 0.5 mm) and immunohistochemistry staining of α-SMA protein (scale bar: 200 μm). (K, L) Immunoblot analysis of SUMOylation status in murine lens epithelium from the therapeutic intervention groups described in (J). (M) Densitometric quantification of SUMO conjugation levels (SUMO1, SUMO2/3). Data were normalized to β-tubulin and GAPDH. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.01. (N, O) Immunoblot analysis of fibrotic markers (fibronectin/α-SMA) in murine lens epithelium from (J), followed by densitometric quantification. GAPDH served as the loading control. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.
    Ml792, supplied by Selleck Chemicals, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ml792/ML792/pmc12886541-35-23-25
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    ml792 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    93
    Selleck Chemicals sumoi
    Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 attenuates TGFβ 2 -driven epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) and prevents anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. (A) FHL124 lens epithelial cells (LECs) were treated with 0.1% DMSO, 10 μM <t>ML792,</t> and 10 μM Ginkgolic acid (GA), along with or without the treatment of 10 ng/mL TGFβ 2 for 24 h. Immunoblot analysis of EMT markers, fibronectin, Collagen I, SLUG, and SNAIL proteins was performed. β-Tubulin served as the loading control. (B) Densitometric quantification of (A). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (C–F) Global SUMOylation profiling in treatment groups from (A). (C) SUMO1 conjugate immunoblot. (E) SUMO2/3 conjugate immunoblot. (D, F) Quantification analysis of SUMOylation levels (normalized to GAPDH and β-tubulin). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G) Ex vivo rat lens organ culture model. Macroscopic lens opacity assessment after 7-day treatments: vehicle (0.1% DMSO), TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), and TGFβ 2 plus ML792. Bottom: histopathological analysis (hematoxylin-eosin staining) and fibrotic marker immunohistochemistry staining (fibronectin/α-SMA). Scar bar: 200 μm. (H, I) Immunoblot validation of fibrotic markers in lens epithelium from (G). GAPDH served as the loading control. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (J) In vivo therapeutic efficacy in C57BL/6J mice: intracameral injection into the anterior ocular chamber with vehicle (0.1% DMSO diluted in PBS) and ML792 (10 μM diluted in PBS) administered immediately post-capsular injury ( n = 6 biological replicates/group). 7-day endpoints: slit-lamp imaging (red arrow indicated plaques; scale bar: 0.5 mm) and immunohistochemistry staining of α-SMA protein (scale bar: 200 μm). (K, L) Immunoblot analysis of SUMOylation status in murine lens epithelium from the therapeutic intervention groups described in (J). (M) Densitometric quantification of SUMO conjugation levels (SUMO1, SUMO2/3). Data were normalized to β-tubulin and GAPDH. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.01. (N, O) Immunoblot analysis of fibrotic markers (fibronectin/α-SMA) in murine lens epithelium from (J), followed by densitometric quantification. GAPDH served as the loading control. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.
    Sumoi, supplied by Selleck Chemicals, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ml792/ML792/pm41712379-349-27-30
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    sumoi - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    93
    Selleck Chemicals sumo activating enzyme
    Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 attenuates TGFβ 2 -driven epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) and prevents anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. (A) FHL124 lens epithelial cells (LECs) were treated with 0.1% DMSO, 10 μM <t>ML792,</t> and 10 μM Ginkgolic acid (GA), along with or without the treatment of 10 ng/mL TGFβ 2 for 24 h. Immunoblot analysis of EMT markers, fibronectin, Collagen I, SLUG, and SNAIL proteins was performed. β-Tubulin served as the loading control. (B) Densitometric quantification of (A). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (C–F) Global SUMOylation profiling in treatment groups from (A). (C) SUMO1 conjugate immunoblot. (E) SUMO2/3 conjugate immunoblot. (D, F) Quantification analysis of SUMOylation levels (normalized to GAPDH and β-tubulin). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G) Ex vivo rat lens organ culture model. Macroscopic lens opacity assessment after 7-day treatments: vehicle (0.1% DMSO), TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), and TGFβ 2 plus ML792. Bottom: histopathological analysis (hematoxylin-eosin staining) and fibrotic marker immunohistochemistry staining (fibronectin/α-SMA). Scar bar: 200 μm. (H, I) Immunoblot validation of fibrotic markers in lens epithelium from (G). GAPDH served as the loading control. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (J) In vivo therapeutic efficacy in C57BL/6J mice: intracameral injection into the anterior ocular chamber with vehicle (0.1% DMSO diluted in PBS) and ML792 (10 μM diluted in PBS) administered immediately post-capsular injury ( n = 6 biological replicates/group). 7-day endpoints: slit-lamp imaging (red arrow indicated plaques; scale bar: 0.5 mm) and immunohistochemistry staining of α-SMA protein (scale bar: 200 μm). (K, L) Immunoblot analysis of SUMOylation status in murine lens epithelium from the therapeutic intervention groups described in (J). (M) Densitometric quantification of SUMO conjugation levels (SUMO1, SUMO2/3). Data were normalized to β-tubulin and GAPDH. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.01. (N, O) Immunoblot analysis of fibrotic markers (fibronectin/α-SMA) in murine lens epithelium from (J), followed by densitometric quantification. GAPDH served as the loading control. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.
    Sumo Activating Enzyme, supplied by Selleck Chemicals, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ml792/ML792/pmc12879034-182-12-16
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    sumo activating enzyme - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    93
    Selleck Chemicals ml 792
    Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 attenuates TGFβ 2 -driven epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) and prevents anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. (A) FHL124 lens epithelial cells (LECs) were treated with 0.1% DMSO, 10 μM <t>ML792,</t> and 10 μM Ginkgolic acid (GA), along with or without the treatment of 10 ng/mL TGFβ 2 for 24 h. Immunoblot analysis of EMT markers, fibronectin, Collagen I, SLUG, and SNAIL proteins was performed. β-Tubulin served as the loading control. (B) Densitometric quantification of (A). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (C–F) Global SUMOylation profiling in treatment groups from (A). (C) SUMO1 conjugate immunoblot. (E) SUMO2/3 conjugate immunoblot. (D, F) Quantification analysis of SUMOylation levels (normalized to GAPDH and β-tubulin). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G) Ex vivo rat lens organ culture model. Macroscopic lens opacity assessment after 7-day treatments: vehicle (0.1% DMSO), TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), and TGFβ 2 plus ML792. Bottom: histopathological analysis (hematoxylin-eosin staining) and fibrotic marker immunohistochemistry staining (fibronectin/α-SMA). Scar bar: 200 μm. (H, I) Immunoblot validation of fibrotic markers in lens epithelium from (G). GAPDH served as the loading control. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (J) In vivo therapeutic efficacy in C57BL/6J mice: intracameral injection into the anterior ocular chamber with vehicle (0.1% DMSO diluted in PBS) and ML792 (10 μM diluted in PBS) administered immediately post-capsular injury ( n = 6 biological replicates/group). 7-day endpoints: slit-lamp imaging (red arrow indicated plaques; scale bar: 0.5 mm) and immunohistochemistry staining of α-SMA protein (scale bar: 200 μm). (K, L) Immunoblot analysis of SUMOylation status in murine lens epithelium from the therapeutic intervention groups described in (J). (M) Densitometric quantification of SUMO conjugation levels (SUMO1, SUMO2/3). Data were normalized to β-tubulin and GAPDH. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.01. (N, O) Immunoblot analysis of fibrotic markers (fibronectin/α-SMA) in murine lens epithelium from (J), followed by densitometric quantification. GAPDH served as the loading control. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.
    Ml 792, supplied by Selleck Chemicals, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ml792/ML792/pm41309693-276-0-10
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    ml 792 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    86
    Cambridge Bioscience ml792
    Ligand-induced GR downregulation requires GR SUMOylation. (A) HCT treatment (20/50/100nM for 6 hours) of GFP-GR-wt-transfected A549 cells decreased GFP-GR protein levels (n = 3-4); one-way ANOVA with Dunnett's multiple comparisons test results shown. (B) HCT treatment (20/50/100nM for 6 hours) of GFP-GRmutSUMO-transfected A549 cells did not decrease GFP-GRmutSUMO protein levels (n = 4; one-way ANOVA, Dunnett's multiple comparisons test results not statistically significant. (C) Western blot of A549 cells transfected with GFP-GR-wt and treated with vehicle or HCT (50nM for 6 hours); lane 3 and 4 cells were pretreated with <t>ML792</t> (1µM) or vehicle (0.1% (v/v) DMSO) for 18 hours prior to HCT addition. (D) Representative Western blot showing the effect of treatment ± HCT (50nM for 6 hours) on cycloheximide-pretreated A549 cells: untransfected cells, cells transfected with GFP-GR-wt and cells transfected with GRmutSUMO. (E) Densitometry results showing GFP-GR-wt downregulation by HCT (50nM for 6 hours) in cycloheximide-pretreated cells (50 µg/mL 1 hour prior to HCT addition) was blocked by GR SUMO site mutations. Data represent GAPDH-normalized Western blot densitometry measurements of transfected GFP-GR from HCT-treated relative to vehicle-treated cells (n = 3/4); unpaired t-test results shown. (F) Cycloheximide chase assay showing GFP fluorescence assay data from A549 cells transfected GFP-GR-wt/GFP-GRmutSUMO and treated with HCT (50nM) for up to 4 hours (n = 3/4) relative to expression at time = 0. (G) The 3 hours timepoint of the cycloheximide chase assay showing GFP-GR downregulation due to HCT. A549 cells were transfected with GFP-GR constructs encoding wild-type GR, the full triple mutant (GRmutSUMO), or partial mutants with SUMO site mutations only in the N-terminal (GRmutS12) or only in the C-terminal (GRmutS3) (n = 4). Western densitometry data were normalized to GAPDH, in graphs A, B, and E. Graphs are presented as mean ± SEM. Effect of treatment * P < .05, ** P < .01.
    Ml792, supplied by Cambridge Bioscience, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ml792/ml792/pmc12501502-14-9-13
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    ml792 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    86/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 attenuates TGFβ 2 -driven epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) and prevents anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. (A) FHL124 lens epithelial cells (LECs) were treated with 0.1% DMSO, 10 μM ML792, and 10 μM Ginkgolic acid (GA), along with or without the treatment of 10 ng/mL TGFβ 2 for 24 h. Immunoblot analysis of EMT markers, fibronectin, Collagen I, SLUG, and SNAIL proteins was performed. β-Tubulin served as the loading control. (B) Densitometric quantification of (A). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (C–F) Global SUMOylation profiling in treatment groups from (A). (C) SUMO1 conjugate immunoblot. (E) SUMO2/3 conjugate immunoblot. (D, F) Quantification analysis of SUMOylation levels (normalized to GAPDH and β-tubulin). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G) Ex vivo rat lens organ culture model. Macroscopic lens opacity assessment after 7-day treatments: vehicle (0.1% DMSO), TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), and TGFβ 2 plus ML792. Bottom: histopathological analysis (hematoxylin-eosin staining) and fibrotic marker immunohistochemistry staining (fibronectin/α-SMA). Scar bar: 200 μm. (H, I) Immunoblot validation of fibrotic markers in lens epithelium from (G). GAPDH served as the loading control. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (J) In vivo therapeutic efficacy in C57BL/6J mice: intracameral injection into the anterior ocular chamber with vehicle (0.1% DMSO diluted in PBS) and ML792 (10 μM diluted in PBS) administered immediately post-capsular injury ( n = 6 biological replicates/group). 7-day endpoints: slit-lamp imaging (red arrow indicated plaques; scale bar: 0.5 mm) and immunohistochemistry staining of α-SMA protein (scale bar: 200 μm). (K, L) Immunoblot analysis of SUMOylation status in murine lens epithelium from the therapeutic intervention groups described in (J). (M) Densitometric quantification of SUMO conjugation levels (SUMO1, SUMO2/3). Data were normalized to β-tubulin and GAPDH. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.01. (N, O) Immunoblot analysis of fibrotic markers (fibronectin/α-SMA) in murine lens epithelium from (J), followed by densitometric quantification. GAPDH served as the loading control. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.

    Journal: Genes & Diseases

    Article Title: Blockage of SUMO E1 enzyme inhibits ocular lens fibrosis by mediating SMAD4 SUMOylation

    doi: 10.1016/j.gendis.2025.101827

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 attenuates TGFβ 2 -driven epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) and prevents anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. (A) FHL124 lens epithelial cells (LECs) were treated with 0.1% DMSO, 10 μM ML792, and 10 μM Ginkgolic acid (GA), along with or without the treatment of 10 ng/mL TGFβ 2 for 24 h. Immunoblot analysis of EMT markers, fibronectin, Collagen I, SLUG, and SNAIL proteins was performed. β-Tubulin served as the loading control. (B) Densitometric quantification of (A). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (C–F) Global SUMOylation profiling in treatment groups from (A). (C) SUMO1 conjugate immunoblot. (E) SUMO2/3 conjugate immunoblot. (D, F) Quantification analysis of SUMOylation levels (normalized to GAPDH and β-tubulin). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G) Ex vivo rat lens organ culture model. Macroscopic lens opacity assessment after 7-day treatments: vehicle (0.1% DMSO), TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), and TGFβ 2 plus ML792. Bottom: histopathological analysis (hematoxylin-eosin staining) and fibrotic marker immunohistochemistry staining (fibronectin/α-SMA). Scar bar: 200 μm. (H, I) Immunoblot validation of fibrotic markers in lens epithelium from (G). GAPDH served as the loading control. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ns, not significant; ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (J) In vivo therapeutic efficacy in C57BL/6J mice: intracameral injection into the anterior ocular chamber with vehicle (0.1% DMSO diluted in PBS) and ML792 (10 μM diluted in PBS) administered immediately post-capsular injury ( n = 6 biological replicates/group). 7-day endpoints: slit-lamp imaging (red arrow indicated plaques; scale bar: 0.5 mm) and immunohistochemistry staining of α-SMA protein (scale bar: 200 μm). (K, L) Immunoblot analysis of SUMOylation status in murine lens epithelium from the therapeutic intervention groups described in (J). (M) Densitometric quantification of SUMO conjugation levels (SUMO1, SUMO2/3). Data were normalized to β-tubulin and GAPDH. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.01. (N, O) Immunoblot analysis of fibrotic markers (fibronectin/α-SMA) in murine lens epithelium from (J), followed by densitometric quantification. GAPDH served as the loading control. Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.

    Article Snippet: Drug preparation was as follows: TGFβ 2 (#8406LC, CST, USA) in PBS containing 0.1% bovine serum albumin; ginkgolic acid (#22910, TargetMol, China) and ML792 (#S8697, Selleck, China) in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO, #196055, MP Biomedicals, USA).

    Techniques: Inhibition, Western Blot, Control, Ex Vivo, Organ Culture, Staining, Marker, Immunohistochemistry, Biomarker Discovery, In Vivo, Drug discovery, Injection, Imaging, Conjugation Assay

    ML792 disrupts SMAD4 SUMOylation-dependent nuclear translocation in TGFβ 2 -stimulated lens epithelial cells (LECs). (A – F) FHL124 LECs were treated with or without TGFβ2 (10 ng/mL, 2 h). Triple immunofluorescence staining of SMAD4 (green), SUMO1 (red)/SUMO2/3 (red), and DAPI (nuclei, blue) shows spatiotemporal dynamics of SMAD4-SUMO colocalization. (A, D) SMAD4-SUMO1/SUMO2/3 immunofluorescence staining and colocalization scatterplot. (B, E) Pearson's r analysis of colocalization performed by Image J. n = 9 replicates per group. (C, F) Quantification of nuclear SMAD4 intensity. n = 30 cells in (C) and n = 44 cells in (F). Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G, H) Flag-SMAD4 immunoprecipitation in engineered FHL124 LECs overexpressing Flag-SMAD4. Treatments were 0.1% DMSO, TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), or their combination for 2 h. (G, H) Whole-cell lysates were blotted with anti-Flag and anti-SMAD4 (INPUT). Cell lysates were immunoprecipitated with anti-Flag, followed by SUMO1 immunoblotting (G) and SUMO2/3 immunoblotting (H). (I, J) Subcellular fractionation analysis. (I) Immunoblots of cytoplasmic/nuclear SMAD4 after 8 h treatments in FHL12.4 LECs. (J) Quantification was normalized to GAPDH (cytoplasm) and lamin A/C (nucleus). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗∗ P < 0.01 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (K, L) SMAD4 nuclear translocation analysis. (K) Triple immunofluorescence staining SMAD4 (red), F-actin (Phalloidin, green), and DAPI (nuclei, blue) in LECs treated as indicated in (I). Scar bar: 20 μm. (L) Nuclear SMAD4 fluorescence intensity quantification. n = 30 cells per group. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.

    Journal: Genes & Diseases

    Article Title: Blockage of SUMO E1 enzyme inhibits ocular lens fibrosis by mediating SMAD4 SUMOylation

    doi: 10.1016/j.gendis.2025.101827

    Figure Lengend Snippet: ML792 disrupts SMAD4 SUMOylation-dependent nuclear translocation in TGFβ 2 -stimulated lens epithelial cells (LECs). (A – F) FHL124 LECs were treated with or without TGFβ2 (10 ng/mL, 2 h). Triple immunofluorescence staining of SMAD4 (green), SUMO1 (red)/SUMO2/3 (red), and DAPI (nuclei, blue) shows spatiotemporal dynamics of SMAD4-SUMO colocalization. (A, D) SMAD4-SUMO1/SUMO2/3 immunofluorescence staining and colocalization scatterplot. (B, E) Pearson's r analysis of colocalization performed by Image J. n = 9 replicates per group. (C, F) Quantification of nuclear SMAD4 intensity. n = 30 cells in (C) and n = 44 cells in (F). Unpaired Student's t -test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (G, H) Flag-SMAD4 immunoprecipitation in engineered FHL124 LECs overexpressing Flag-SMAD4. Treatments were 0.1% DMSO, TGFβ 2 (10 ng/mL), ML792 (10 μM), or their combination for 2 h. (G, H) Whole-cell lysates were blotted with anti-Flag and anti-SMAD4 (INPUT). Cell lysates were immunoprecipitated with anti-Flag, followed by SUMO1 immunoblotting (G) and SUMO2/3 immunoblotting (H). (I, J) Subcellular fractionation analysis. (I) Immunoblots of cytoplasmic/nuclear SMAD4 after 8 h treatments in FHL12.4 LECs. (J) Quantification was normalized to GAPDH (cytoplasm) and lamin A/C (nucleus). One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction; ns, not significant; ∗∗ P < 0.01 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001. (K, L) SMAD4 nuclear translocation analysis. (K) Triple immunofluorescence staining SMAD4 (red), F-actin (Phalloidin, green), and DAPI (nuclei, blue) in LECs treated as indicated in (I). Scar bar: 20 μm. (L) Nuclear SMAD4 fluorescence intensity quantification. n = 30 cells per group. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test; ∗ P < 0.05 and ∗∗∗ P < 0.001.

    Article Snippet: Drug preparation was as follows: TGFβ 2 (#8406LC, CST, USA) in PBS containing 0.1% bovine serum albumin; ginkgolic acid (#22910, TargetMol, China) and ML792 (#S8697, Selleck, China) in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO, #196055, MP Biomedicals, USA).

    Techniques: Translocation Assay, Immunofluorescence, Staining, Immunoprecipitation, Western Blot, Fractionation, Fluorescence

    Mechanistic schema of SUMO E1-mediated SMAD4 SUMOylation in lens fibrogenesis. In TGFβ/SMAD signaling, the SAE1/UBA2 heterodimer (SUMO E1) catalyzes SMAD4 SUMOylation at Lys113/159 residues, enhancing nucleocytoplasmic trafficking efficiency of the SMAD complex. SUMOylated SMAD4 accumulates in the nucleus, stabilizing the transcriptional machinery of epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT)-related genes ( e.g. , SNAIL , SLUG , FN1 , COL1A1 ), thereby amplifying fibrotic gene expression. Sustained SUMOylation drives lens epithelial cell (LEC) transdifferentiation, characterized by α-SMA expression and extracellular matrix overproduction, culminating in anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 by ML792 blocks SMAD4 SUMOylation, disrupting nuclear translocation and abrogating pro-fibrotic transcriptional programs.

    Journal: Genes & Diseases

    Article Title: Blockage of SUMO E1 enzyme inhibits ocular lens fibrosis by mediating SMAD4 SUMOylation

    doi: 10.1016/j.gendis.2025.101827

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Mechanistic schema of SUMO E1-mediated SMAD4 SUMOylation in lens fibrogenesis. In TGFβ/SMAD signaling, the SAE1/UBA2 heterodimer (SUMO E1) catalyzes SMAD4 SUMOylation at Lys113/159 residues, enhancing nucleocytoplasmic trafficking efficiency of the SMAD complex. SUMOylated SMAD4 accumulates in the nucleus, stabilizing the transcriptional machinery of epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT)-related genes ( e.g. , SNAIL , SLUG , FN1 , COL1A1 ), thereby amplifying fibrotic gene expression. Sustained SUMOylation drives lens epithelial cell (LEC) transdifferentiation, characterized by α-SMA expression and extracellular matrix overproduction, culminating in anterior subcapsular cataract (ASC) progression. Pharmacological inhibition of SUMO E1 by ML792 blocks SMAD4 SUMOylation, disrupting nuclear translocation and abrogating pro-fibrotic transcriptional programs.

    Article Snippet: Drug preparation was as follows: TGFβ 2 (#8406LC, CST, USA) in PBS containing 0.1% bovine serum albumin; ginkgolic acid (#22910, TargetMol, China) and ML792 (#S8697, Selleck, China) in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO, #196055, MP Biomedicals, USA).

    Techniques: Gene Expression, Expressing, Inhibition, Translocation Assay

    Ligand-induced GR downregulation requires GR SUMOylation. (A) HCT treatment (20/50/100nM for 6 hours) of GFP-GR-wt-transfected A549 cells decreased GFP-GR protein levels (n = 3-4); one-way ANOVA with Dunnett's multiple comparisons test results shown. (B) HCT treatment (20/50/100nM for 6 hours) of GFP-GRmutSUMO-transfected A549 cells did not decrease GFP-GRmutSUMO protein levels (n = 4; one-way ANOVA, Dunnett's multiple comparisons test results not statistically significant. (C) Western blot of A549 cells transfected with GFP-GR-wt and treated with vehicle or HCT (50nM for 6 hours); lane 3 and 4 cells were pretreated with ML792 (1µM) or vehicle (0.1% (v/v) DMSO) for 18 hours prior to HCT addition. (D) Representative Western blot showing the effect of treatment ± HCT (50nM for 6 hours) on cycloheximide-pretreated A549 cells: untransfected cells, cells transfected with GFP-GR-wt and cells transfected with GRmutSUMO. (E) Densitometry results showing GFP-GR-wt downregulation by HCT (50nM for 6 hours) in cycloheximide-pretreated cells (50 µg/mL 1 hour prior to HCT addition) was blocked by GR SUMO site mutations. Data represent GAPDH-normalized Western blot densitometry measurements of transfected GFP-GR from HCT-treated relative to vehicle-treated cells (n = 3/4); unpaired t-test results shown. (F) Cycloheximide chase assay showing GFP fluorescence assay data from A549 cells transfected GFP-GR-wt/GFP-GRmutSUMO and treated with HCT (50nM) for up to 4 hours (n = 3/4) relative to expression at time = 0. (G) The 3 hours timepoint of the cycloheximide chase assay showing GFP-GR downregulation due to HCT. A549 cells were transfected with GFP-GR constructs encoding wild-type GR, the full triple mutant (GRmutSUMO), or partial mutants with SUMO site mutations only in the N-terminal (GRmutS12) or only in the C-terminal (GRmutS3) (n = 4). Western densitometry data were normalized to GAPDH, in graphs A, B, and E. Graphs are presented as mean ± SEM. Effect of treatment * P < .05, ** P < .01.

    Journal: Endocrinology

    Article Title: Glucocorticoid Receptor and SUMO Fluctuations in Response to Pulsatile Glucocorticoids In Vitro and in Male Rat Brains

    doi: 10.1210/endocr/bqaf140

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Ligand-induced GR downregulation requires GR SUMOylation. (A) HCT treatment (20/50/100nM for 6 hours) of GFP-GR-wt-transfected A549 cells decreased GFP-GR protein levels (n = 3-4); one-way ANOVA with Dunnett's multiple comparisons test results shown. (B) HCT treatment (20/50/100nM for 6 hours) of GFP-GRmutSUMO-transfected A549 cells did not decrease GFP-GRmutSUMO protein levels (n = 4; one-way ANOVA, Dunnett's multiple comparisons test results not statistically significant. (C) Western blot of A549 cells transfected with GFP-GR-wt and treated with vehicle or HCT (50nM for 6 hours); lane 3 and 4 cells were pretreated with ML792 (1µM) or vehicle (0.1% (v/v) DMSO) for 18 hours prior to HCT addition. (D) Representative Western blot showing the effect of treatment ± HCT (50nM for 6 hours) on cycloheximide-pretreated A549 cells: untransfected cells, cells transfected with GFP-GR-wt and cells transfected with GRmutSUMO. (E) Densitometry results showing GFP-GR-wt downregulation by HCT (50nM for 6 hours) in cycloheximide-pretreated cells (50 µg/mL 1 hour prior to HCT addition) was blocked by GR SUMO site mutations. Data represent GAPDH-normalized Western blot densitometry measurements of transfected GFP-GR from HCT-treated relative to vehicle-treated cells (n = 3/4); unpaired t-test results shown. (F) Cycloheximide chase assay showing GFP fluorescence assay data from A549 cells transfected GFP-GR-wt/GFP-GRmutSUMO and treated with HCT (50nM) for up to 4 hours (n = 3/4) relative to expression at time = 0. (G) The 3 hours timepoint of the cycloheximide chase assay showing GFP-GR downregulation due to HCT. A549 cells were transfected with GFP-GR constructs encoding wild-type GR, the full triple mutant (GRmutSUMO), or partial mutants with SUMO site mutations only in the N-terminal (GRmutS12) or only in the C-terminal (GRmutS3) (n = 4). Western densitometry data were normalized to GAPDH, in graphs A, B, and E. Graphs are presented as mean ± SEM. Effect of treatment * P < .05, ** P < .01.

    Article Snippet: Hydrocortisone, dexamethasone, and cycloheximide were from Sigma (Gillingham, UK); ML792 (HY-108702-5 mg) from Cambridge Bioscience (Cambridge, UK).

    Techniques: Transfection, Western Blot, Fluorescence, Expressing, Construct, Mutagenesis

    Glucocorticoid withdrawal increases endogenous GR protein expression. (A) Timecourse showing downregulation of GR-HiBiT following exposure to 50nM HCT, in GR-HiBiT A549 cells. Relative fluorescence units (RFU) represent Nano-Glo® HiBiT lytic detection assay luminescence readings after background subtraction and normalization to luminescence at t = 0 minutes. Data represent mean ± SEM, n = 3/4. (B) Timecourse showing downregulation of GR-HiBiT following pretreatment with 1µM ML792/vehicle (DMSO 0.1% [v/v]) for 1 hour and exposure to 50nM HCT, in GR-HiBiT A549. Data represent mean ± SEM, n ≥ 3. (C) Effect of ML792 (ratio ML792-treated/vehicle-treated) on GR-HiBiT expression after 1 hour HCT treatment, in GR-HiBiT A549 cells. Cells were pretreated with vehicle (DMSO 0.1% [v/v])/1 µM ML792, ± cycloheximide, for 1 hour then exposed to 50nM HCT for 1 hour. Data represent mean ± SEM, n ≥ 9, 2-way ANOVA (2 treatments) with Tukey's multiple comparisons test. (D) GR-HiBiT expression following withdrawal of hormone, in GR-HiBiT A549 cells pretreated with 50nM HCT for 18 hours. Cells were subjected to ×3 media exchanges to wash out (−) or maintain (+) HCT, then further incubation for 2/4/6 hours in the absence/presence of HCT. Data represent mean ± SEM, n = 3, 2-way ANOVA (treatment and time) with Tukey's multiple comparisons test. (E) Timecourse showing effect of ML792 on upregulation of GR-HiBiT following hormone withdrawal, in GR-HiBiT A549 cells pretreated with 50nM HCT for 18 hours. Pretreatment with 1µM ML792/vehicle (DMSO 0.1% [v/v]) for 1 hour was followed by media replacements to wash out HCT. Data represent mean ± SEM n = 3. Effect of treatment * P < .05, ** P < .01, *** P < .001, **** P < .0001.

    Journal: Endocrinology

    Article Title: Glucocorticoid Receptor and SUMO Fluctuations in Response to Pulsatile Glucocorticoids In Vitro and in Male Rat Brains

    doi: 10.1210/endocr/bqaf140

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Glucocorticoid withdrawal increases endogenous GR protein expression. (A) Timecourse showing downregulation of GR-HiBiT following exposure to 50nM HCT, in GR-HiBiT A549 cells. Relative fluorescence units (RFU) represent Nano-Glo® HiBiT lytic detection assay luminescence readings after background subtraction and normalization to luminescence at t = 0 minutes. Data represent mean ± SEM, n = 3/4. (B) Timecourse showing downregulation of GR-HiBiT following pretreatment with 1µM ML792/vehicle (DMSO 0.1% [v/v]) for 1 hour and exposure to 50nM HCT, in GR-HiBiT A549. Data represent mean ± SEM, n ≥ 3. (C) Effect of ML792 (ratio ML792-treated/vehicle-treated) on GR-HiBiT expression after 1 hour HCT treatment, in GR-HiBiT A549 cells. Cells were pretreated with vehicle (DMSO 0.1% [v/v])/1 µM ML792, ± cycloheximide, for 1 hour then exposed to 50nM HCT for 1 hour. Data represent mean ± SEM, n ≥ 9, 2-way ANOVA (2 treatments) with Tukey's multiple comparisons test. (D) GR-HiBiT expression following withdrawal of hormone, in GR-HiBiT A549 cells pretreated with 50nM HCT for 18 hours. Cells were subjected to ×3 media exchanges to wash out (−) or maintain (+) HCT, then further incubation for 2/4/6 hours in the absence/presence of HCT. Data represent mean ± SEM, n = 3, 2-way ANOVA (treatment and time) with Tukey's multiple comparisons test. (E) Timecourse showing effect of ML792 on upregulation of GR-HiBiT following hormone withdrawal, in GR-HiBiT A549 cells pretreated with 50nM HCT for 18 hours. Pretreatment with 1µM ML792/vehicle (DMSO 0.1% [v/v]) for 1 hour was followed by media replacements to wash out HCT. Data represent mean ± SEM n = 3. Effect of treatment * P < .05, ** P < .01, *** P < .001, **** P < .0001.

    Article Snippet: Hydrocortisone, dexamethasone, and cycloheximide were from Sigma (Gillingham, UK); ML792 (HY-108702-5 mg) from Cambridge Bioscience (Cambridge, UK).

    Techniques: Expressing, Fluorescence, Detection Assay, Incubation