Healthcare analytics, AI solutions for biological big data, providing an AI platform for the biotech, life sciences, medical and pharmaceutical industries, as well as for related technological approaches, i.e., curation and text analysis with machine learning and other activities related to AI applications to these industries.
There has always been Personalized Medicine if you consider the time a physician spends with a patient, which has dwindled. But the current recognition of personalized medicine refers to breakthrough advances in technological innovation in diagnostics and treatment that differentiates subclasses within diagnoses that are amenable to relapse eluding therapies. There are just a few highlights to consider:
We live in a world with other living beings that are adapting to a changing environmental stresses.
Nutritional resources that have been available and made plentiful over generations are not abundant in some climates.
Despite the huge impact that genomics has had on biological progress over the last century, there is a huge contribution not to be overlooked in epigenetics, metabolomics, and pathways analysis.
A Reconstructed View of Personalized Medicine
There has been much interest in ‘junk DNA’, non-coding areas of our DNA are far from being without function. DNA has two basic categories of nitrogenous bases: the purines (adenine [A] and guanine [G]), and the pyrimidines (cytosine [C], thymine [T], and no uracil [U]), while RNA contains only A, G, C, and U (no T). The Watson-Crick proposal set the path of molecular biology for decades into the 21st century, culminating in the Human Genome Project.
There is no uncertainty about the importance of “Junk DNA”. It is both an evolutionary remnant, and it has a role in cell regulation. Further, the role of histones in their relationship the oligonucleotide sequences is not understood. We now have a large output of research on noncoding RNA, including siRNA, miRNA, and others with roles other than transcription. This requires major revision of our model of cell regulatory processes. The classic model is solely transcriptional.
DNA-> RNA-> Amino Acid in a protein.
Redrawn we have
DNA-> RNA-> DNA and
DNA->RNA-> protein-> DNA.
Neverthess, there were unrelated discoveries that took on huge importance. For example, since the 1920s, the work of Warburg and Meyerhoff, followed by that of Krebs, Kaplan, Chance, and others built a solid foundation in the knowledge of enzymes, coenzymes, adenine and pyridine nucleotides, and metabolic pathways, not to mention the importance of Fe3+, Cu2+, Zn2+, and other metal cofactors. Of huge importance was the work of Jacob, Monod and Changeux, and the effects of cooperativity in allosteric systems and of repulsion in tertiary structure of proteins related to hydrophobic and hydrophilic interactions, which involves the effect of one ligand on the binding or catalysis of another, demonstrated by the end-product inhibition of the enzyme, L-threonine deaminase (Changeux 1961), L-isoleucine, which differs sterically from the reactant, L-threonine whereby the former could inhibit the enzyme without competing with the latter. The current view based on a variety of measurements (e.g., NMR, FRET, and single molecule studies) is a ‘‘dynamic’’ proposal by Cooper and Dryden (1984) that the distribution around the average structure changes in allostery affects the subsequent (binding) affinity at a distant site.
What else do we have to consider? The measurement of free radicals has increased awareness of radical-induced impairment of the oxidative/antioxidative balance, essential for an understanding of disease progression. Metal-mediated formation of free radicals causes various modifications to DNA bases, enhanced lipid peroxidation, and altered calcium and sulfhydryl homeostasis. Lipid peroxides, formed by the attack of radicals on polyunsaturated fatty acid residues of phospholipids, can further react with redox metals finally producing mutagenic and carcinogenic malondialdehyde, 4-hydroxynonenal and other exocyclic DNA adducts (etheno and/or propano adducts). The unifying factor in determining toxicity and carcinogenicity for all these metals is the generation of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species. Various studies have confirmed that metals activate signaling pathways and the carcinogenic effect of metals has been related to activation of mainly redox sensitive transcription factors, involving NF-kappaB, AP-1 and p53.
I have provided mechanisms explanatory for regulation of the cell that go beyond the classic model of metabolic pathways associated with the cytoplasm, mitochondria, endoplasmic reticulum, and lysosome, such as, the cell death pathways, expressed in apoptosis and repair. Nevertheless, there is still a missing part of this discussion that considers the time and space interactions of the cell, cellular cytoskeleton and extracellular and intracellular substrate interactions in the immediate environment.
There is heterogeneity among cancer cells of expected identical type, which would be consistent with differences in phenotypic expression, aligned with epigenetics. There is also heterogeneity in the immediate interstices between cancer cells. Integration with genome-wide profiling data identified losses of specific genes on 4p14 and 5q13 that were enriched in grade 3 tumors with high microenvironmental diversity that also substratified patients into poor prognostic groups. In the case of breast cancer, there is interaction with estrogen , and we refer to an androgen-unresponsive prostate cancer.
Finally, the interaction between enzyme and substrates may be conditionally unidirectional in defining the activity within the cell. The activity of the cell is dynamically interacting and at high rates of activity. In a study of the pyruvate kinase (PK) reaction the catalytic activity of the PK reaction was reversed to the thermodynamically unfavorable direction in a muscle preparation by a specific inhibitor. Experiments found that in there were differences in the active form of pyruvate kinase that were clearly related to the environmental condition of the assay – glycolitic or glyconeogenic. The conformational changes indicated by differential regulatory response were used to present a dynamic conformational model functioning at the active site of the enzyme. In the model, the interaction of the enzyme active site with its substrates is described concluding that induced increase in the vibrational energy levels of the active site decreases the energetic barrier for substrate induced changes at the site. Another example is the inhibition of H4 lactate dehydrogenase, but not the M4, by high concentrations of pyruvate. An investigation of the inhibition revealed that a covalent bond was formed between the nicotinamide ring of the NAD+ and the enol form of pyruvate. The isoenzymes of isocitrate dehydrogenase, IDH1 and IDH2 mutations occur in gliomas and in acute myeloid leukemias with normal karyotype. IDH1 and IDH2 mutations are remarkably specific to codons that encode conserved functionally important arginines in the active site of each enzyme. In this case, there is steric hindrance by Asp279 where the isocitrate substrate normally forms hydrogen bonds with Ser94.
Personalized medicine has been largely viewed from a lens of genomics. But genomics is only the reading frame. The living activities of cell processes are dynamic and occur at rapid rates. We have to keep in mind that personalized in reference to genotype is not complete without reconciliation of phenotype, which is the reference to expressed differences in outcomes.
Intratumor heterogeneity, it is known, can complicate cancer treatments. Now it appears the same may be true of tumor microenvironment heterogeneity. According to a new study from the Institute of Cancer Research (ICR), London, breast cancers that develop within an “ecologically diverse” breast cancer microenvironment are particularly likely to progress and lead to death.
The study took an unusual approach: It combined ecological scoring methods with genome-wide profiling data. This approach, besides showing clinical utility in the evaluation of breast cancer outcomes, demonstrated that even so contextual a discipline as genomics can benefit from being placed within a larger context. In this case, the context is essentially Darwinian, albeit at a small scale.
Natural selection is typically studied at the level of ecosystems consisting of animals and plants. In the current study, however, it was assessed at the level of the tumor microenvironment, which consists of cancer cells, immune system lymphocytes, and stromal cells.
The ICR scientists, led by Yinyin Yuan, Ph.D., presented their work February 16 in the journal PLoS Medicine, in an article entitled “Microenvironmental Heterogeneity Parallels Breast Cancer Progression: A Histology–Genomic Integration Analysis.” The article describes how the scientists developed a tumor ecosystem diversity index (EDI), a scoring system that indicates the degree of microenvironmental heterogeneity along three spatial dimensions in solid tumors. EDI scores take account of “fully automated histology image analysis coupled with statistical measures commonly used in ecology.”
“[EDI] was compared with disease-specific survival, key mutations, genome-wide copy number, and expression profiling data in a retrospective study of 510 breast cancer patients as a test set and 516 breast cancer patients as an independent validation set,” wrote the authors. “In high-grade (grade 3) breast cancers, we uncovered a striking link between high microenvironmental heterogeneity measured by EDI and a poor prognosis that cannot be explained by tumor size, genomics, or any other data types.”
By using the EDI, the ICR team was able to identify several particularly aggressive subgroups of breast cancer. In fact, the EDI was a stronger predictor of survival than many established markers for the disease.
The ICR researchers also looked at the EDI in addition to genetic factors. For example, the researchers found that the prognostic value of EDI was enhanced with the addition of TP53 mutation status. By integrating EDI data and genome-wide profiling data, the researchers identified losses of specific genes on 4p14 and 5q13 that were enriched in grade 3 tumors. These tumors, which showed high microenvironmental diversity, substratified patients into poor prognostic groups.
“Our findings show that mathematical models of ecological diversity can spot more aggressive cancers,” said Dr. Yuan. “By analyzing images of the environment around a tumor based on Darwinian natural selection principles, we can predict survival in some breast cancer types even more effectively than many of the measures used now in the clinic.
“In the future, we hope that by combining cell diversity scores with other factors that influence cancer survival, such as genetics and tumor size, we will be able to tell apart patients with more or less aggressive disease so we can identify those who might need different types of treatment.”
“This ingenious study…teaches us a valuable lesson,” added Paul Workman, Ph.D., chief executive of the ICR. “[We] should always remember that cancer cells are not developing and growing in isolation, but are part of a complex ecosystem that involves normal human cells, too. By better understanding these ecosystems, we aim to create new ways to diagnose, monitor and treat cancer.”
Microenvironmental Heterogeneity Parallels Breast Cancer Progression: A Histology–Genomic Integration Analysis
The intra-tumor diversity of cancer cells is under intense investigation; however, little is known about the heterogeneity of the tumor microenvironment that is key to cancer progression and evolution. We aimed to assess the degree of microenvironmental heterogeneity in breast cancer and correlate this with genomic and clinical parameters.
Methods and Findings
We developed a quantitative measure of microenvironmental heterogeneity along three spatial dimensions (3-D) in solid tumors, termed the tumor ecosystem diversity index (EDI), using fully automated histology image analysis coupled with statistical measures commonly used in ecology. This measure was compared with disease-specific survival, key mutations, genome-wide copy number, and expression profiling data in a retrospective study of 510 breast cancer patients as a test set and 516 breast cancer patients as an independent validation set. In high-grade (grade 3) breast cancers, we uncovered a striking link between high microenvironmental heterogeneity measured by EDI and a poor prognosis that cannot be explained by tumor size, genomics, or any other data types. However, this association was not observed in low-grade (grade 1 and 2) breast cancers. The prognostic value of EDI was superior to known prognostic factors and was enhanced with the addition of TP53 mutation status (multivariate analysis test set, p = 9 × 10−4, hazard ratio = 1.47, 95% CI 1.17–1.84; validation set, p = 0.0011, hazard ratio = 1.78, 95% CI 1.26–2.52). Integration with genome-wide profiling data identified losses of specific genes on 4p14 and 5q13 that were enriched in grade 3 tumors with high microenvironmental diversity that also substratified patients into poor prognostic groups. Limitations of this study include the number of cell types included in the model, that EDI has prognostic value only in grade 3 tumors, and that our spatial heterogeneity measure was dependent on spatial scale and tumor size.
Conclusions
To our knowledge, this is the first study to couple unbiased measures of microenvironmental heterogeneity with genomic alterations to predict breast cancer clinical outcome. We propose a clinically relevant role of microenvironmental heterogeneity for advanced breast tumors, and highlight that ecological statistics can be translated into medical advances for identifying a new type of biomarker and, furthermore, for understanding the synergistic interplay of microenvironmental heterogeneity with genomic alterations in cancer cells.
Background
The human body contains millions of cells, all of which grow, divide, and die in an orderly fashion to build tissues during early life and to replace worn-out or dying cells and repair injuries during adult life. Sometimes, however, normal cells acquire genetic changes (mutations) that allow them to divide uncontrollably and to move around the body (metastasize), resulting in cancer. Because any cell in the body can acquire the mutations needed for cancer development, there are many types of cancer. For example, breast cancer, the most common cancer in women, begins when the cells in the breast that normally make milk become altered. Moreover, different types of cancer progress and evolve differently—some cancers grow quickly and kill their “host” soon after diagnosis, whereas others can be successfully treated with drugs, surgery, or radiotherapy. The behavior of individual cancers depends both on the characteristics of the cancer cells within the tumor and on the interactions between the cancer cells and the normal stromal cells (the connective tissue cells of organs) and other cells (for example, immune cells) that surround and feed cancer cells (the tumor microenvironment).
Why Was This Study Done?
Although recent studies have highlighted the importance of the tumor microenvironment for disease-related outcomes, little is known about how the heterogeneity of the tumor microenvironment—the diversity of non-cancer cells within the tumor—affects outcomes. Mathematical modeling suggests that tumors with heterogeneous and homogeneous microenvironments have different growth patterns and that heterogeneous microenvironments are more likely to be associated with aggressive cancers than homogenous microenvironments. However, the lack of methods to quantify the spatial variability and cellular composition across solid tumors has prevented confirmation of these predictions. Here, the researchers develop a computational system for quantifying microenvironmental heterogeneity in breast cancer based on tumor morphology (shape and form) in histological sections (tissue samples taken from tumors that are examined microscopically). They then use this system to analyze the associations between clinical outcomes, molecular changes, and microenvironmental heterogeneity in breast cancer.
What Did the Researchers Do and Find?
The researchers used automated image analysis and statistical analysis to develop the ecosystem diversity index (EDI), a numerical measure of microenvironmental heterogeneity in solid tumors. They compared the EDI with prognosis (likely outcome), key mutations, genome-wide copy number (tumor cells often contain abnormal numbers of copies of specific genes), and expression profiling data (the expression of several key proteins is altered in tumors) in a test set of 510 samples from patients with breast cancer and in a validation set of 516 additional samples. Among high-grade breast cancers (grade 3 cancers; the grade of a cancer indicates what the cells look like; high-grade breast cancers have a poor prognosis), but not among low-grade breast cancers (grades 1 and 2), a high EDI (high microenvironmental heterogeneity) was associated with a poor prognosis. Specifically, patients with grade 3 tumors and a high EDI had a ten-year disease-specific survival rate of 51%, whereas the remaining patients with grade 3 tumors had a ten-year survival rate of 70%. Notably, the combination of a high EDI with specific DNA alterations—mutations in a gene called TP53 and loss of genes on Chromosomes 4p14 and 5q13—improved the accuracy of prognosis among patients with grade 3 breast cancer and stratified them into subgroups with disease-specific five-year survival rates of 35%, 9%, and 32%, respectively.
What Do These Findings Mean?
These findings establish a method for measuring the spatial heterogeneity of the microenvironment of solid tumors and suggest that the measurement of tumor microenvironmental heterogeneity can be coupled with information about genomic alterations to provide an accurate way to predict outcomes among patients with high-grade breast cancer. The association between EDI, specific genomic alterations, and outcomes needs to be confirmed in additional patients. However, these findings suggest that microenvironmental heterogeneity might provide an additional biomarker to help clinicians identify those patients with advanced breast cancer who have a particularly bad prognosis. The ability to identify these patients is important because it will help clinicians target aggressive treatments to individuals with a poor prognosis and avoid the overtreatment of patients whose prognosis is more favorable. Finally, and more generally, these findings describe a new way to investigate the interactions between the tumor microenvironment and genomic alterations in cancer cells.
Breast Cancer Now is a not-for-profit organization that provides up-to-date information about breast cancer (in English and Spanish)
The UK National Health Service Choices website has information and personal stories about breast cancer; the not-for-profit organization Healthtalkonline also provides personal stories about dealing with breast cancer
Wikipedia has a page about the tumor microenvironment (note that Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit; available in several languages)
Citation: Natrajan R, Sailem H, Mardakheh FK, Arias Garcia M, Tape CJ, Dowsett M, et al. (2016) Microenvironmental Heterogeneity Parallels Breast Cancer Progression: A Histology–Genomic Integration Analysis.
PLoS Med 13(2): e1001961. http://dx.doi.org:/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001961
Fig 1. In silico tumor dissection pipeline for quantifying spatial diversity in the tumor ecosystem. (A) Flow diagram depicting the overall study design. (B) Schematic of our pipeline for quantifying spatial diversity in pathological samples. H&E sections are morphologically classified and divided into regions to be spatially scored. The number of clusters k in the regional scores is indicative of the number of sub-populations of cell types in the tumor regions. (C) Examples of tumor regions with low and high diversity scores using the Shannon diversity index, accounting for cancer cells (outlined in green), lymphocytes (blue), and stromal cells (red). Cell classification is automated by image analysis. (D) The 3-D landscape of cell diversity scores on an example H&E section; the x- and y-axes are the geometric axes of the image, and the z-axis is cell diversity computed on a region-by-region basis. (E) The distribution of regional scores in a tumor from the METABRIC study with two regional clusters identified using Gaussian mixture clustering (grey shading: histogram; dashed black line: density; solid black lines: mixture components/clusters).
Fig 2. Application of EDI to 1,026 breast tumors from the METABRIC study. (A) The frequencies of EDI scores in breast tumors. (B) H&E staining, distribution of classified cells (green: cancer; blue: lymphocyte; red: stromal cells), and the heatmap of regional diversity scores for a tumor with the highest EDI score (EDI = 5). (C) Representative regions from each of the clusters k1–k5 are shown in a tumor with EDI = 5, with cluster k1 having the lowest diversity score and k5 the highest. By mapping regional clusters to the H&E image, we can begin to interpret these clusters with different cell diversity. We observed predominantly cancer cells in k1, increasingly more stromal cells and ductal in situ carcinoma cells (DCIS) in k2, and a vessel in k3. Cluster k4 features extensive stromal lymphocytes between ductal in situ carcinoma components, while k5 shows tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) associated with invasive carcinoma cells.
Fig 3. Reproducibility, stability, and independence of the EDI-high group in 507 grade 3 breast tumors.
Fig 3. Reproducibility, stability, and independence of the EDI-high group in 507 grade 3 breast tumors. (A) Kaplan–Meier curves of disease-specific survival to illustrate the prognosis of EDI-high samples compared to other grade 3 samples in two independent patient cohorts. Shown below the graph are the number of patients (the number of disease-specific events) per group for EDI-low (grey) and EDI-high (red). (B) Agreement of the EDI subtyping between 100% data and resampling with progressively fewer tumor regions in 200 repeats. (C) Distribution of known subtypes in grade 3 tumors stratified by EDI; asterisks mark subtypes enriched in the EDI-high group. (D) Kaplan–Meier curves illustrating the duration of disease-specific survival according to tumor size (left) and improvement of stratification with the addition of EDI information (right).
Accumulating evidence suggests that the interactions of cancer cells and stromal cells within their microenvironment govern disease progression, metastasis, and, ultimately, the evolution of therapeutic resistance [1–3]. Recent reports have highlighted the significance of the contribution of stromal gene expression and morphological structure as powerful prognostic determinants for a number of tumor types, emphasizing the importance of the tumor microenvironment in disease-related outcomes [4–7]. In breast cancer, a number of studies have demonstrated the prognostic correlation of individual cell types, including the immune cell infiltrate that predicts response to therapy [8–10], and the high percentage of tumor stroma that predicts poor prognosis in triple-negative disease but good prognosis in estrogen receptor (ER)–positive disease [11,12]. Nevertheless, different types of cells coexist with varying degrees of heterogeneity within a tumor. This fundamental feature of human tumors and the combinatorial effects of cell types have been largely ignored, and the collective implications for clinical outcome remain elusive. Consistent observations from mathematical models have highlighted that tumors with diverse microenvironments show growth patterns dramatically different from those of tumors with homogeneous environments [13] and are more likely to be associated with aggressive cancer phenotypes [2] that select for cell migration and eventual metastasis by allowing cancer cells to evolve more rapidly [14]. These observations highlight the need to understand the collective physiological characteristics and heterogeneity of tumor microenvironments. However, there is a lack of methods to quantify the high spatial variability and diverse cellular composition across different solid tumors. Moreover, the interplay of genomic alterations in cancer cells and microenvironmental heterogeneity and its subsequent role in treatment response have not been explored. Our aims were (i) to develop a computational system for quantifying microenvironmental heterogeneity based on tumor morphology in routine histological sections, (ii) to define the clinical implications of microenvironmental heterogeneity, and (iii) to integrate this histologybased index with RNA gene expression and DNA copy number profiling data to identify molecular changes associated with microenvironmental heterogeneity.
The Ecosystem Diversity Index To characterize the tumor ecosystem based on cell compositions, we developed a new index to be used in conjunction with our image analysis tool [16]. First, we used our automated morphological classification method [16] to identify and classify cells into cancer, lymphocyte, or stromal cell classes in H&E sections (Fig 1B). We next divided sections into smaller spatial regions and quantified the diversity of the tumor ecosystem in a tumor region j using the Shannon diversity index: dj ¼ Sm i pi logpi ; ð1Þ where m is the number of cell types and pi is the proportion of the ith cell type (Fig 1B and 1C). A high value of the Shannon diversity index dj reports a heterogeneous environment populated by many cell types, whilst a low value indicates a homogeneous environment (Fig 1C). Compared to other methods such as the Simpson index, the Shannon diversity index accounts for rare species and, hence, is less dominated by main species [17]. Subsequently, we derived the ecosystem diversity index (EDI) by applying unsupervised clustering that identifies the optimum number of clusters in the dataset in an unbiased manner, in order to group tumor regions and quantify the degree of spatial heterogeneity. Let D = d1,d2,…,dn be the Shannon index for n regions in a tumor. We used Gaussian mixture models to fit data D: D SK k¼1okNðmk; s2 kÞ: ð2Þ where μk, ,s2 k, and ωk are the mean, variance, and weight of a Gaussian distribution k, and K is the number of clusters. The Bayesian information criterion was then used to select the best number of clusters K [18]. We used K = 1–5 as the range of K to avoid small EDI groups (S1 Text). The final value of K thus is a measurement of heterogeneity and the score of EDI for a tumor.
Fig 5. The relationship between ecological heterogeneity and cancer genomic aberrations in 507 grade 3 tumors. (A) Genome-wide copy number aberrations in grade 3 breast tumors and genomic coordinates of genes with copy number aberrations enriched in the EDI-high group. Lengths of black lines denote level of enrichment significance with copy number gains (above the horizontal line) or losses (below the horizontal line). (B) Kaplan–Meier curves illustrating the duration of disease-specific survival in grade 3 breast cancer patients according to copy number loss of the 4p14 region (left) and the EDI-high group with additional information of 4p14 copy number loss (right). (C) Kaplan–Meier curves illustrating the duration of disease-specific survival according to copy number loss of the 5q13 region (left) and the EDI-high group with additional information of 5q13 copy number loss (right).
This study has a number of limitations. The motivation for our computational development was to use a data-driven model and measure the degree of spatial heterogeneity in tumor pathological specimens. In this model, only three major cell types in breast tumors were considered. Further sub-classification of the different types of stromal and immune cells by immunohistochemistry may add additional discriminatory value to our model. For dissecting spatial heterogeneity, we chose to use square regions with equal sizes. We found that EDI was correlated with the size of the region chosen for calculation of the Shannon diversity index, and as such the spatial heterogeneity is scale dependent. This phenomenon has been well described in a number of studies in ecology that show that a scale needs to be chosen that is appropriate for the ecological process under study [38,39], further highlighting the analogy between tumor studies and ecology. Similar to the recent observation that breast cancer subclonal heterogeneity is correlated with tumor size [35], we also found an association between microenvironmental heterogeneity and tumor size; hence, EDI may have more limited value in smaller tumors. However, small tumors were present in the EDI-high group, and addition of EDI within tumors grouped by size further stratified their prognosis. We found that EDI was prognostic only in grade 3 tumors in our study, which could be a limitation, given the possible discordance in grading between pathologists.
The identification of additional biomarkers in subgroups of patients that identify them as high risk is important for patient management and to avoid overtreatment for low-risk patients. We envision that the use of our measure of microenvironment heterogeneity, together with key genomic alterations, will enable the diagnosis of patients at very high risk of relapse and facilitate the enrollment of these patients into additional clinical trials for novel therapies or treatment intensification. Our novel computational approach provides a fully automated tool that is relatively easy to implement. Integration of this measure with genomic profiling provides additional prognostic information independent of known clinical parameters. The results of this study highlight the possibility of a grade-3-specific prognostic tool that may aid in further classification of high-grade breast cancer patients beyond standard assays such as ER and HER2 status.
Persistency of Transgene Expression Mediated by Lentiviral Gene Delivery in Pluripotent Cell Lines
Suleiman Alhaji
Ph.D. Student, University Putra, Malaysia
My general objectives are to (1) determine the duration of reporter gene expression from pluripotent cell lines transduced by lentivirus and (2) to assess the epigenetic effects on the provirus. More specifically, I plan to (1) produce LV carrying Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP) reporter gene, (2) obtain and maintain the required cell lines including establishing primary mouse fibroblast as a control, 3) measure the duration of GFP expression from pluripotent and control cell lines transduced with the lentivirus, (4) exclude the loss of the integrated provirus as the factor for GFP silencing in transduced non-pluripotent cell lines, and (5) study the effects of epigenetics on the GFP gene and the regulatory sequence of the provirus.
Transgene integration by lentiviral (LV) vector in the host cell’s genome would theoretically generate a prolonged or permanent transgene expression. However, several citations have reported a decline in transgene expression in early progenitor cells and stem cells transduced by LV. We hypothesized that prolonged transgene expression can be achieved if the transgene is introduced into the cells before epigenetic markers are established in the genome, i.e during the pluripotency period. Therefore, the proposed study seeks to determine if this phenomenon would occur in pluripotent cell lines, focusing on mouse induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells as the target cell, in a gene therapy context.
Two epigenetic analyses that will be performed on the promoter and transgene of the provirus are DNA methylation and chromatin modification. For DNA methylation profiling, the genomic DNA of the cell will be treated with bisulfite prior to PCR and sequencing of the proviral DNA. The cells may also be analyzed for 5-hmC using 5-hmC monoclonal antibody (C15200200-200) or hMeDIP Kit (C02010031) to assess the level of hydroxymethylation. We may also consider using Diagenode’s MethylCap kit (C02020010) to fractionate the methylated DNA by CpG density.
For the chromatin modification analysis, the cells will be treated with trichostatin A (TSA) before chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) analysis by chromatin IP – bisulfite – sequencing (ChIP-Bis-Seq) and as well Combining chromatin IP and DNA methylation profiles in one assay using the Premium Bisulfite kit, Diagenode. We may also perform pull-down methylated DNA analysis by using specific antibodies such as (1) H3K4 monoclonal antibody (C1541065) (2) H3K4 polyclonal antibody (C15410037) (3) H3K9 polyclonal antibody (C15410004). Beads only will be used as a control.
Epigenome-wide methylation pattern discovery for irradiated skin in radiotherapy
Maxwell Johnson, Ph.D.
Research Fellow, University of Southern California, Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Radiotherapy is utilized in neoadjuvant, definitive, and palliative treatment of a wide variety of cancers. From a reconstructive perspective, however, irradiated fields pose significant challenges as the tissue is often stiff, brittle, and heals poorly. Little is known about the mechanism by which irradiation produces these changes. The objective of our research is to reveal the epigenetic changes that occur in irradiated skin in order to identify potential targets for therapy. We aim to translate our findings into interventional studies in both cell culture and a mouse model to assess their efficacy in vitro and in vivo.
We have access to a bank of paired samples of irradiated and non-irradiated tissues from patients who have undergone reconstructive procedures after cancer treatment. We have used the Illumina Infinium Human Methylation450 BeadChip array to assess epigenome-wide methylation status of eight paired samples, and have identified a signature methylation pattern for irradiated skin. We would like to utilize the Diagenode Premium WGBS Kit for bisulfite sequencing of additional paired samples for two purposes. First, we would like to confirm the findings of our BeadChip array utilizing a more robust method of assessing epigenome-wide methylation status. Second, we would like to assess methylation status at loci that are not evaluated by the BeadChip array. Using this information, we plan to identify loci with the greatest change in methylation status between irradiated and non-irradiated samples. By comparing these loci to literature, we intend to identify genes that are known to have an effect on wound healing. We then plan to design interventional studies to assess the effects of modulating the expression of these genes and/or supplementing gene products in cell culture and a mouse model. We would like to utilize the Diagenode Bisulfite Kit to confirm methylation status at target genes in these additional studies.
Next-generation sequencing based methylome study of primary breast tumours
Rajbir Batra, Ph.D. Researcher
Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge
Breast cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer death in women, and is unanimously considered a heterogeneous disease displaying distinct therapeutic responses and outcomes. While recent advances have led to the refinement of the molecular classification of the disease, the epigenetic landscape has received less attention.
We are delighted to win the DNA methylation research grant award and intend to use it to conduct a next-generation sequencing based methylome study of primary breast tumours. DNA methylation markers will also be investigated in Patient Derived Tumour Xenografts (PDTXs) and in circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) to identify potential prognostic and predictive methylation biomarkers in breast cancer.
Changes in the pattern of gene expression play an important role in allowing cancer cells to acquire their hallmark characteristics, while genomic instability enables cells to acquire genetic alterations that promote oncogenesis. Chromatin plays central roles in both transcriptional regulation and the maintenance of genomic stability. Studies by cancer genome consortiums have identified frequent mutations in genes encoding chromatin regulatory factors and histone proteins in human cancer, implicating them as major mediators in the pathogenesis of both hematological malignancies and solid tumors. Here, we review recent advances in our understanding of the role of chromatin in cancer, focusing on transcriptional regulatory complexes, enhancer-associated factors, histone point mutations, and alterations in heterochromatin-interacting factors.
Keywords: cancer, chromatin, histone proteins
Fifteen years ago, in their paper “The Hallmarks of Cancer,” Hanahan and Weinberg (2000) laid out a conceptual framework for the properties of cancer cells. Cancer development is a complex process involving diverse tissue types of distinct developmental origins, cell–cell interactions, and a myriad of signaling pathways. Digesting decades worth of research, Hanahan and Weinberg (2000) extracted fundamental properties common to many cancer types. Some aspects of their six hallmarks of cancer (resisting apoptosis, self-sufficiency in growth signals, insensitivity to anti-growth signals, invasive metastasis, unlimited cellular proliferation, and sustained angiogenesis) can be viewed in the light of deregulated gene expression at the level of transcription. Indeed, many signal transduction pathways perturbed in cancer ultimately modulate the activity of transcriptional regulators (Hanahan and Weinberg 2000, 2011). Moreover, genomic instability is recognized as an enabling characteristic of cancer (Hanahan and Weinberg 2011). Thus, transcriptional control and structural maintenance of the genome at the level of chromatin are likely suspects in the hunt for culprits underlying cancer development.
The eukaryotic genome is packaged into a structure called chromatin that, at its most basic level, comprises the four core histones H2A, H2B, H3, and H4 wrapped inside ∼147 base pairs (bp) of DNA to form the nucleosome core particle (Kornberg 1974; Kornberg and Thomas 1974; Luger et al. 1997). Additionally, histone H1 functions as an internucleosome linker and is involved in the compaction of chromatin (Laybourn and Kadonaga 1991). The N-terminal tails of the core histones protrude out from the nucleosome and are subject to a diverse array of post-translational modifications that alter chromatin structure and dynamics (Campos and Reinberg 2009). Large families of proteins containing domains such as bromodomain, chromodomain, plant homeodomain (PHD) finger, Tudor domains, PWWP domains, and YEATS domains bind these modifications to effect diverse downstream chromatin-based processes (Taverna et al. 2007). Considering the importance of chromatin in regulating eukaryotic gene expression and maintaining genome stability, it is perhaps not wholly unexpected that recent genome-wide sequencing studies have uncovered cancer-associated mutations in genes encoding chromatin regulatory factors and enzymes (Fig. 1).
Chromatin proteins mutated in cancer. A summary of cancer mutations that affect post-translational modifications of the histone H3 N-terminal tail. Protein classes are indicated by the fill color for the ovals ([red] methyltransferase; [green] demethylase; [orange] deacetylase; [blue] histone), whereas mutational status is indicated by the outline color ([gray] loss of function; [purple] overexpressed/hyperactive). Dashed lines indicate the residue of histone H3 that is expected to be modified due to the indicated cancer mutations.
The emerging picture of chromatin function in cancer is multifaceted and involves a complex interplay of chromatin-modifying enzymes. A recent review from Van Rechem and Whetstine (2014) highlights the diverse mutations in genes involved in histone lysine methylation pathways associated with human cancer. In some instances, alterations in chromatin itself, such as histone H3.3 Lys27-to-methionine mutations in pediatric glioma, are highly context-specific to a single cancer type (Schwartzentruber et al. 2012; Wu et al. 2012). In other cases, mutations of related pathway component genes such as MLL3, MLL4, and UTX within the COMPASS (complex of proteins associated with Set1) family occur in a range of cancers, suggesting a broader tumor suppressor role (Gui et al. 2011; Morin et al. 2011; Parsons et al. 2011; Pasqualucci et al. 2011; Jones et al. 2012; Lohr et al. 2012; Pugh et al. 2012; Herz et al. 2014a). As more cancer genomes are sequenced, perhaps one of the most stirring observations is co-occurrence as well as mutual exclusivity of mutations between related cancer types. These mutational signatures promise insight into not only cancer development but also the molecular signaling pathways underlying normal development. Paradoxically, whereas basic developmental biology research has supplied us with a rich understanding of the signal transduction pathways involved in cancer, the recent intense focus on cancer genomics may provide a better understanding of the interplay between cell signaling and chromatin during normal tissue development.
Mutations of Trithorax (Trx)/COMPASS and Polycomb-repressive complex 2 (PRC2) in cancer
The Trx and PCRC2 complexes were identified as factors controlling the developmentally regulated expression of the homeotic gene (Hox) clusters in Drosophila melanogaster (Ingham 1983; Jones and Gelbart 1990). Trx is essential for maintaining Hox gene activation, whereas PRC2 acts as a transcriptional repressor to prevent ectopic Hox expression. Genetically, these two complexes act in opposition to each other, suggesting that they converge on a common pathway (Ingham 1983; Hanson et al. 1999). Although the importance of Trx and PRC2 in developmental gene regulation has been established for some time (Ingham 1983; Jones and Gelbart 1990), the biochemical activity of these proteins remained elusive until ∼12 years ago. The first clues to the function of these complexes stemmed from the presence of a SET histone methyltransferase domain protein in both the Trx and PRC2 complexes. Studies in yeast revealed that Trx is a member of the COMPASS family of protein complexes that catalyzes methylation of histone H3 Lys4 (H3K4) (Miller et al. 2001; Krogan et al. 2002; Shilatifard 2012). Biochemical experiments and Drosophila genetics demonstrated that the Enhancer of Zeste [E(Z)] subunit of PRC2 is a histone methyltransferase specific for H3K27 (Cao et al. 2002; Czermin et al. 2002; Kuzmichev et al. 2002; Muller et al. 2002). Consistent with Trx’s and PRC2’s respective roles as activators and repressors of transcription, histone H3K4 trimethylation (H3K4me3) is associated with active promoters, whereas histone H3K27me3 is associated with transcriptional silencing (Margueron and Reinberg 2011; Shilatifard 2012).
The first link between Trx function and cancer was made when it was observed that childhood mixed-lineage leukemias (MLLs) contain a translocation occurring at chromosome 11q23 involving the MLL1 gene, one of the two mammalian Trx homologs (Ziemin-van der Poel et al. 1991; Rowley 1993; Mohan et al. 2010, 2011). These translocations remove the C-terminal portion of MLL1, containing its catalytic SET histone methyltransferase domain, and create an in-frame fusion to generate gain-of-function chimeric proteins (Mohan et al. 2010, 2011). Recent work has elucidated the molecular mechanism underlying the oncogenic activity of these MLL1 fusions. A number of the most common MLL1 gene translocation partners, including AF4, AF9, ENL, and ELL, are components of the macromolecular complex called the super elongation complex (SEC) (Lin et al. 2010; Luo et al. 2012). SEC associates with positive transcriptional elongation factor B (PTEF-b), a cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) that promotes RNA polymerase II elongation by phosphorylating its C-terminal domain and other basal factors within the preinitiation complexes (Smith et al. 2011). Thus, MLL1-SEC fusion proteins cause aberrant activation of MLL1 targets through misregulation of transcription elongation. MLL1 is required for normal hematopoietic stem cell function (Hess et al. 1997; Ernst et al. 2004), and MLL1 fusions likely result in altered stem cell properties that promote tumor formation.
Whereas MLL1 gene mutations involve a characteristic chromosomal translocation in a specific tumor type, PRC2 appears to a have a more complex role in cancer. Frequent point mutations of the EZH2 gene are observed in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (follicular and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma) (Morin et al. 2010). These affect the EZH2 catalytic site and convert Tyr641 (Y641) to a variety of other amino acids, with asparagine being the most common substitution. In vitro, these mutants are unable to methylate an unmodified histone peptide (Morin et al. 2010). However, subsequent studies revealed that these mutations are not inactive but rather possess an altered activity. Remarkably, EZH2 Y641 mutants show increased activity toward the di- and trimethylated states (Sneeringer et al. 2010). Thus, tumor cells with Y641 mutations in the EZH2 gene contain increased H3K27me3. This finding is intriguing because H3K27 monomethylation (H3K27me1), H3K27 dimethylation (H3K27me2), and H3K27me3 were recently shown to have distinct enrichment patterns across the genome, with H3K27me2 being implicated in the suppression of enhancer function (Ferrari et al. 2014). In addition to Y641, the A677G EZH2 mutant exhibits a similar increase in H3K27me3 accompanied by a decrease in H3K27me2 (McCabe et al. 2012a). In contrast, a recently characterized A687V mutant displayed both increased H3K27me3 and H3K27me2 (Ott et al. 2014). Remarkably, a Drosophila mutation of E(Z) that mimics the Trx loss-of-function phenotype has also been shown to possess hyperactive methyltransferase activity (Bajusz et al. 2001; Stepanik and Harte 2012). The E(Z) Trx mimic mutation [E(z)(Trm)] converts Arg741 (Arg727 in human EZH2) to lysine (R741K), suggesting that this position may also be important for regulating PRC2 catalytic activity (Bajusz et al. 2001; Stepanik and Harte 2012). The activating nature of these mutations makes PRC2 an attractive target for therapeutic intervention. Recently, a small molecule inhibitor of EZH2, GSK126, was shown to specifically inhibit the growth of B-cell lymphomas containing activating EZH2 mutations, whereas tumor lines with wild-type EZH2 were largely unaffected (McCabe et al. 2012b).
While EZH2 activating mutations are common in non-Hodgkin lymphoma, loss of PRC2 activity is associated with cancer development in other contexts. Inactivating mutations of the PRC2 components EZH2, SUZ12, and EED are detected in T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) (Fig. 2; Ntziachristos et al. 2012; Simon et al. 2012; Zhang et al. 2012). Removal of the H3K27 methyl mark is catalyzed by the Jumonji domain containing demethylases UTX/KDM6A and JMJD3/KDM6B (Kooistra and Helin 2012). A recent study explored whether disruption of UTX and JMJD3 activity might provide a therapeutic benefit for T-ALL by increasing H3K27me3 levels (Ntziachristos et al. 2014). Surprisingly, UTX and JMJD3 have strikingly distinct roles in T-ALL. UTX acts as a tumor suppressor, as mice with a NOTCH1-driven model of T-ALL succumb to disease more rapidly on a UTX mutant genetic background (Ntziachristos et al. 2014). In contrast, JMJD3 is highly expressed in T-ALL versus normal T cells and is required for leukemogenesis, as mice with JMJD3 mutant T-ALL show improved survival rates. GSK-J4, an inhibitor of KDM6-type demethylases (Kruidenier et al. 2012), causes cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in T-ALL cells but not myeloid leukemia or normal hematopoietic progenitors (Ntziachristos et al. 2014). Remarkably, GSK-J4 treatment results in gene expression changes that resemble knockdown of JMJD3 but are inversely correlated with the changes observed for UTX knockdown. Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) combined with sequencing (ChIP-seq) revealed a significant overlap between JMJD3 and NOTCH1 targets, including genes with known oncogenic function such as HEY1, NRARP, and HES1. Strikingly, these genes gain H3K27me3 and are repressed upon JMJD3 depletion or GSK-J4 treatment. It is unclear why GSK-J4 appears to inhibit JMJD3 but not UTX functional activity in T-ALL, but perhaps the molecule has a higher affinity for JMJD3 in vivo. Recent studies have also suggested that GSK-J4 may also target KDM5-type demethylases but with an affinity five to 10 times lower than JMJD3 and UTX (Heinemann et al. 2014). Despite these caveats, GSK-J4 appears to be a promising drug for modulating chromatin modifications and perhaps a chemotherapeutic agent.
Drugging the histone H3K27 methyl/acetyl switch in cancer. (A) Antagonism between H3K27 methylation and acetylation machinery. H3K27 methylation and acetylation are mutually exclusive, and the PRC2 and CBP/p300 complexes act in opposition to one another. In addition, deacetylation of H3K27ac by the HDAC1/2–NURD complex promotes PRC2-mediated repression, whereas demethylation of H3K27me3 by UTX within COMPASS or JMJD3 is required for acetylation to occur. (B) In NOTCH-driven T-ALL, the histone H3K27 demethylases UTX and JMJD3 have distinct functions. UTX acts as a tumor suppressor by activating genes such as FBXW7 that negatively regulate the NOTCH pathway. In contrast, JMJD3 exists in a complex with NOTCH and is responsible for activation of oncogenic NOTCH targets. Inhibition of JMJD3 with the small molecule GSK-J4 promotes PRC2-mediated H3K27me3 at NOTCH target genes, resulting in their silencing. (C) MPNSTs often carry mutations in the genes encoding the components of both the RAS pathway inhibitor NF1 and the PRC2 component SUZ12. In this cell type, PRC2 functions to suppress RAS target genes. Reduced H3K27 methylation by PRC2 results in increased H3K27ac, increased recruitment of BRD4, and amplification of the RAS transcriptional signature. Inhibition of BRD4 with JQ1 in combination with dampening of the RAS pathway with the MEK inhibitor PD-0325901 suppresses RAS targets, resulting in tumor regression.
Loss of PRC2 components EED and SUZ12 is often detected in combination with mutation of NF1 and CDKN2A genes in malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNSTs) (Fig. 2; Lee et al. 2014; Zhang et al. 2014). In addition to loss of H3K27me3, PRC2 mutant MPNSTs also display increased H3K27 acetylation (H3K27ac) levels, an effect observed for loss of PRC2 in multiple contexts (Tie et al. 2009; Pasini et al. 2010; Herz et al. 2014b). Histone H3K27 methylation and acetylation are mutually exclusive modifications that correlate with gene silencing and activation, respectively. Strong evidence suggests that complexes responsible for implementing these modifications act in opposition to one another (Tie et al. 2009; Pasini et al. 2010; Reynolds et al. 2012; Herz et al. 2014b). A recent study examined whether these increased acetylation levels in MPNSTs could serve as a therapeutic target. Bromodomain-containing protein 4 (BRD4) is a member of the bromodomain and extraterminal (BET) family of chromatin-associated proteins that bind to acetylated histone H3 and H4 via tandem bromodomains (Belkina and Denis 2012; Shi and Vakoc 2014). The small molecule JQ1 binds to the BRD4 bromodomains and evicts the protein from chromatin (Filippakopoulos et al. 2010). JQ1 has shown promise as a potential chemotherapeutic agent in a number of cancers in part due to regulation of the c-Myc oncogene by BRD4 (Filippakopoulos et al. 2010; Delmore et al. 2011; Chapuy et al. 2013; Knoechel et al. 2014). BRD4 localizes to enhancers containing H3K27ac, and the effects of JQ1 may involve disruption of enhancer activity (Chapuy et al. 2013; Loven et al. 2013). As PRC2 mutant MPNSTs display increased H3K27ac levels, BRD4 is an attractive target in this context. Indeed, loss of SUZ12 and NF1 (a negative regulator of the oncogenic RAS pathway) in MPNSTs renders them sensitive to treatment with JQ1 in combination with inhibition of the RAS pathway by the MEK inhibitor PD-0325901 (De Raedt et al. 2014). Interestingly, the RAS pathway and PRC2 appear to synergize in MPNSTs, as SUZ12 loss promotes cell proliferation in NF1 mutant cells but not wild-type cells, and, moreover, SUZ12 loss enhances the RAS transcriptional signature (De Raedt et al. 2014). MEK inhibition has been shown to inhibit PRC2 activity in embryonic stem cells, suggesting a potential negative feedback loop (Marks et al. 2012; Tee et al. 2014). It will be important to determine the molecular details of the connection between RAS/MEK signaling and PRC2 activity and examine whether this link is conserved in multiple types of cancer.
PRC2 gene mutations in cancer highlight both the biochemical complexity of chromatin-modifying pathways and the rich potential for therapeutic intervention. In PRC2 loss-of-function cancer models, inhibition of BRD4, which binds to increased acetylated histones in PRC2 mutant cells, as well as inhibition of H3K27me3 demethylases show therapeutic effects. In contrast, drugs inhibiting EZH2 activity are more appropriate for non-Hodgkin lymphomas carrying hyperactive EZH2 mutations. Thus, the search for therapeutic targets should take into consideration cross-regulation between histone modification pathways (i.e., methylation and acetylation) as well as effectors of those pathways, such as bromodomain and chromodomain proteins that bind to modified histones. These studies also highlight the importance of determining the precise mutational status of individuals to determine what pathways should be targeted for treatment.
Enhancers are noncoding DNA elements that play an essential role in transcriptional regulation by conferring tissue-specific gene expression patterns (Smith and Shilatifard 2014). Although enhancers have been intensely studied for several decades, their precise mode of action is not fully understood. Enhancers can act across very long ranges of intervening DNA to activate a specific promoter (Blackwood and Kadonaga 1998; Bulger and Groudine 2011). Enhancer–promoter communication involves the formation of chromatin loops mediated by cohesin complexes and other trans-acting factors (Cuylen and Haering 2010). However, the mechanisms that restrict enhancer activity to a single promoter in the presence of multiple promoter choices are unclear.
Enhancers carry a unique chromatin structure characterized by the presence of 3K4me1 (Heintzman et al. 2009). In addition, histone H3K27ac distinguishes active enhancers from poised enhancers (Creyghton et al. 2010). Promoters typically contain H3K4me3 implemented by the Set1A/B and MLL1/2 COMPASS-like complexes, whereas MLL3/4 COMPASS catalyzes H3K4me1 at enhancers (Herz et al. 2012; Smith and Shilatifard 2014). Acetylation of H3K27 is mediated by the acetyltransferases CREBBP (CBP) and EP300 (p300) (Pasini et al. 2010). Besides H3K4me1 methylase activity, MLL3/4 complexes also contain the H3K27 demethylase KDM6A (UTX), raising the possibility that removal of H3K27 methyl marks by the MLL3/4 complex facilitates acetylation by CBP and p300 (Cho et al. 2007; Issaeva et al. 2007; Herz et al. 2012; Hu et al. 2013).
Recent genome-wide studies have identified mutations in genes for the regulators of enhancer chromatin in cancer (Herz et al. 2014a). Mutations of the H3K4 monomethylases MLL3 and MLL4 as well as their cofactor, UTX, within the COMPASS family have been identified in a range of malignancies, including the pediatric brain cancer medulloblastoma (Parsons et al. 2011; Jones et al. 2012; Pugh et al. 2012), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (Morin et al. 2011; Pasqualucci et al. 2011; Lohr et al. 2012), and bladder cancer (Gui et al. 2011). MLL4 is particularly frequently mutated in non-Hodgkin lymphomas and often co-occurs with mutations in the histone acetyltransferase gene CREBBP and activating mutations of EZH2 (Morin et al. 2011; Okosun et al. 2014). Mutations of EP300 and CREBBP have been found to co-occur with UTX in bladder cancer (Gui et al. 2011). MEF2B, a transcription factor involved in recruiting CREBBP and EP300 to target sites in chromatin, is frequently mutated in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (Morin et al. 2011). Intriguingly, the majority of these mutations result in single amino acid changes at one of four positions (K4, Y69, N81, and D83) (Morin et al. 2011), and a subset of these mutations results in increased MEF2B transcriptional activation activity by loss of binding to the corepressor CABIN1 (Ying et al. 2013) Another enhancer-associated factor, LIM domain-binding protein 1 (LDB1), is mutated in medulloblastoma (Pugh et al. 2012). LDB1 is involved in the formation of chromatin loops in both Drosophila and mammalian cells and participates in enhancer–promoter communication (Morcillo et al. 1997; Deng et al. 2012; Krivega et al. 2014).
A large body of evidence implicates enhancer malfunction in cancer, and much remains to be learned about the molecular mechanisms of this process (Herz et al. 2014a). For instance, how does mutation in genes for factors such as EP300 and CREBBP that are thought to function globally at most enhancers play a role in cancer development? Inappropriate enhancer–promoter communication is known to play a role in the pathogenesis of some cancers. For instance, the classical chromosomal translocation found in Burkitt’s lymphoma places the c-Myc gene under the regulation of the immunoglobulin heavy chain enhancer, thus boosting its expression in B cells, resulting in lymphomagenesis. Recent studies of acute myeloid leukemia with a chromosomal translocation near the GATA2 and EVI1 genes revealed that this inversion allows a GATA2 enhancer to inappropriately activate EVI1 expression (Groschel et al. 2014; Yamazaki et al. 2014). This raises the possibility that mutation in genes for enhancer-associated factors may lead to defective enhancer–promoter restriction, perhaps allowing for promiscuous activation of oncogenic gene products (Herz et al. 2014a).
Mutations and translocations in genes encoding chromatin regulatory proteins such as the MLL family within COMPASS have been linked with oncogenesis for many years (Shilatifard 2012); however, cancer-associated mutations of histone genes themselves were only recently identified. Genome sequencing studies of aggressive pediatric brainstem glioma uncovered point mutations in histone H3 (Schwartzentruber et al. 2012; Wu et al. 2012). These mutations convert Lys27 to methionine (H3K27M) or Gly34 to arginine or valine (H3G34R/V), occurring primarily in the replication-independent histone H3.3 (H3F3A) and, to lesser extent, the replication-dependent histone H3.1 (HIST1H3B) (Schwartzentruber et al. 2012; Wu et al. 2012). Strikingly, these mutations occur in only a single copy of the multiple histone H3 genes, suggesting that they have gain-of-function activity. Mutations of H3K27M and H3G34R/V define distinct subtypes of glioma, as they occur in distinct regions of the brain and display unique molecular characteristics (Sturm et al. 2012).
Histological examination of tumors harboring the H3K27M mutation revealed a dramatic reduction in the levels of H3K27me3 (Venneti et al. 2013). Further molecular studies revealed that H3K27M as well as other histone lysine-to-methionine mutants act as dominant inhibitors of histone lysine methylation pathways in tissue culture (Chan et al. 2013; Lewis et al. 2013). Histone H3K27M expression in Drosophila recapitulates the phenotype observed for depletion of the PRC2 component E(Z) and mirrors the phenotype of replacing all histone H3s with a H3K27R mutant (Pengelly et al. 2013; Herz et al. 2014b). In contrast, the H3K34R/V mutations do not dominantly inhibit bulk H3K27me3 or H3K36me3 in trans but do block methylation of H3K36 in cis (Lewis et al. 2013).
The precise mechanism of H3K27M action is still unclear. In vitro methyltransferase assays and immunoprecipitation followed by Western blotting suggest that H3K27M interacts strongly with EZH2 (Chan et al. 2013; Lewis et al. 2013). However, using an unbiased proteomic approach, we failed to detect increased enrichment of PRC2 subunits relative to wild-type H3.3 control (Herz et al. 2014b). In contrast, we found increased association of the bromodomain protein BRD4, which is consistent with increased histone acetylation levels observed in H3K27M mutant cells (Herz et al. 2014b). It is also intriguing that mutations in genes encoding for the PRC2 components do not appear to be prevalent in these pediatric gliomas.
Recent studies of chondroblastoma and giant cell tumors of bone revealed additional histone H3.3 gene mutations associated with distinct disease phenotypes (Behjati et al. 2013). Remarkably, 95% of chondroblastoma samples analyzed carried a mutation of the H3.3 gene at Lys36 to methionine (H3.3K36M) in the H3F3B gene, whereas 92% of giant cell tumors of bone harbored mutations of H3.3 Gly34 to tryptophan or leucine (Behjati et al. 2013). Similar to H3.3K27M, H3.3K36M can dominantly inhibit methylation of H3K36 (Lewis et al. 2013).
Histone gene mutations in cancer are not restricted to histone H3. Recent work in follicular lymphoma identified mutations in a number of histone H1 genes (Lohr et al. 2012; Morin et al. 2013; Li et al. 2014; Okosun et al. 2014). Whereas histone H2A, H2B, H3, and H4 constitute the nucleosome core, histone H1 acts as a linker histone and is involved in chromatin compaction. Like H3 gene mutations, H1 gene mutations are primarily single amino acid substitutions; however, instead of occurring at a few specific positions, the H1 gene mutations are scattered throughout the H1 globular domain (Lohr et al. 2012; Morin et al. 2013; Li et al. 2014; Okosun et al. 2014). Molecular analysis of one of these mutants, H1S102F, revealed that it has a reduced capacity to associate with chromatin (Morin et al. 2013) and binding to DNA methyltransferase 3B (DNMT3B) (Li et al. 2014). This suggests that histone H1 may lead to defective chromatin compaction and cause transcriptional misregulation or result in genomic instability. It will be important to examine the molecular function of histone H1 gene mutations in B-cell lymphoma in more detail.
Analysis of mutations that co-occur or are mutually exclusive to histone H3 gene mutations have been insightful. For instance, in pediatric glioblastoma, mutations of histone H3K27M, H3G34R/V, and isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) are mutually exclusive and occur in tumors with different molecular signatures, neuroanatomic locations, and prognostic outcome (Sturm et al. 2012). H3K27M mutants lose H3K27 methylation, whereas H3G34V/R mutants display DNA CpG hypomethylation, and IDH1 mutants have a CpG hypermethylation phenotype (Sturm et al. 2012; Turcan et al. 2012). Mutations of the IDH1 gene are particularly prevalent in glioma but are also detected in leukemias (Parsons et al. 2008; Mardis et al. 2009). IDH1 alterations occur in the substrate-binding site at position Arg132, and most mutations convert this residue to histidine (IDH1 R132H), although other substitutions have also been detected (Parsons et al. 2008; Mardis et al. 2009). Under normal circumstances, IDH1 converts isocitrate to α-ketoglutarate and nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADP+) to NADPH. However, the mutant IDH1 R132H enzyme generates the 2-hydroxyglutarate in place of α-ketoglutarate (Dang et al. 2009). This metabolite inhibits α-ketoglutarate-dependent enzymes (including Jumonji-containing histone demethylases) as well as TET family methylcytosine dioxygenases thought to be involved in the process of DNA demethylation by converting 5-methylcytosine to 5-hydroxy-methylcytosine (Figueroa et al. 2010; Chowdhury et al. 2011; Xu et al. 2011; Lu et al. 2012). Thus, cells with the mutant IDH1 gene display CpG hypermethylation as well as increased histone lysine methylation. Interestingly, histone H3G34R/V gene mutations show an opposite effect on CpG methylation (Sturm et al. 2012). It is also notable that H3G34R/V gene mutations tend to co-occur with mutations of the histone H3.3 chaperone genes ATRX and DAXX, suggesting that altered histone incorporation into chromatin may play a role in these cancers (Schwartzentruber et al. 2012).
Recently, mutations in the gene for BMP receptor ACVR1/ALK2 were detected in pediatric glioma with H3K27M mutations (Buczkowicz et al. 2014; Fontebasso et al. 2014; Taylor et al. 2014; Wu et al. 2014). These point mutations convert ACVR1 into a constitutively active form, and several cancer-associated mutations are identical to those found in the rare but devastating bone formation disorder fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP) (Shore et al. 2006). Interestingly, ACVR1 mutations tend to overlap with H3.1K27M mutations. Mutations of H3.3K27M are more prevalent than H3.1K27M in pediatric gliomas (Schwartzentruber et al. 2012; Wu et al. 2012), and these mutational types have distinct properties, as patients with H3.1K27M show an early disease onset with tumors located in the pons, whereas H3.3K27M tumors are located at multiple brain regions along the midline (Buczkowicz et al. 2014; Fontebasso et al. 2014; Taylor et al. 2014; Wu et al. 2014). Determining the biological significance of these mutational signatures will be important to understanding pediatric glioma and may shed light onto other developmental disorders, such as FOP.
Maintenance of genome stability through the heterochromatin pathway. Centromeric heterochromain is essential for normal segregation of chromosomes during mitosis, and defects in this pathway result in aneuploidy. H3K9me3 and binding of HP-1 are hallmarks of heterochromatin. At pericentromeric heterochromatin, SETDB1 monomethylates H3K9, whereas Suv39 converts H3K9me1 to H3K8me2/3. Disruption of Suv39 function results in aneuploidy and lymphoma development in mice. Active deacetylation is also important for centromeric heterochromatin. Treatment of cells with the class I and II histone deacetylase inhibitor TSA results in abnormal mitosis. Similarly, Suv39 and SETDB1 are essential for telomeric heterochromatin. At telomeres, disruption of Suv39 results in loss of H3K9me2/3 and a depletion of HP-1 recruitment. However, Suv39 mutant telomeres contain increased H3K9me1 mediated by SETDB1 and exhibit abnormal telomere lengthening. Overexpression of SETDB1 has been reported in some cancers. Whereas centromeres depend on type I and II HDACs, the sirtuin deacetylase SIRT6 is essential at telomeres. Lack of SIRT6 in mice results in telomere fusions and premature senescence. In other contexts, SIRT6 functions as a tumor suppressor.
Heterochromatin plays an essential role in genomic stability at multiple levels. Mice doubly mutant for the H3K9 methyltransferases Suv39h1 and Suv39h2 lack H3K9 methylation at pericentric heterochromatin, exhibit aneuploidy and male germline meiosis defects, and develop B-cell lymphomas (Peters et al. 2001). Mutations in the gene for the H3K9 methyl-binding protein HP1 also disrupt genomic stability through both aberrant centromere and telomere function. HP1 mutant flies display defective chromosome segregation as well as telomere fusions (Kellum and Alberts 1995; Fanti et al. 1998). Interestingly, cells mutant for Suv39h1 and Suv39h2 exhibit abnormally elongated telomeres (Garcia-Cao et al. 2004). These mutant telomeres have reduced H3K9me2/3 and loss of HP-1 binding but display increased H3K9me1 (Garcia-Cao et al. 2004). This is consistent with the function of SETDB1 as a H3K9 monomethyltransferase, whereas Suv39h1/2 act as H3K9 di- and trimethylases (Loyola et al. 2009). Intriguingly, studies suggest that amplification of SETDB1 may play a role in development of human cancer as well as in a zebrafish model of melanoma (Ceol et al. 2011; Rodriguez-Paredes et al. 2014). It remains to be examined whether these oncogenic effects may be mediated through abnormal telomere lengthening.
Maintenance of histone hypoacetylation is also important for heterochromatin function. Treatment of cells with the class I and II histone deacetylase inhibitor trichostatin A (TSA) results in loss of HP1 binding to pericentric regions and relocalization of these domains to the nuclear periphery (Taddei et al. 2001). TSA also causes abnormal mitotic structures consistent with a defect in centromere function (Taddei et al. 2001). SIRT6, a histone deacetylase specific for histone H3K9, is essential for maintenance of telomeric heterochromatin (Michishita et al. 2008). SIRT6 mutant mice display genomic instability and exhibit a premature aging phenotype (Mostoslavsky et al. 2006). Human cells depleted for SIRT6 display telomere hyperacetylation, chromosome end-to-end fusions, and premature senescence that can be rescued by overexpression of telomerase (Michishita et al. 2008). While Sirt6-null mice exhibit premature aging and early death, they do not develop spontaneous tumors (Mostoslavsky et al. 2006). However, immortalized Sirt6-null mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) are able to form tumors in immunocompromised mice even in the absence of transformation with an activated oncogene (Sebastian et al. 2012). Moreover, SIRT6 is frequently deleted in human cancer, and a conditional mutant mouse model revealed it to act as a tumor suppressor in an intestinal cancer model in vivo (Sebastian et al. 2012).
Recent work has linked heterochromatin function to the regulation of DNA replication. Methylation of histone H3K9 and K36 have been linked to DNA replication in fission yeast (Kim et al. 2008). The mammalian Jumonji domain protein KDM4A/JMJD2A is a histone lysine demethylase specific for methylated H3K9 and K36 (Klose et al. 2006; Whetstine et al. 2006). Studies in Caenorhabditis elegans and mammalian cells revealed that KDM4A overexpression positively regulates S-phase progression, whereas depletion slowed DNA replication and induced cell death (Black et al. 2010). Moreover these effects were dependent on HP1 levels, implying that KDM4A influences cell cycle in part by removing H3K9me3 and evicting HP1. A follow-up study revealed that KDM4A is amplified in human cancers, and overexpression in tissue culture results in focal copy number gains during DNA replication (Black et al. 2013). However, these copy number gains are transient and become resolved during entry into G2/M through an as-yet-undetermined mechanism (Black et al. 2013). These copy gains are suppressed by increasing the cellular concentration of the H3K9 methyltransferase Suv39h1 or HP1-γ. Interestingly, expression of the mutant histones H3.3K9M or H3.3K36M, which inhibit bulk methylation of H3K9 and H3K36, respectively, also results in copy number gains. Recent work has shown that H3.3K9M disrupts heterochromatic transcriptional silencing in D. melanogaster (Herz et al. 2014b). Whereas the function of H3K9 methylation in heterochromatin is well established, studies by Whetstine and colleagues (Black et al. 2010, 2013) implicate H3K36 methylation in a pathway involving heterochromatin machinery that controls mammalian DNA replication. In yeast, H3K36 methylation restricts nucleosome dynamics over transcribed regions and prevents “cryptic” transcription (Smolle et al. 2013). Perhaps a similar mechanism is involved in restricting access of DNA replication machinery.
The role of chromatin proteins in cancer is complex and highly context-specific. Relatively few chromatin modifiers seem capable of independently causing cancer development; they are typically mutated in combination with essential tumor suppressors and cell cycle regulators such as p53 and CDKN2A. Although some chromatin regulators, such as the MLL3/4-UTX of the COMPASS family, may play a broad tumor suppressor role in various cancers, many mutant chromatin proteins are highly tissue-specific. Moreover, in the case of PRC2, both hyperactivating and loss-of-function mutations are found in cancers of distinct origins. Whereas B-cell lymphomas tend to acquire hyperactivating mutations of the EZH2 gene in combination with loss of MLL4, other cancer types, such as T-ALL and MPNST, harbor inactivating mutations in genes encoding for PRC2 components EZH2, EED, and SUZ12. These differences likely reflect tissue-specific functions for PRC2. Thus, it is important to determine the precise molecular consequence of altered chromatin proteins, particularly in the case of point mutations that may cause either loss of function or gain of function. As the majority of cancer-associated mutations in chromatin protein-encoding genes have yet to be functionally characterized, biochemical analysis of these mutants may lead to exciting new avenues of research.
The rapid proliferation of next-generation genome sequencing promises to reveal not only novel mutations involved in cancer but also co-occurring and mutually exclusive mutations. These will likely connect developmental signaling pathways to their downstream chromatin effector proteins. In the instance of the NF1 mutant MPNST, PRC2 appears to dampen the RAS signaling pathway. Similarly, in T-ALL, PRC2 antagonizes the NOTCH1 signal transduction pathway, whereas the H3K27 demethylase JMJD3 directly associates with NOTCH1 to remove PRC2-deposited H3K27me3. Interestingly, recent studies have identified activating mutations in the gene for the BMP receptor ACVR1/ALK2 in combination with histone H3.1K27M gene mutations, suggesting a potential connection between BMP–SMAD1/5/8 signaling and PRC2-mediated repression. Thus, future collaborative efforts between clinicians, geneticists, biochemists, and developmental biologists may shed light onto both the mechanisms underlying cancer development and the connection between cell signaling pathways and the chromatin signatures of cancer.
We are grateful to the members of the Shilatifard laboratory for conversation and discussion during the writing of this review. Studies in A.S.’s laboratory are supported by grants R01CA150265, R01GM069905, and R01CA89455 to A.S.
Aagaard L, Laible G, Selenko P, Schmid M, Dorn R, Schotta G, Kuhfittig S, Wolf A, Lebersorger A, Singh PB, et al.. 1999. Functional mammalian homologues of the Drosophila PEV-modifier Su(var)3-9 encode centromere-associated proteins which complex with the heterochromatin component M31. EMBO J18: 1923–1938. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Bajusz I, Sipos L, Gyorgypal Z, Carrington EA, Jones RS, Gausz J, Gyurkovics H. 2001. The Trithorax-mimic allele of Enhancer of zeste renders active domains of target genes accessible to polycomb-group-dependent silencing in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics159: 1135–1150. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Bannister AJ, Zegerman P, Partridge JF, Miska EA, Thomas JO, Allshire RC, Kouzarides T. 2001. Selective recognition of methylated lysine 9 on histone H3 by the HP1 chromo domain. Nature410: 120–124. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Behjati S, Tarpey PS, Presneau N, Scheipl S, Pillay N, Van Loo P, Wedge DC, Cooke SL, Gundem G, Davies H, et al.. 2013. Distinct H3F3A and H3F3B driver mutations define chondroblastoma and giant cell tumor of bone. Nat Genet45: 1479–1482. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Belkina AC, Denis GV. 2012. BET domain co-regulators in obesity, inflammation and cancer. Nat Rev Cancer12: 465–477. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Black JC, Allen A, Van Rechem C, Forbes E, Longworth M, Tschop K, Rinehart C, Quiton J, Walsh R, Smallwood A, et al.. 2010. Conserved antagonism between JMJD2A/KDM4A and HP1γ during cell cycle progression. Mol Cell40: 736–748. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Black JC, Manning AL, Van Rechem C, Kim J, Ladd B, Cho J, Pineda CM, Murphy N, Daniels DL, Montagna C, et al.. 2013. KDM4A lysine demethylase induces site-specific copy gain and rereplication of regions amplified in tumors. Cell154: 541–555. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Blackwood EM, Kadonaga JT. 1998. Going the distance: a current view of enhancer action. Science281: 60–63. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Buczkowicz P, Hoeman C, Rakopoulos P, Pajovic S, Letourneau L, Dzamba M, Morrison A, Lewis P, Bouffet E, Bartels U, et al.. 2014. Genomic analysis of diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas identifies three molecular subgroups and recurrent activating ACVR1 mutations. Nat Genet46: 451–456. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Bulger M, Groudine M. 2011. Functional and mechanistic diversity of distal transcription enhancers. Cell144: 327–339. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Campos EI, Reinberg D. 2009. Histones: annotating chromatin. Annu Rev Genet43: 559–599. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Cao R, Wang L, Wang H, Xia L, Erdjument-Bromage H, Tempst P, Jones RS, Zhang Y. 2002. Role of histone H3 lysine 27 methylation in Polycomb-group silencing. Science298: 1039–1043. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Ceol CJ, Houvras Y, Jane-Valbuena J, Bilodeau S, Orlando DA, Battisti V, Fritsch L, Lin WM, Hollmann TJ, Ferre F, et al.. 2011. The histone methyltransferase SETDB1 is recurrently amplified in melanoma and accelerates its onset. Nature471: 513–517. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Chan KM, Fang D, Gan H, Hashizume R, Yu C, Schroeder M, Gupta N, Mueller S, James CD, Jenkins R, et al.. 2013. The histone H3.3K27M mutation in pediatric glioma reprograms H3K27 methylation and gene expression. Genes Dev27: 985–990. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Chapuy B, McKeown MR, Lin CY, Monti S, Roemer MG, Qi J, Rahl PB, Sun HH, Yeda KT, Doench JG, et al.. 2013. Discovery and characterization of super-enhancer-associated dependencies in diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Cancer Cell24: 777–790. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Cho YW, Hong T, Hong S, Guo H, Yu H, Kim D, Guszczynski T, Dressler GR, Copeland TD, Kalkum M, et al.. 2007. PTIP associates with MLL3- and MLL4-containing histone H3 lysine 4 methyltransferase complex. J Biol Chem282: 20395–20406. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Chowdhury R, Yeoh KK, Tian YM, Hillringhaus L, Bagg EA, Rose NR, Leung IK, Li XS, Woon EC, Yang M, et al.. 2011. The oncometabolite 2-hydroxyglutarate inhibits histone lysine demethylases. EMBO Rep12: 463–469. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Creyghton MP, Cheng AW, Welstead GG, Kooistra T, Carey BW, Steine EJ, Hanna J, Lodato MA, Frampton GM, Sharp PA, et al.. 2010. Histone H3K27ac separates active from poised enhancers and predicts developmental state. Proc Natl Acad Sci107: 21931–21936. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Cuylen S, Haering CH. 2010. A new cohesive team to mediate DNA looping. Cell Stem Cell7: 424–426. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Czermin B, Melfi R, McCabe D, Seitz V, Imhof A, Pirrotta V. 2002. Drosophila enhancer of Zeste/ESC complexes have a histone H3 methyltransferase activity that marks chromosomal Polycomb sites. Cell111: 185–196. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Dang L, White DW, Gross S, Bennett BD, Bittinger MA, Driggers EM, Fantin VR, Jang HG, Jin S, Keenan MC, et al.. 2009. Cancer-associated IDH1 mutations produce 2-hydroxyglutarate. Nature462: 739–744. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Delmore JE, Issa GC, Lemieux ME, Rahl PB, Shi J, Jacobs HM, Kastritis E, Gilpatrick T, Paranal RM, Qi J, et al.. 2011. BET bromodomain inhibition as a therapeutic strategy to target c-Myc. Cell146: 904–917. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Deng W, Lee J, Wang H, Miller J, Reik A, Gregory PD, Dean A, Blobel GA. 2012. Controlling long-range genomic interactions at a native locus by targeted tethering of a looping factor. Cell149: 1233–1244. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
De Raedt T, Beert E, Pasmant E, Luscan A, Brems H, Ortonne N, Helin K, Hornick JL, Mautner V, Kehrer-Sawatzki H, et al.. 2014. PRC2 loss amplifies Ras-driven transcription and confers sensitivity to BRD4-based therapies. Nature514: 247–251. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Eissenberg JC, Morris GD, Reuter G, Hartnett T. 1992. The heterochromatin-associated protein HP-1 is an essential protein in Drosophila with dosage-dependent effects on position-effect variegation. Genetics131: 345–352. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Ernst P, Fisher JK, Avery W, Wade S, Foy D, Korsmeyer SJ. 2004. Definitive hematopoiesis requires the mixed-lineage leukemia gene. Dev Cell6: 437–443. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Fanti L, Giovinazzo G, Berloco M, Pimpinelli S. 1998. The heterochromatin protein 1 prevents telomere fusions in Drosophila. Mol Cell2: 527–538. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Ferrari KJ, Scelfo A, Jammula S, Cuomo A, Barozzi I, Stutzer A, Fischle W, Bonaldi T, Pasini D. 2014. Polycomb-dependent H3K27me1 and H3K27me2 regulate active transcription and enhancer fidelity. Mol Cell53: 49–62. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Figueroa ME, Abdel-Wahab O, Lu C, Ward PS, Patel J, Shih A, Li Y, Bhagwat N, Vasanthakumar A, Fernandez HF, et al.. 2010. Leukemic IDH1 and IDH2 mutations result in a hypermethylation phenotype, disrupt TET2 function, and impair hematopoietic differentiation. Cancer Cell18: 553–567. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Filippakopoulos P, Qi J, Picaud S, Shen Y, Smith WB, Fedorov O, Morse EM, Keates T, Hickman TT, Felletar I, et al.. 2010. Selective inhibition of BET bromodomains. Nature468: 1067–1073. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Fontebasso AM, Papillon-Cavanagh S, Schwartzentruber J, Nikbakht H, Gerges N, Fiset PO, Bechet D, Faury D, De Jay N, Ramkissoon LA, et al.. 2014. Recurrent somatic mutations in ACVR1 in pediatric midline high-grade astrocytoma. Nat Genet46: 462–466. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Garcia-Cao M, O’Sullivan R, Peters AH, Jenuwein T, Blasco MA. 2004. Epigenetic regulation of telomere length in mammalian cells by the Suv39h1 and Suv39h2 histone methyltransferases. Nat Genet36: 94–99. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Groschel S, Sanders MA, Hoogenboezem R, de Wit E, Bouwman BA, Erpelinck C, van der Velden VH, Havermans M, Avellino R, van Lom K, et al.. 2014. A single oncogenic enhancer rearrangement causes concomitant EVI1 and GATA2 deregulation in leukemia. Cell157: 369–381. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Gui Y, Guo G, Huang Y, Hu X, Tang A, Gao S, Wu R, Chen C, Li X, Zhou L, et al.. 2011. Frequent mutations of chromatin remodeling genes in transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Nat Genet43: 875–878. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. 2000. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell100: 57–70. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. 2011. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell144: 646–674. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Hanson RD, Hess JL, Yu BD, Ernst P, van Lohuizen M, Berns A, van der Lugt NM, Shashikant CS, Ruddle FH, Seto M, et al.. 1999. Mammalian Trithorax and polycomb-group homologues are antagonistic regulators of homeotic development. Proc Natl Acad Sci96: 14372–14377. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Heinemann B, Nielsen JM, Hudlebusch HR, Lees MJ, Larsen DV, Boesen T, Labelle M, Gerlach LO, Birk P, Helin K. 2014. Inhibition of demethylases by GSK-J1/J4. Nature514: E1–E2. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Heintzman ND, Hon GC, Hawkins RD, Kheradpour P, Stark A, Harp LF, Ye Z, Lee LK, Stuart RK, Ching CW, et al.. 2009. Histone modifications at human enhancers reflect global cell-type-specific gene expression. Nature459: 108–112. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Herz HM, Mohan M, Garruss AS, Liang K, Takahashi YH, Mickey K, Voets O, Verrijzer CP, Shilatifard A. 2012. Enhancer-associated H3K4 monomethylation by Trithorax-related, the Drosophila homolog of mammalian Mll3/Mll4. Genes Dev26: 2604–2620. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Herz HM, Morgan M, Gao X, Jackson J, Rickels R, Swanson SK, Florens L, Washburn MP, Eissenberg JC, Shilatifard A. 2014b. Histone H3 lysine-to-methionine mutants as a paradigm to study chromatin signaling. Science345: 1065–1070. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Hess JL, Yu BD, Li B, Hanson R, Korsmeyer SJ. 1997. Defects in yolk sac hematopoiesis in Mll-null embryos. Blood90: 1799–1806. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Hu D, Gao X, Morgan MA, Herz HM, Smith ER, Shilatifard A. 2013. The MLL3/MLL4 branches of the COMPASS family function as major histone H3K4 monomethylases at enhancers. Mol Cell Biol33: 4745–4754. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Ingham PW. 1983. Differential expression of bithorax complex genes in the absence of the extra sex combs and trithorax genes. Nature306: 591–593. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Issaeva I, Zonis Y, Rozovskaia T, Orlovsky K, Croce CM, Nakamura T, Mazo A, Eisenbach L, Canaani E. 2007. Knockdown of ALR (MLL2) reveals ALR target genes and leads to alterations in cell adhesion and growth. Mol Cell Biol27: 1889–1903. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
James TC, Elgin SC. 1986. Identification of a nonhistone chromosomal protein associated with heterochromatin in Drosophila melanogaster and its gene. Mol Cell Biol6: 3862–3872. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Jones RS, Gelbart WM. 1990. Genetic analysis of the enhancer of zeste locus and its role in gene regulation in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics126: 185–199. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Jones DT, Jager N, Kool M, Zichner T, Hutter B, Sultan M, Cho YJ, Pugh TJ, Hovestadt V, Stutz AM, et al.. 2012. Dissecting the genomic complexity underlying medulloblastoma. Nature488: 100–105. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Kellum R, Alberts BM. 1995. Heterochromatin protein 1 is required for correct chromosome segregation in Drosophila embryos. J Cell Sci108: 1419–1431. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Kim HS, Rhee DK, Jang YK. 2008. Methylations of histone H3 lysine 9 and lysine 36 are functionally linked to DNA replication checkpoint control in fission yeast. Biochem Biophys Res Commun368: 419–425. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Klose RJ, Yamane K, Bae Y, Zhang D, Erdjument-Bromage H, Tempst P, Wong J, Zhang Y. 2006. The transcriptional repressor JHDM3A demethylates trimethyl histone H3 lysine 9 and lysine 36. Nature442: 312–316. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Knoechel B, Roderick JE, Williamson KE, Zhu J, Lohr JG, Cotton MJ, Gillespie SM, Fernandez D, Ku M, Wang H, et al.. 2014. An epigenetic mechanism of resistance to targeted therapy in T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Nat Genet46: 364–370. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Kooistra SM, Helin K. 2012. Molecular mechanisms and potential functions of histone demethylases. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol13: 297–311. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Kornberg RD. 1974. Chromatin structure: a repeating unit of histones and DNA. Science184: 868–871. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Kornberg RD, Thomas JO. 1974. Chromatin structure; oligomers of the histones. Science184: 865–868. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Krivega I, Dale RK, Dean A. 2014. Role of LDB1 in the transition from chromatin looping to transcription activation. Genes Dev28: 1278–1290. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Krogan NJ, Dover J, Khorrami S, Greenblatt JF, Schneider J, Johnston M, Shilatifard A. 2002. COMPASS, a histone H3 (Lysine 4) methyltransferase required for telomeric silencing of gene expression. J Biol Chem277: 10753–10755. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Kruidenier L, Chung CW, Cheng Z, Liddle J, Che K, Joberty G, Bantscheff M, Bountra C, Bridges A, Diallo H, et al.. 2012. A selective jumonji H3K27 demethylase inhibitor modulates the proinflammatory macrophage response. Nature488: 404–408. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Kuzmichev A, Nishioka K, Erdjument-Bromage H, Tempst P, Reinberg D. 2002. Histone methyltransferase activity associated with a human multiprotein complex containing the Enhancer of Zeste protein. Genes Dev16: 2893–2905. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Lachner M, O’Carroll D, Rea S, Mechtler K, Jenuwein T. 2001. Methylation of histone H3 lysine 9 creates a binding site for HP1 proteins. Nature410: 116–120. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Laybourn PJ, Kadonaga JT. 1991. Role of nucleosomal cores and histone H1 in regulation of transcription by RNA polymerase II. Science254: 238–245. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Lee W, Teckie S, Wiesner T, Ran L, Prieto Granada CN, Lin M, Zhu S, Cao Z, Liang Y, Sboner A, et al.. 2014. PRC2 is recurrently inactivated through EED or SUZ12 loss in malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors. Nat Genet46: 1227–1232. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Lewis PW, Muller MM, Koletsky MS, Cordero F, Lin S, Banaszynski LA, Garcia BA, Muir TW, Becher OJ, Allis CD. 2013. Inhibition of PRC2 activity by a gain-of-function H3 mutation found in pediatric glioblastoma. Science340: 857–861. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Li H, Kaminski MS, Li Y, Yildiz M, Ouillette P, Jones S, Fox H, Jacobi K, Saiya-Cork K, Bixby D, et al.. 2014. Mutations in linker histone genes HIST1H1 B, C, D, and E; OCT2 (POU2F2); IRF8; and ARID1A underlying the pathogenesis of follicular lymphoma. Blood123: 1487–1498. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Lin C, Smith ER, Takahashi H, Lai KC, Martin-Brown S, Florens L, Washburn MP, Conaway JW, Conaway RC, Shilatifard A. 2010. AFF4, a component of the ELL/P-TEFb elongation complex and a shared subunit of MLL chimeras, can link transcription elongation to leukemia. Mol Cell37: 429–437. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Lohr JG, Stojanov P, Lawrence MS, Auclair D, Chapuy B, Sougnez C, Cruz-Gordillo P, Knoechel B, Asmann YW, Slager SL, et al.. 2012. Discovery and prioritization of somatic mutations in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) by whole-exome sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci109: 3879–3884. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Loven J, Hoke HA, Lin CY, Lau A, Orlando DA, Vakoc CR, Bradner JE, Lee TI, Young RA. 2013. Selective inhibition of tumor oncogenes by disruption of super-enhancers. Cell153: 320–334. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Loyola A, Tagami H, Bonaldi T, Roche D, Quivy JP, Imhof A, Nakatani Y, Dent SY, Almouzni G. 2009. The HP1α-CAF1-SetDB1-containing complex provides H3K9me1 for Suv39-mediated K9me3 in pericentric heterochromatin. EMBO Rep10: 769–775. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Lu C, Ward PS, Kapoor GS, Rohle D, Turcan S, Abdel-Wahab O, Edwards CR, Khanin R, Figueroa ME, Melnick A, et al.. 2012. IDH mutation impairs histone demethylation and results in a block to cell differentiation. Nature483: 474–478. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Luger K, Mader AW, Richmond RK, Sargent DF, Richmond TJ. 1997. Crystal structure of the nucleosome core particle at 2.8 A resolution. Nature389: 251–260. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Luo Z, Lin C, Shilatifard A. 2012. The super elongation complex (SEC) family in transcriptional control. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol13: 543–547. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Maison C, Almouzni G. 2004. HP1 and the dynamics of heterochromatin maintenance. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol5: 296–304. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Mardis ER, Ding L, Dooling DJ, Larson DE, McLellan MD, Chen K, Koboldt DC, Fulton RS, Delehaunty KD, McGrath SD, et al.. 2009. Recurring mutations found by sequencing an acute myeloid leukemia genome. N Engl J Med361: 1058–1066. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Marks H, Kalkan T, Menafra R, Denissov S, Jones K, Hofemeister H, Nichols J, Kranz A, Stewart AF, Smith A, et al.. 2012. The transcriptional and epigenomic foundations of ground state pluripotency. Cell149: 590–604. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
McCabe MT, Graves AP, Ganji G, Diaz E, Halsey WS, Jiang Y, Smitheman KN, Ott HM, Pappalardi MB, Allen KE, et al.. 2012a. Mutation of A677 in histone methyltransferase EZH2 in human B-cell lymphoma promotes hypertrimethylation of histone H3 on lysine 27 (H3K27). Proc Natl Acad Sci109: 2989–2994. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
McCabe MT, Ott HM, Ganji G, Korenchuk S, Thompson C, Van Aller GS, Liu Y, Graves AP, Della Pietra A 3rd, Diaz E, et al.. 2012b. EZH2 inhibition as a therapeutic strategy for lymphoma with EZH2-activating mutations. Nature492: 108–112. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Michishita E, McCord RA, Berber E, Kioi M, Padilla-Nash H, Damian M, Cheung P, Kusumoto R, Kawahara TL, Barrett JC, et al.. 2008. SIRT6 is a histone H3 lysine 9 deacetylase that modulates telomeric chromatin. Nature452: 492–496. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Miller T, Krogan NJ, Dover J, Erdjument-Bromage H, Tempst P, Johnston M, Greenblatt JF, Shilatifard A. 2001. COMPASS: a complex of proteins associated with a trithorax-related SET domain protein. Proc Natl Acad Sci98: 12902–12907. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Mohan M, Lin C, Guest E, Shilatifard A. 2010. Licensed to elongate: a molecular mechanism for MLL-based leukaemogenesis. Nat Rev Cancer10: 721–728. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Mohan M, Herz HM, Smith ER, Zhang Y, Jackson J, Washburn MP, Florens L, Eissenberg JC, Shilatifard A. 2011. The COMPASS family of H3K4 methylases in Drosophila. Mol Cell Biol31: 4310–4318. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Morcillo P, Rosen C, Baylies MK, Dorsett D. 1997. Chip, a widely expressed chromosomal protein required for segmentation and activity of a remote wing margin enhancer in Drosophila. Genes Dev11: 2729–2740. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Morin RD, Johnson NA, Severson TM, Mungall AJ, An J, Goya R, Paul JE, Boyle M, Woolcock BW, Kuchenbauer F, et al.. 2010. Somatic mutations altering EZH2 (Tyr641) in follicular and diffuse large B-cell lymphomas of germinal-center origin. Nat Genet42: 181–185. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Morin RD, Mendez-Lago M, Mungall AJ, Goya R, Mungall KL, Corbett RD, Johnson NA, Severson TM, Chiu R, Field M, et al.. 2011. Frequent mutation of histone-modifying genes in non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Nature476: 298–303. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Morin RD, Mungall K, Pleasance E, Mungall AJ, Goya R, Huff RD, Scott DW, Ding J, Roth A, Chiu R, et al.. 2013. Mutational and structural analysis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma using whole-genome sequencing. Blood122: 1256–1265. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Mostoslavsky R, Chua KF, Lombard DB, Pang WW, Fischer MR, Gellon L, Liu P, Mostoslavsky G, Franco S, Murphy MM, et al.. 2006. Genomic instability and aging-like phenotype in the absence of mammalian SIRT6. Cell124: 315–329. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Muller J, Hart CM, Francis NJ, Vargas ML, Sengupta A, Wild B, Miller EL, O’Connor MB, Kingston RE, Simon JA. 2002. Histone methyltransferase activity of a Drosophila Polycomb group repressor complex. Cell111: 197–208. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Murzina N, Verreault A, Laue E, Stillman B. 1999. Heterochromatin dynamics in mouse cells: interaction between chromatin assembly factor 1 and HP1 proteins. Mol Cell4: 529–540. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Nakayama J, Rice JC, Strahl BD, Allis CD, Grewal SI. 2001. Role of histone H3 lysine 9 methylation in epigenetic control of heterochromatin assembly. Science292: 110–113. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Ntziachristos P, Tsirigos A, Van Vlierberghe P, Nedjic J, Trimarchi T, Flaherty MS, Ferres-Marco D, da Ros V, Tang Z, Siegle J, et al.. 2012. Genetic inactivation of the polycomb repressive complex 2 in T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Nat Med18: 298–301. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Ntziachristos P, Tsirigos A, Welstead GG, Trimarchi T, Bakogianni S, Xu L, Loizou E, Holmfeldt L, Strikoudis A, King B, et al.. 2014. Contrasting roles of histone 3 lysine 27 demethylases in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Nature514: 513–517. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Okosun J, Bodor C, Wang J, Araf S, Yang CY, Pan C, Boller S, Cittaro D, Bozek M, Iqbal S, et al.. 2014. Integrated genomic analysis identifies recurrent mutations and evolution patterns driving the initiation and progression of follicular lymphoma. Nat Genet46: 176–181. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Ott HM, Graves A, Pappalardi MB, Huddleston M, Halsey WS, Hughes A, Groy A, Dul E, Jiang Y, Bai Y, et al.. 2014. A687V EZH2 is a driver of histone H3 lysine 27 (H3K27) hypertrimethylation. Mol Cancer Ther13: 3062–3073. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Parsons DW, Jones S, Zhang X, Lin JC, Leary RJ, Angenendt P, Mankoo P, Carter H, Siu IM, Gallia GL, et al.. 2008. An integrated genomic analysis of human glioblastoma multiforme. Science321: 1807–1812. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Parsons DW, Li M, Zhang X, Jones S, Leary RJ, Lin JC, Boca SM, Carter H, Samayoa J, Bettegowda C, et al.. 2011. The genetic landscape of the childhood cancer medulloblastoma. Science331: 435–439. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Pasini D, Malatesta M, Jung HR, Walfridsson J, Willer A, Olsson L, Skotte J, Wutz A, Porse B, Jensen ON, et al.. 2010. Characterization of an antagonistic switch between histone H3 lysine 27 methylation and acetylation in the transcriptional regulation of Polycomb group target genes. Nucleic Acids Res38: 4958–4969. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Pasqualucci L, Trifonov V, Fabbri G, Ma J, Rossi D, Chiarenza A, Wells VA, Grunn A, Messina M, Elliot O, et al.. 2011. Analysis of the coding genome of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Nat Genet43: 830–837. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Pengelly AR, Copur O, Jackle H, Herzig A, Muller J. 2013. A histone mutant reproduces the phenotype caused by loss of histone-modifying factor Polycomb. Science339: 698–699. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Peters AH, O’Carroll D, Scherthan H, Mechtler K, Sauer S, Schofer C, Weipoltshammer K, Pagani M, Lachner M, Kohlmaier A, et al.. 2001. Loss of the Suv39h histone methyltransferases impairs mammalian heterochromatin and genome stability. Cell107: 323–337. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Quivy JP, Gerard A, Cook AJ, Roche D, Almouzni G. 2008. The HP1-p150/CAF-1 interaction is required for pericentric heterochromatin replication and S-phase progression in mouse cells. Nat Struct Mol Biol15: 972–979. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Reynolds N, Salmon-Divon M, Dvinge H, Hynes-Allen A, Balasooriya G, Leaford D, Behrens A, Bertone P, Hendrich B. 2012. NuRD-mediated deacetylation of H3K27 facilitates recruitment of Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 to direct gene repression. EMBO J31: 593–605. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Rodriguez-Paredes M, Martinez de Paz A, Simo-Riudalbas L, Sayols S, Moutinho C, Moran S, Villanueva A, Vazquez-Cedeira M, Lazo PA, Carneiro F, et al.. 2014. Gene amplification of the histone methyltransferase SETDB1 contributes to human lung tumorigenesis. Oncogene33: 2807–2813. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Rowley JD. 1993. Rearrangements involving chromosome band 11Q23 in acute leukaemia. Semin Cancer Biol4: 377–385. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Schwartzentruber J, Korshunov A, Liu XY, Jones DT, Pfaff E, Jacob K, Sturm D, Fontebasso AM, Quang DA, Tonjes M, et al.. 2012. Driver mutations in histone H3.3 and chromatin remodelling genes in paediatric glioblastoma. Nature482: 226–231. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Sebastian C, Zwaans BM, Silberman DM, Gymrek M, Goren A, Zhong L, Ram O, Truelove J, Guimaraes AR, Toiber D, et al.. 2012. The histone deacetylase SIRT6 is a tumor suppressor that controls cancer metabolism. Cell151: 1185–1199. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Shi J, Vakoc CR. 2014. The mechanisms behind the therapeutic activity of BET bromodomain inhibition. Mol Cell54: 728–736. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Shilatifard A. 2012. The COMPASS family of histone H3K4 methylases: mechanisms of regulation in development and disease pathogenesis. Annu Rev Biochem81: 65–95. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Shore EM, Xu M, Feldman GJ, Fenstermacher DA, Cho TJ, Choi IH, Connor JM, Delai P, Glaser DL, LeMerrer M, et al.. 2006. A recurrent mutation in the BMP type I receptor ACVR1 causes inherited and sporadic fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva. Nat Genet38: 525–527. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Simon C, Chagraoui J, Krosl J, Gendron P, Wilhelm B, Lemieux S, Boucher G, Chagnon P, Drouin S, Lambert R, et al.. 2012. A key role for EZH2 and associated genes in mouse and human adult T-cell acute leukemia. Genes Dev26: 651–656. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Smith E, Shilatifard A. 2014. Enhancer biology and enhanceropathies. Nat Struct Mol Biol21: 210–219. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Smith E, Lin C, Shilatifard A. 2011. The super elongation complex (SEC) and MLL in development and disease. Genes Dev25: 661–672. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Smolle M, Workman JL, Venkatesh S. 2013. reSETting chromatin during transcription elongation. Epigenetics8: 10–15. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Sneeringer CJ, Scott MP, Kuntz KW, Knutson SK, Pollock RM, Richon VM, Copeland RA. 2010. Coordinated activities of wild-type plus mutant EZH2 drive tumor-associated hypertrimethylation of lysine 27 on histone H3 (H3K27) in human B-cell lymphomas. Proc Natl Acad Sci107: 20980–20985. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Stepanik VA, Harte PJ. 2012. A mutation in the E(Z) methyltransferase that increases trimethylation of histone H3 lysine 27 and causes inappropriate silencing of active Polycomb target genes. Dev Biol364: 249–258. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Sturm D, Witt H, Hovestadt V, Khuong-Quang DA, Jones DT, Konermann C, Pfaff E, Tonjes M, Sill M, Bender S, et al.. 2012. Hotspot mutations in H3F3A and IDH1 define distinct epigenetic and biological subgroups of glioblastoma. Cancer Cell22: 425–437. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Taddei A, Maison C, Roche D, Almouzni G. 2001. Reversible disruption of pericentric heterochromatin and centromere function by inhibiting deacetylases. Nat Cell Biol3: 114–120. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Taverna SD, Li H, Ruthenburg AJ, Allis CD, Patel DJ. 2007. How chromatin-binding modules interpret histone modifications: lessons from professional pocket pickers. Nat Struct Mol Biol14: 1025–1040. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Taylor KR, Mackay A, Truffaux N, Butterfield YS, Morozova O, Philippe C, Castel D, Grasso CS, Vinci M, Carvalho D, et al.. 2014. Recurrent activating ACVR1 mutations in diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma. Nat Genet46: 457–461. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Tee WW, Shen SS, Oksuz O, Narendra V, Reinberg D. 2014. Erk1/2 activity promotes chromatin features and RNAPII phosphorylation at developmental promoters in mouse ESCs. Cell156: 678–690. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Tie F, Banerjee R, Stratton CA, Prasad-Sinha J, Stepanik V, Zlobin A, Diaz MO, Scacheri PC, Harte PJ. 2009. CBP-mediated acetylation of histone H3 lysine 27 antagonizes Drosophila Polycomb silencing. Development136: 3131–3141. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Turcan S, Rohle D, Goenka A, Walsh LA, Fang F, Yilmaz E, Campos C, Fabius AW, Lu C, Ward PS, et al.. 2012. IDH1 mutation is sufficient to establish the glioma hypermethylator phenotype. Nature483: 479–483. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Van Rechem C, Whetstine JR. 2014. Examining the impact of gene variants on histone lysine methylation. Biochim Biophys Acta1839: 1463–1476. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Venneti S, Garimella MT, Sullivan LM, Martinez D, Huse JT, Heguy A, Santi M, Thompson CB, Judkins AR. 2013. Evaluation of histone 3 lysine 27 trimethylation (H3K27me3) and enhancer of Zest 2 (EZH2) in pediatric glial and glioneuronal tumors shows decreased H3K27me3 in H3F3A K27M mutant glioblastomas. Brain Pathol23: 558–564. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Whetstine JR, Nottke A, Lan F, Huarte M, Smolikov S, Chen Z, Spooner E, Li E, Zhang G, Colaiacovo M, et al.. 2006. Reversal of histone lysine trimethylation by the JMJD2 family of histone demethylases. Cell125: 467–481. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wu G, Broniscer A, McEachron TA, Lu C, Paugh BS, Becksfort J, Qu C, Ding L, Huether R, Parker M, et al.. 2012. Somatic histone H3 alterations in pediatric diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas and non-brainstem glioblastomas. Nat Genet44: 251–253. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wu G, Diaz AK, Paugh BS, Rankin SL, Ju B, Li Y, Zhu X, Qu C, Chen X, Zhang J, et al.. 2014. The genomic landscape of diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma and pediatric non-brainstem high-grade glioma. Nat Genet46: 444–450. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Xu W, Yang H, Liu Y, Yang Y, Wang P, Kim SH, Ito S, Yang C, Xiao MT, Liu LX, et al.. 2011. Oncometabolite 2-hydroxyglutarate is a competitive inhibitor of α-ketoglutarate-dependent dioxygenases. Cancer Cell19: 17–30. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Yamazaki H, Suzuki M, Otsuki A, Shimizu R, Bresnick EH, Engel JD, Yamamoto M. 2014. A remote GATA2 hematopoietic enhancer drives leukemogenesis in inv(3)(q21;q26) by activating EVI1 expression. Cancer Cell25: 415–427. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Ying CY, Dominguez-Sola D, Fabi M, Lorenz IC, Hussein S, Bansal M, Califano A, Pasqualucci L, Basso K, Dalla-Favera R. 2013. MEF2B mutations lead to deregulated expression of the oncogene BCL6 in diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Nat Immunol14: 1084–1092. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Zhang J, Ding L, Holmfeldt L, Wu G, Heatley SL, Payne-Turner D, Easton J, Chen X, Wang J, Rusch M, et al.. 2012. The genetic basis of early T-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Nature481: 157–163. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Zhang M, Wang Y, Jones S, Sausen M, McMahon K, Sharma R, Wang Q, Belzberg AJ, Chaichana K, Gallia GL, et al.. 2014. Somatic mutations of SUZ12 in malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors. Nat Genet46: 1170–1172. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Ziemin-van der Poel S, McCabe NR, Gill HJ, Espinosa R 3rd, Patel Y, Harden A, Rubinelli P, Smith SD, LeBeau MM, Rowley JD, et al.. 1991. Identification of a gene, MLL, that spans the breakpoint in 11q23 translocations associated with human leukemias. Proc Natl Acad Sci88: 10735–10739. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
One of the unexpected findings of the Human Genome Project was that over 98% of the human genome does not encode for proteins. Once dismissed as “junk” genomic material, non-protein-coding DNA is now appraised more highly.
Or to be more precise, at least some portions of non-protein-coding DNA are thought to serve important biological functions.
For example, some stretches of DNA give rise to a noncoding but still functional kind of RNA called microRNA. MicroRNAs have increasingly emerged in recent years as key regulators of biological processes and pathways.
During the years since their discovery, a key question in the biology of microRNAs has focused on the number of microRNAs encoded in the genome. Between 1993 and 2015, approximately 1,900 human genome loci were discovered to produce microRNAs and were added to miRBbase, the public database that catalogues and annotates microRNA molecules.
The cataloguing of microRNAs work has been pursued with extra urgency since 2004, the year the connection between microRNAs and human disease was first demonstrated. “When this connection was made, it launched a whole new field,” says Isidore Rigoutsos, Ph.D., professor of pathology, anatomy, and cell biology and director of the Computational Medicine Center at Thomas Jefferson University.
Another Set of MicroRNAs Emerge
“We wanted to know how many microRNA-producing loci really exist in humans,” recalls Dr. Rigoutsos. In a study published in 2015, Dr. Rigoutsos and colleagues analyzed datasets from 1,323 individuals that represented 13 different tissues and identified an additional 3,356 such genomic loci that produce (at least) 3,707 novel microRNs
“We basically tripled the number of locations in the human genome that are now known to encode microRNAs,” asserts Dr. Rigoutsos. Considering that each microRNA regulates up to hundreds of different mRNAs, and that each mRNA is regulated by tens of microRNAs, this finding adds a new layer of complexity to the regulatory dynamics of the human transcriptome.
The newly unveiled microRNAs and previously characterized microRNAs have distinct expression patterns. While 50–60% of the microRNAs previously deposited into the miRBase are expressed in multiple tissues, only about 10% of the newly discovered microRNAs are shared across multiple tissue types. Also, most of the newly found microRNAs show tissue-specific expression.
Using Argonaute CLIP-seq data, Dr. Rigoutsos and colleagues showed that similar percentages of the two sets of microRNAs were in complex with Argonaute proteins. “This shows that these novel microRNAs participate in RNA interference just as frequently as the miRBase microRNAs,” contends Dr. Rigoutsos.
In a comparative analysis between the human microRNA datasets and the chimpanzee, gorilla, orangutan, macaque, mouse, fruit fly, and mouse genomes, Dr. Rigoutsos and colleagues discovered that almost 95% of the newly unveiled microRNAs were primate-specific, and over 56% of them were found only in humans.
“We are seeing many human microRNAs that do not exist in the mouse,” states Dr. Rigoutsos. “This means that the mouse models engineered to capture human disease cannot recapitulate the interactions mediated by these microRNAs.
Interest in IsomiRs Grows
In the years since the biology of microRNAs started receiving increasing attention, the conventional view has been that one microRNA locus generates one microRNA. However, once deep sequencing became widely available, microRNA variants that showed differences at their 5′- or 3′-termini have been described.
“It was initially presumed that these variants were likely the result of the enzyme Dicer not being sufficiently accurate when processing microRNA precursors,” notes Dr. Rigoutsos. Subsequent research revealed that microRNAs are more dynamic than previously thought, with each precursor being able to generate multiple mature microRNA species known as isomiRs.
To gain insight into the biology of isomiRs, Dr. Rigoutsos and colleagues analyzed genomic datasets from 452 individuals participating in the 1000 Genomes Project. The datasets comprised five different populations and two races. In addition, each population was represented by an even number of men and women.
This collection allowed the abundance of microRNA isoforms to be examined with respect to population, gender, and race. “We found that isomiRs have expression profiles that are population-, race-, and gender-dependent,” informs Dr. Rigoutsos.
All the transcriptome data that this analysis was based on came from immortalized B cells. “These are cells that normally are not associated with gender differences, but molecularly we found, in these cells, differences between men and women of the same population and race,” explains Dr. Rigoutsos.
Expanding these observations to disease states, Dr. Rigoutsos and colleagues collected isomiR profiles from tissue affected by breast cancer, and compared them with isomiR profiles from control breast tissue. The investigators found that the isomiR profiles also depend on tissue state (healthy vs. diseased), on disease subtype, and on the patient’s race.
For example, their analysis identified several miR-183-5p isoforms that were upregulated in white triple-negative breast cancer patients compared to control breast samples, but not in black/African-American triple-negative breast cancer patients. In an in vitro phase of this study, three isoforms of this microRNA species were overexpressed in human breast cancer cell lines.
“We found very little overlap in the gene sets that were affected by each of these isoforms,” emphasizes Dr. Rigoutsos. Despite being generated simultaneously by the same locus, each of the three isoforms affected distinct groups of genes, thus exerting different effects on the transcriptome.
“As the relative abundance of these isoforms changes ever so slightly from patient to patient, it will affect the corresponding gene groups slightly differently,” concludes Dr. Rigoutsos. “In the process, it creates a new molecular background in each patient.”
MicroRNAs Point to Therapeutic Strategies against Colorectal Cancer
“We are using microRNAs as modulators to overcome chemotherapy resistance in colorectal cancer,” says Jingfang Ju, Ph.D., associate professor of pathology and co-director of translational research at Stony Brook University School of Medicine. Resistance to chemotherapy is one of the major challenges in the clinical management of malignancies, including colorectal cancer. Chemotherapy is usually unable to eliminate cancer stem cells, which may become even more resistant over time, and several microRNAs have been implicated in this process. “We reasoned that we could provide new modulatory approaches to target this small cell population and allow chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or immunotherapy to eliminate resistant populations or at least prolong long-term survival,” Dr. Ju said.
This image shows how miR-129 may function as a tumor suppressor in colorectal cancer. In this model, which has been proposed by researchers at Stony Brook University’s Translational Research Laboratory, miR-129 suppresses the protein expression of three critical targets—BCL2, TS, and E2F3. Downregulation of BCL2 activates the intrinsic apoptosis pathway by cleaving caspase-9 and caspase-3. Downregulation of TS and E2F3 inhibits cell proliferation by impacting the cell cycle. Consequently, miR-129 exerts a strong antitumor phenotype by induction of apoptosis and impairment of proliferation in tumor cells. [Mihriban Karaayvaz, Haiyan Zhai, Jingfang Ju]
In a retrospective study in which colorectal patient samples were used, Dr. Ju and colleagues revealed that hsa-miR-140-5p expression progressively decreases from normal tissues to primary colorectal cancer tissue, and that it shows a further decrease in liver and lymph node metastases. The experimental overexpression of hsa-miR-140-5p inhibited colorectal cancer stem cell growth by disrupting autophagy, and in a mouse model of disease it abolished tumor formation and metastasis.
In addition to hsa-miR-140-5p, Dr. Ju and colleagues recently identified hsa-miR-129 and found that it, too, has therapeutic potential. Specifically, they showed that hsa-miR-129 enhanced the sensitivity of colorectal cancer cells to 5-fluorouracil, pointing toward its ability to function as a tumor suppressor.
One of the mechanisms implicated in this process was the ability of miR-192 to inhibit protein translation of several important targets. These include Bcl-2 (B-cell lymphoma 2), a key anti-apoptotic protein; E2F3, a major cell cycle regulator; and thymidylate synthase, an enzyme that is inhibited by 5-fluorouracil.
The NIH recently awarded a $3 million grant to establish the Long Island Bioscience Hub (LIBH), which is part of the NIH’s Research Evaluation and Commercialization Hub (REACH) program and represents a partnership between the Center for Biotechnology, Stony Brook University, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, and Brookhaven National Laboratory. One of the technology development grants, as part of the first funding cycle of this initiative, will support a feasibility investigation of hsa-miR-129-based therapeutics in colon cancer, an effort led by Dr. Ju. “We are further exploring this novel mechanism,” states Dr. Ju. “We anticipate conducting pharmacokinetic studies and moving to a clinical trial in the future.”
MicroRNA Insights Gleaned from Host-Virus Interactions
At Mount Sinai Hospital’s Icahn School of Medicine, researchers used a codon-optimized version of VP55 produced from an adenovirus-based vector to study the impact of microRNA deletion on the response to virus infection. This image shows RNA in situ hybridization of fibroblasts expressing VP55 (top left), and that of mock-treated fibroblasts (bottom right). Ribosomal RNA, DNA, and microRNAs (miR-26) are depicted by red, blue (DAPI), and green fluorophores, respectively.
“We observed that when a poxvirus is artificially engineered to encode a microRNA, the microRNA is destroyed along with all the microRNAs from the host cell,” says Benjamin R. tenOever, Ph.D., professor of microbiology at the Icahn School of Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital. Previously, Dr. tenOever’s group reported that a single vaccinia virus-encoded gene product, VP55, is sufficient to achieve this effect. The group also found that the protein adds nontemplate adenosines to the 3′-end of microRNAs associated with the RNA-induced silencing complex.
biology,” asserts Dr. tenOever.
In a recent study, Dr. tenOever and colleagues used a codon-optimized version of VP55 produced from an adenovirus-based vector to study the impact microRNA deletion would have on our normal response to virus infection. “We found that after administration of the vector and rapid ablation of microRNA expression, there is very little that happens over the first one to two days,” informs Dr. tenOever. During the first 24–48 hours after VP55 delivery, the elimination of cellular microRNAs impacted less than 0.35% of the over 11,000 genes expressed in the cell. After 9 days, however, almost 20% of the genes showed significant changes in expression.
“MicroRNAs are very powerful and influential in controlling the biology of the cell but they do so over the long term,” declares Dr. tenOever. These findings are in agreement with knowledge that has accumulated over the years about microRNA biology, which established that microRNAs play a central role in determining how cells differentiate during development.
“While microRNAs can act on hundreds of mRNAs, their action requires several days of fine-tuning to have long-term consequences,” adds Dr. tenOever. This finding suggests miRNAs are unable to significantly contribute to the acute response to virus infection.
The one exception to this observation was that, even though very few genes were affected in the first 48 hours after VP55 delivery, several genes encoding chemokines were impacted. These included chemokines responsible for recruiting antigen-presenting cells, neutrophils, and other immune cells.
An in vivo analysis of mouse lung tissue 48 hours after vector administration confirmed that several cytokines were specifically upregulated, resulting in immune cell infiltration following the degradation of all microRNAs. These results indicate that the acute viral infection is largely independent of microRNAs, and that microRNAs are primarily involved in the adaptive response to infection and other longer term processes.
MicroRNA Biomarkers Reveal Molecular Pathways of Kidney Damage
“Our approach involves looking at microRNAs from the perspective of biomarkers as a readout for kidney damage,” says Vishal S. Vaidya, Ph.D., associate professor of medicine and environmental health at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “At the same time, we are exploring their utility as therapeutics.”
A large number of medications and occupational toxins cause kidney damage, but many tests to assess kidney function and damage are not sufficiently sensitive or specific, opening the need for novel diagnostic strategies. MicroRNAs, which are differentially expressed between healthy and diseased states, are promising as early biomarkers for impaired renal function.
“MicroRNAs can also provide information about which pathways are active and which targets can be druggable,” points out Dr. Vaidya.
In a study that used microRNAs and proteins to provide a combined biomarker signature, Dr. Vaidya and colleagues examined two patient cohorts, one presenting with acetaminophen-induced kidney injury and the other one with cisplatin-induced kidney damage. “Protein biomarkers provide sensitivity, and microRNAs offer mechanistic insight,” explains Dr. Vaidya.
This approach helped visualize metabolic pathways that are altered in the kidney during toxic injury. “The biggest challenge, from a therapeutic perspective, is that microRNAs regulate many mRNAs and, therefore, impact many proteins,” concludes Dr. Vaidya.
One in 15 adults has moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea, a disorder in which a person’s breathing is frequently interrupted during sleep — as many as 30 times per hour.
People with sleep apnea also often report problems with thinking such as poor concentration, difficulty with memory and decision-making, depression, and stress.
According to new research from the UCLA School of Nursing, published online in the Journal of Sleep Research, people with sleep apnea show significant changes in the levels of two important brain chemicals, which could be a reason that many have symptoms that impact their day-to-day lives.
UCLA researchers looked at levels of these neurotransmitters — glutamate and gamma-aminobutyric acid, known as GABA — in a brain region called the insula, which integrates signals from higher brain regions to regulate emotion, thinking and physical functions such as blood pressure and perspiration. They found that people with sleep apnea had decreased levels of GABA and unusually high levels of glutamate.
GABA is a chemical messenger that acts as an inhibitor in the brain, which can slow things down and help to keep people calm — like a brake pedal. GABA affects mood and helps make endorphins.
Glutamate, by contrast, is like an accelerator; when glutamate levels are high, the brain is working in a state of stress, and consequently doesn’t function as effectively. High levels of glutamate can also be toxic to nerves and neurons.
“In previous studies, we’ve seen structural changes in the brain due to sleep apnea, but in this study we actually found substantial differences in these two chemicals that influence how the brain is working,” said Paul Macey, the lead researcher on the study and an associate professor at the UCLA School of Nursing.
Macey said the researchers were taken aback by the differences in the GABA and glutamate levels.
“It is rare to have this size of difference in biological measures,” Macey said. “We expected an increase in the glutamate, because it is a chemical that causes damage in high doses and we have already seen brain damage from sleep apnea. What we were surprised to see was the drop in GABA. That made us realize that there must be a reorganization of how the brain is working.”
Macey said the study’s results are, in a way, encouraging. “In contrast with damage, if something is working differently, we can potentially fix it.”
The link between sleep apnea and changes in the state of the brain is important news for clinicians, Macey said.
“What comes with sleep apnea are these changes in the brain, so in addition to prescribing continuous positive airway pressure, or CPAP — a machine used to help an individual sleep easier, which is the gold standard treatment for sleep disturbance — physicians now know to pay attention to helping their patients who have these other symptoms,” Macey said. “Stress, concentration, memory loss — these are the things people want fixed.”
In future studies, the researchers hope to determine whether treating the sleep apnea — using CPAP or other methods — returns patients’ brain chemicals back to normal levels. If not, they will turn to the question of what treatments could be more effective. They are also studying the impacts of mindfulness exercises to see if they can reduce glutamate levels by calming the brain.
3.3.11 Unlocking the Microbiome, Volume 2 (Volume Two: Latest in Genomics Methodologies for Therapeutics: Gene Editing, NGS and BioInformatics, Simulations and the Genome Ontology), Part 2: CRISPR for Gene Editing and DNA Repair
Machine-learning technique uncovers unknown features of multi-drug-resistant pathogen
Relatively simple “unsupervised” learning system reveals important new information to microbiologists
According to the CDC, Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a common cause of healthcare-associated infections, including pneumonia, bloodstream infections, urinary tract infections, and surgical site infections. Some strains of P. aeruginosa have been found to be resistant to nearly all or all antibiotics. (illustration credit: CDC)
A new machine-learning technique can uncover previously unknown features of organisms and their genes in large datasets, according to researchers from the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania and the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth University.
For example, the technique learned to identify the characteristic gene-expression patterns that appear when a bacterium is exposed in different conditions, such as low oxygen and the presence of antibiotics.
The technique, called “ADAGE” (Analysis using Denoising Autoencoders of Gene Expression), uses a “denoising autoencoder” algorithm, which learns to identify recurring features or patterns in large datasets — without being told what specific features to look for (that is, “unsupervised.”)*
Last year, Casey Greene, PhD, an assistant professor of Systems Pharmacology and Translational Therapeutics at Penn, and his team published, in an open-access paper in the American Society for Microbiology’s mSystems, the first demonstration of ADAGE in a biological context: an analysis of two gene-expression datasets of breast cancers.
Tracking down gene patterns of a multi-drug-resistant bacterium
The new study, published Jan. 19 in an open-access paper in mSystems, was more ambitious. It applied ADAGE to a dataset of 950 gene-expression arrays publicly available at the time for the multi-drug-resistant bacteriumPseudomonas aeruginosa. This bacterium is a notorious pathogen in the hospital and in individuals with cystic fibrosis and other chronic lung conditions; it’s often difficult to treat due to its high resistance to standard antibiotic therapies.
The data included only the identities of the roughly 5,000 P. aeruginosa genes and their measured expression levels in each published experiment. The goal was to see if this “unsupervised” learning system could uncover important patterns in P. aeruginosa gene expression and clarify how those patterns change when the bacterium’s environment changes — for example, when in the presence of an antibiotic.
Even though the model built with ADAGE was relatively simple — roughly equivalent to a brain with only a few dozen neurons — it had no trouble learning which sets of P. aeruginosa genes tend to work together or in opposition. To the researchers’ surprise, the ADAGE system also detected differences between the main laboratory strain of P. aeruginosa and strains isolated from infected patients. “That turned out to be one of the strongest features of the data,” Greene said.
“We expect that this approach will be particularly useful to microbiologists researching bacterial species that lack a decades-long history of study in the lab,” said Greene. “Microbiologists can use these models to identify where the data agree with their own knowledge and where the data seem to be pointing in a different direction … and to find completely new things in biology that we didn’t even know to look for.”
Support for the research came from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the William H. Neukom Institute for Computational Science, the National Institutes of Health, and the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation.
* In 2012, Google-sponsored researchers applied a similar method to randomly selected YouTube images; their system learned to recognize major recurring features of those images — including cats of course.
Abstract of ADAGE-Based Integration of Publicly Available Pseudomonas aeruginosa Gene Expression Data with Denoising Autoencoders Illuminates Microbe-Host Interactions
The increasing number of genome-wide assays of gene expression available from public databases presents opportunities for computational methods that facilitate hypothesis generation and biological interpretation of these data. We present an unsupervised machine learning approach, ADAGE (analysis using denoising autoencoders of gene expression), and apply it to the publicly available gene expression data compendium for Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In this approach, the machine-learned ADAGE model contained 50 nodes which we predicted would correspond to gene expression patterns across the gene expression compendium. While no biological knowledge was used during model construction, cooperonic genes had similar weights across nodes, and genes with similar weights across nodes were significantly more likely to share KEGG pathways. By analyzing newly generated and previously published microarray and transcriptome sequencing data, the ADAGE model identified differences between strains, modeled the cellular response to low oxygen, and predicted the involvement of biological processes based on low-level gene expression differences. ADAGE compared favorably with traditional principal component analysis and independent component analysis approaches in its ability to extract validated patterns, and based on our analyses, we propose that these approaches differ in the types of patterns they preferentially identify. We provide the ADAGE model with analysis of all publicly available P. aeruginosa GeneChip experiments and open source code for use with other species and settings. Extraction of consistent patterns across large-scale collections of genomic data using methods like ADAGE provides the opportunity to identify general principles and biologically important patterns in microbial biology. This approach will be particularly useful in less-well-studied microbial species.
Abstract of Unsupervised feature construction and knowledge extraction from genome-wide assays of breast cancer with denoising autoencoders
Big data bring new opportunities for methods that efficiently summarize and automatically extract knowledge from such compendia. While both supervised learning algorithms and unsupervised clustering algorithms have been successfully applied to biological data, they are either dependent on known biology or limited to discerning the most significant signals in the data. Here we present denoising autoencoders (DAs), which employ a data-defined learning objective independent of known biology, as a method to identify and extract complex patterns from genomic data. We evaluate the performance of DAs by applying them to a large collection of breast cancer gene expression data. Results show that DAs successfully construct features that contain both clinical and molecular information. There are features that represent tumor or normal samples, estrogen receptor (ER) status, and molecular subtypes. Features constructed by the autoencoder generalize to an independent dataset collected using a distinct experimental platform. By integrating data from ENCODE for feature interpretation, we discover a feature representing ER status through association with key transcription factors in breast cancer. We also identify a feature highly predictive of patient survival and it is enriched by FOXM1 signaling pathway. The features constructed by DAs are often bimodally distributed with one peak near zero and another near one, which facilitates discretization. In summary, we demonstrate that DAs effectively extract key biological principles from gene expression data and summarize them into constructed features with convenient properties.
2.2.9 Reengineering Therapeutics, Volume 2 (Volume Two: Latest in Genomics Methodologies for Therapeutics: Gene Editing, NGS and BioInformatics, Simulations and the Genome Ontology), Part 2: CRISPR for Gene Editing and DNA Repair
CAR-T has been all the rage in cancer R&D for several years now as a slate of biotech upstarts pursue highly promising work reengineering T cells into attack weapons by adding a chimeric antigen receptor that can zero in on particular cancer cells. The approach has been highly effective in acute lymphoblastic leukemia, triggering an attack on B cells by homing in on the CD19 antigen, a breakthrough that has inspired a race to the regulatory finish line with the first CAR-Ts.
That approach, though, has run into some major obstacles when researchers move from the blood cancer to solid tumors. But now a group of scientists working with UC San Francisco’s Wendell Lim say they’ve come up with a new therapeutic model for T-cell engineering that promises to overcome that hurdle and make it a more precise weapon that can tackle solid tumors while avoiding off-target reactions that threaten patients.
The key to this new approach is a new receptor: synNotch. Taking a cue from nature, which relies on a sensor called Notch to perform key functions, the synthetic biology engineers say they can add a receptor that includes one section that sticks out from the cell with one that lies inside. By tinkering with synNotch they can reengineer the immune cell to run down a particular cancer cell target and then issue instructions to turn genes on or off to set up the other half of the therapeutic equation.
In a project described in Cell, the team says they created a synNotch that recognized an antigen on the surface of the cancer cell while the internal mechanism contributed a chimeric antigen receptor that recognized a different antigen. They then tested it on a mouse model that included two different tumor cells: one with both targets recognized by the external synNotch sensor and the CAR and one with just the CAR target.
The newly programmed attack weapon zeroed in on the two targets (which required synNotch activation for it to work) while leaving the other alone, providing preclinical proof-of-concept evidence that they could create a much more efficient tumor cell killing vehicle.
“The kinds of engineered T cells that we can now construct give us the exciting potential to create precision cancer therapeutics that take advantage of all the genomic and proteomic information we are currently gathering on disease,” said Lim, the senior author of the study. “This genomic information now becomes actionable.”
The team was led by Leonardo Morsut and Kole Roybal.
Lim added that it is possible to reengineer a T cell with multiple synNotches to make it even more precise. And there are added applications for autoimmune disease, regenerative medicine, and more.
Engineering Customized Cell Sensing and Response Behaviors Using Synthetic Notch Receptors
Leonardo Morsut, Kole T. Roybal, Xin Xiong, Russell M. Gordley, Scott M. Coyle, Matthew Thomson, Wendell A. Lim
•SynNotch receptors with altered extra- and intracellular domains yield new responses
•SynNotch pathways drive diverse user-defined responses in many mammalian cell types
•Multiple synNotch pathways are functionally orthogonal to one another
•SynNotch pathways control differentiation, spatial patterning, and Boolean decisions
The Notch protein is one of the most mechanistically direct transmembrane receptors—the intracellular domain contains a transcriptional regulator that is released from the membrane when engagement of the cognate extracellular ligand induces intramembrane proteolysis. We find that chimeric forms of Notch, in which both the extracellular sensor module and the intracellular transcriptional module are replaced with heterologous protein domains, can serve as a general platform for generating novel cell-cell contact signaling pathways. Synthetic Notch (synNotch) pathways can drive user-defined functional responses in diverse mammalian cell types. Because individual synNotch pathways do not share common signaling intermediates, the pathways are functionally orthogonal. Thus, multiple synNotch receptors can be used in the same cell to achieve combinatorial integration of environmental cues, including Boolean response programs, multi-cellular signaling cascades, and self-organized cellular patterns. SynNotch receptors provide extraordinary flexibility in engineering cells with customized sensing/response behaviors to user-specified extracellular cues.
Tricked-Out Immune Cells Could Attack Cancer, Spare Healthy Cells
New Cell-Engineering Technique May Lead To Precision Immunotherapies
UC San Francisco scientists have created a new class of highly customizable biological sensors that can be used to form “logic gates” inside cells of the immune system, giving these cells the capability to home in on and kill a wide range of cancer cells while preventing them from attacking normal tissue.
As reported in two companion papers published Jan. 28 in the online edition of Cell, in addition to their potential to bring much-needed precision and safety to the form of cancer immunotherapy known as CAR T cell therapy, these versatile new sensors, known as synNotch receptors, can also be inserted into cells such as nerve and muscle cells. The receptors may have uses in regenerative medicine, in the treatment of autoimmune diseases, and in basic biological research.
“SynNotch receptors provide us with one of the most flexible ways we have to reprogram the behavior and function of almost any cell,” said Wendell A. Lim, PhD, chair and professor of cellular and molecular pharmacology at UCSF, and senior author of the two new papers. “One of the most exciting applications is in engineering therapeutic cells – we can now provide these cells with highly precise instructions about how to recognize and respond to disease.”
One of the pioneers in the whole gene therapy movement of the past 35 years has combined his knowledge of viral vectors with the hot new CRISPR/Cas9 tech to tackle a rare genetic liver disease. And his work with rodents highlighted both the promise of this new technology as well as an unexpected hurdle.
James Wilson at the University of Pennsylvania is virtually the father of adeno-associated virus–or AAV–vectors used to deliver gene therapies. After years of up and down progress, including an early patient death that slowed research in gene therapies for decades, his technology was in-licensed by ReGenX, which has since outlicensed it to a group of biotechs pursuing new gene therapy programs.
In what is described as a first in research circles, he used an AAV vector to deliver the components of CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing tools into a mouse model of a rare metabolic urea-cycle disorder, triggered by a deficiency in the ornithine transcarbamylase (OTC) enzyme. When one of a series of enzymes is missing or “deficient,” ammonia can accumulate in the blood and circulate into the brain, where it can badly damage brains. OTC deficiency occurs in one in every 40,000 births.
Wilson’s group used one AAV to deliver a Cas9 enzyme–the cutting tool–specifically into liver cells. Another vector carried a guide RNA to the specified spot and donor DNA to correct the mutation in a cut-and-paste approach that is spreading around academic labs like wild fire.
Wilson says his team achieved a 10% reversion in the liver cells of newborn mice, with an increased survival rate for challenged rodents and a high death rate in the untreated group of newly born mice. In adult mice, though, the team say that the experiment didn’t work as planned, highlighting a needed correction in the process. And now they’re following up with new approaches to see how that might work.
“Correcting a disease-causing mutation following birth in this animal model brings us one step closer to realizing the potential of personalized medicine,” said Wilson, a professor of medicine and director of the Orphan Disease Center at Penn. “Nevertheless, my 35-year career in gene therapy has taught me how difficult translating mouse studies to successful human treatments can be. From this study, we are now adjusting the gene-editing system in the next phases of our investigation to address the unforeseen complications seen in adult animals.”
New CRISPR/Cas9 delivery method could offer a clinical pathway
CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing is a rapidly developing technique that is thought to provide revolutionary new ways to manipulate genes for the treatment of a number of diseases. Delivering the CRISPR therapeutic in an efficient, safe and predictable way, though, has been difficult–to this end, researchers at UMass have created a means of administering the gene editor that could help send it to clinical trials.
CRISPR/Cas9 is a natural immune system in bacteria used to protect them from foreign genetic material, and scientists have used its components to cut and repair DNA sequences to replace faulty, disease-causing portions with corrected versions.
The difficulty comes about in getting the separate components (the Cas9 “scalpel,” the DNA repair template and an RNA guide) to the genetic material in a target cell. Previous attempts at delivering the system through disruptive, high-powered injection has caused damage to the liver and required too much volume when treating mice with metabolic diseases.
A hypothesis is proposed about potassium ponds being the cradles of life enriches the gamut of ideas about the possible conditions of pre-biological evolution on the primeval Earth, but does not bring us closer to solving the real problem of the origin of life. The gist of the matter lies in the mechanism of making a delimitation between two environments – the intracellular environment and the habitat of protocells. Since the sodium–potassium pump (Na+ /K+-ATPase) was discovered, no molecular model has been proposed for a predecessor of the modern sodium pump. This has brought into life the idea of the potassium pond, wherein protocells would not need a sodium pump. However, current notions of the operation of living cells come into conflict with even physical laws when trying to use them to explain the origin and functioning of protocells. Thus, habitual explanations of the physical properties of living cells have become inapplicable to explain the corresponding properties of Sidney Fox’s microspheres. Likewise, existing approaches to solving the problem of the origin of life do not see the need for the comparative study of living cells and cell models, assemblies of biological and artificial small molecules and macromolecules under physical conditions conducive to the origin of life. The time has come to conduct comprehensive research into the fundamental physical properties of protocells and create a new discipline – protocell physiology or protophysiology – which should bring us much closer to solving the problem of the origin of life.
There is a statement we constantly come across in the scientific and popular-science literature: the ion composition of the internal environment of the body of humans and animals, in which all of its cells are immersed, is close to that of seawater. This observation appeared in the literature even 100 years ago, when it became possible to investigate the ion composition of biological liquids.
This similarity between the internal environment of the body and the sea is quite obvious: in both seawater and blood plasma there are one or two orders of magnitude more Na+ ions than K+. It is this composition that can make one think that life originated in the primeval ocean (the memory of which has since been sustained by the internal environment of the body), and the first cells delineated themselves from seawater using a weakly permeable membrane, so that their internal environment became special, suitable for chemical and physical processes needed to sustain life. Indeed, the ratio of the above cations in the cytoplasm is the exact reverse of their ratio in seawater: there is much more K+ in it than Na+ . In fact, physiological processes can only be possible in an environment where potassium prevails over sodium. Therefore, any theory of the origin of life must explain how such a deep delimitation (distinction) between the two environments could occur: the intracellular environment, wherein vitally important processes take course, and the external environment, which provides the cell with necessary materials and conditions.
For the protocell to separate from seawater, a mechanism must arise that creates and maintains the ion asymmetry between the primeval cell and its environs. We normally consider a mechanism of this kind as the isolating lipid membrane with a molecular ion pump, the Na+/K+ -ATPase, built into it. If life originated in seawater, the origin of the first cell inevitably comes down to the origin of the sodium pump and any structure supporting it – the lipid membrane – without which the work of any pump would make little sense. It seems that life is born in conditions that are really adverse to it and even ruinous.
The great basic question of science: Membrane compartment or non-membrane phase compartment (biophase) is a physical basis for origin of life?
1. If life originated in seawater, the origin of the first cell inevitably comes down to the origin of the sodium pump and any structure supporting it – the lipid membrane – without which the work of any pump would make little sense.
2. Since the sodium-potassium pump (Na+/K+-ATPase) was discovered, no molecular model has been proposed for a predecessor of the modern sodium pump. Neither Miller’s electrical charges, nor Fox’s amino-acid condensation, nor building ready-made biomolecules into coacervates; none of this has managed to lead to the self-origination of the progenitor of the ion pump even in favourable lab conditions.
3. In 2007, we saw the simultaneous release of two articles, in which it was posited that life originated not in seawater as previously thought, but in smaller bodies of water with a K+/Na+ ratio necessary to sustain life. In this conditions sodium pump is not needed and the pump can originate later. But why the pump is needed if K+/Na+ ratio is good? The origin of the sodium pump in conditions where there is no natural need for it may require the agency of Providence.
4. Potassium Big Bang on Earth instead of potassium ponds.
5. Fox’s microspheres do not need potassium ponds.
6. Despite the fact that Fox’s microspheres have no fully functional membrane with sodium pumps and specific ion channels, they generate action potentials similar to that by nerve cells and in addition have ion channels which open and close spontaneously. This ability of the microspheres contradicts to the generally accepted ideas about the mechanism of generation of biological electrical potentials.
7. Hodgkin-Huxley model of action potentials is similarly well-compatible with both the nerve cell and Fox’s microsphere.
8. Biophase as the main subject of protophysiology. In the past they considered the living cell as a non-membrane phase compartment with different physical properties in comparison to the surrounding medium, and this physical difference plays a key role in cell function. According to a new take on an old phase, non-membrane phase compartments play an important role in the functioning of the cell nucleus, nuclear envelope and then of cytoplasm. Somebody sees the compartments even as temporary organelles. According to available data, the phase compartments can play a key role in cell signaling. In this historical context, studies in recent years dedicated to non-membrane phase compartments in the living cells sound sensational.
9. It is essentially a Protocell World which weaves known RNA World, DNA World and Protein World into unity. 10. In the view of non-membrane phase approach, the usage of liposomes and other membrane (non-biophase) cell models to solve the issue of the origin of life is a deadlock way of the investigation. I would be grat
This visual abstract depicts how the microbiota and serum metabolites in brown bears differ seasonally between hibernation and active phases. Colonization of mice with a bear microbiota promoted increased adiposity. These findings suggest that seasonal microbiota variation may contribute to metabolism of the hibernating brown bear. [Sommer et al./Cell Reports 2016]
Gorging oneself on high-calorie food to pack on fat only to fall asleep for a few months and have it all melt away isn’t the latest diet fad (at least not yet), but it is a regular part of life for bears as they prepare to hibernate for the winter. Yet, despite the rapid weight gain, the animals somehow avoid the health consequences so often associated with obesity in humans.
Researchers at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden have published results from a study wherein they show that bears’ shifting metabolic status is associated with significant changes in their gut microbes. The researchers were particularly surprised by the discovery that the bears’ summer gut microbiota included bacteria that take in more energy from the diet.
“The restructuring of the microbiota into a more avid energy harvester during summer, which potentially contributes to the increased adiposity gain without impairing glucose metabolism, is quite striking,” explained senior study author Fredrik Bäckhed, Ph.D., professor at The Wallenberg Laboratory for Cardiovascular and Metabolic Research within the University of Gothenburg.
The findings from this study were published recently in Cell Reports through an article entitled “The Gut Microbiota Modulates Energy Metabolism in the Hibernating Brown Bear Ursus arctos.”
Previous work done in Dr. Bäckhed’s laboratory showed that the composition of gut microbiota can influence the amount of energy harvested from the diet, and more recently the investigators found that the microbiota also shifts in people who are obese and in those with type 2 diabetes. This led the team to hypothesize whether changes to the microbiota might also be important in hibernating brown bears in the wild.
“We analyzed the microbiota of free-ranging brown bears during their active phase and hibernation. Compared to the active phase, hibernation microbiota had reduced diversity, reduced levels ofFirmicutes and Actinobacteria, and increased levels of Bacteroidetes,” the authors wrote. “Several metabolites involved in lipid metabolism, including triglycerides, cholesterol, and bile acids were also affected by hibernation.”
Dr. Bäckhed’s team took their investigation a step further by exploring whether the changes in the bears’ microbiota was driving the shift in metabolism by transferring the bears’ summer and winter microbiota into mice.
“Transplantation of the bear microbiota from summer and winter to germ-free mice transferred some of the seasonal metabolic features and demonstrated that the summer microbiota promoted adiposity without impairing glucose tolerance, suggesting that seasonal variation in the microbiota may contribute to host energy metabolism in the hibernating brown bear,” described the authors.
The researchers were encouraged by their findings and believe it’s possible that the findings in bears might suggest new strategies for managing obesity in humans; however, Dr. Bäckhed urged caution about over-interpreting the study results.
“I think it’s too early [to say], as I consider this being very basic science,” Dr. Bäckhed concluded. “However, if we learn more about which bacteria and the functions that promote and/or protect against obesity [in hibernating bears], we may identify new potential therapeutic targets.”
The Gut Microbiota Modulates Energy Metabolism in the Hibernating Brown Bear Ursus arctos
Felix Sommer, Marcus Stahlman, Olga Ilkayeva, …, Christopher B. Newgard, Ole Frobert, Frederik Backhed
Bear microbiota composition differs seasonally between hibernation and active phase
Blood metabolites differ seasonally in the brown bear
The bear gut microbiota promote energy storage during summer
Hibernation is an adaptation that helps many animals to conserve energy during food shortage in winter. Brown bears double their fat depots during summer and use these stored lipids during hibernation. Although bears seasonally become obese, they remain metabolically healthy. We analyzed the microbiota of free-ranging brown bears during their active phase and hibernation. Compared to the active phase, hibernation microbiota had reduced diversity, reduced levels of Firmicutes and Actinobacteria, and increased levels of Bacteroidetes. Several metabolites involved in lipid metabolism, including triglycerides, cholesterol, and bile acids, were also affected by hibernation. Transplantation of the bear microbiota from summer and winter to germ-free mice transferred some of the seasonal metabolic features and demonstrated that the summer microbiota promoted adiposity without impairing glucose tolerance, suggesting that seasonal variation in the microbiota may contribute to host energy metabolism in the hibernating brown bear.
Signaling of Immune Response in Colon Cancer, Volume 2 (Volume Two: Latest in Genomics Methodologies for Therapeutics: Gene Editing, NGS and BioInformatics, Simulations and the Genome Ontology), Part 1: Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)
Signaling of Immune Response in Colon Cancer
Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP, Curator
LPBI
Revised 1/13/2016
STING Protein May Serve as Biomarker for Colorectal and Other Cancers
Scientists at University of Miami Miller School of Medicine’s Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center say they have discovered how the stimulator of interferon genes (STING) signaling pathway may play an important role in alerting the immune system to cellular transformation. They believe their finding will shed further light on the immune system’s response to cancer development.
In 2008, Glen N. Barber, Ph.D., leader of the viral oncology program at Sylvester, and professor and chairman of cell biology at the Miller School of Medicine, and colleagues published in Nature (“STING is an endoplasmic reticulum adaptor that facilitates innate immune signalling”) the discovery of STING as a new cellular molecule that recognizes virus and bacteria infection to initiate host defense and immune responses. In the new study, published in Cell Reports (“Deregulation of STING Signaling in Colorectal Carcinoma Constrains DNA Damage Responses and Correlates With Tumorigenesis”), they describe STING’s role in the potential suppression of colorectal cancer.
“Since 2008 we’ve known that STING is crucial for antiviral and antibacterial responses,” said Dr. Barber. “But until now, little had been known about its function in human tumors. In this study we show, for the first time, that STING signaling is repressed in colorectal carcinoma and other cancers, an event which may enable transformed cells to evade the immune system.”
Colorectal cancer currently affects around 1.2 million people in the U.S. and 150,000 new cases are diagnosed every year, making it the third most common cancer in both men and women. Since most colon cancers develop from benign polyps, they can be treated successfully when detected early. However, if the tumor has already spread, survival rates are generally low.
Using disease models of colorectal cancer, the team of Sylvester scientists showed that loss of STING signaling negatively affected the body’s ability to recognize DNA-damaged cells. In particular, certain cytokines that facilitate tissue repair and antitumor priming of the immune system were not sufficiently produced to initiate a significant immune response to eradicate the colorectal cancer.
“We were able to show that impaired STING responses may enable damaged cells to elude the immune system,” continued Dr. Barber. “And if the body doesn’t recognize and attack cancer cells, they will multiply and, ultimately, spread to other parts of the body.”
He and his colleagues suggest evaluating STING signaling as a prognostic marker for the treatment of colorectal as well as other cancers. For example, Dr. Barber’s study showed that cancer cells with defective STING signaling were particularly prone to attack by oncolytic viruses presently being used as cancer therapies.
“Impaired STING responses may enable damaged cells to evade host immunosurveillance processes, although they provide a critical prognostic measurement that could help predict the outcome of effective oncoviral therapy,” wrote the investigators.
This is the first detailed examination of how the stimulator of interferon genes (STING) signaling pathway, discovered by Glen N. Barber, Ph.D., Leader of the Viral Oncology Program at Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, may play an important role in alerting the immune system to cellular transformation.
In 2008, Barber, who is also Professor and Chairman of Cell Biology at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, and colleagues published in Nature the discovery of STINGas a new cellular molecule that recognizes virus and bacteria infection to initiate host defense and immune responses. In the new study they describe STING’s role in the potential suppression of colorectal cancer.
“Since 2008 we’ve known that STING is crucial for antiviral and antibacterial responses,” said Barber. “But until now, little had been known about its function in human tumors. In this study we show, for the first time, that STING signaling is repressed in colorectal carcinoma and other cancers, an event which may enable transformed cells to evade the immune system.”
Colorectal cancer currently affects around 1.2 million people in the United States and 150.000 new cases are diagnosed every year, making it the third most common cancer in both men and women. Since most colon cancers develop from benign polyps, they can be treated successfully when detected early. However, if the tumor has already spread, survival rates are generally low.
Using disease models of colorectal cancer, the team of Sylvester scientists showed that loss of STING signaling negatively affected the body’s ability to recognize DNA-damaged cells. In particular, certain cytokines – small proteins important for cell signaling – that facilitate tissue repair and anti-tumor priming of the immune system were not sufficiently produced to initiate a significant immune response to eradicate the colorectal cancer.
“We were able to show that impaired STING responses may enable damaged cells to elude the immune system,” added Barber. “And if the body doesn’t recognize and attack cancer cells, they will multiply and, ultimately, spread to other parts of the body.”
Barber and his colleagues suggest evaluating STING signaling as a prognostic marker for the treatment of colorectal as well as other cancers. For example, Barber’s study showed that cancer cells with defective STING signaling were particularly prone to attack by oncolytic viruses presently being used as cancer therapies. Alternate studies with colleagues have also shown that activators of STING signaling are potent stimulators of anti-tumor immune responses. Collectively, the control of STING signaling may have important implications for cancer development as well as cancer treatment.
Every step you take: STING pathway key to tumor immunity
A recently discovered protein complex known as STING plays a crucial role in detecting the presence of tumor cells and promoting an aggressive anti-tumor response by the body’s innate immune system, according to two separate studies published in the Nov. 20 issue of the journal Immunity.
The studies, both from University of Chicago-based research teams, have major implications for the growing field of cancer immunotherapy. The findings show that when activated, the STING pathway triggers a natural immune response against the tumor. This includes production of chemical signals that help the immune system identify tumor cells and generate specific killer T cells. The research also found that targeted high-dose radiation therapy dials up the activation of this pathway, which promotes immune-mediated tumor control.
These findings could “enlarge the fraction of patients who respond to immunotherapy with prolonged control of the tumor,” according to a commentary on the papers by the University of Verona’s Vincenzo Bronte, MD. “Enhancing the immunogenicity of their cancers might expand the lymphocyte repertoire that is then unleashed by interference with checkpoint blockade pathways,” such as anti-PD-1.
STING, short for STimulator of INterferon Genes complex, is a crucial part of the process the immune system relies on to detect threats — such as infections or cancer cells — that are marked by the presence of DNA that is damaged or in the wrong place, inside the cell but outside the nucleus.
Detection of such “cytosolic” DNA initiates a series of interactions that lead to the STING pathway. Activating the pathway triggers the production of interferon-beta, which in turn alerts the immune system to the threat, helps the system detect cancerous or infected cells, and ultimately sends activated T cells into the battle.
“We have learned
“Innate immune sensing via the host STING pathway is critical for tumor control by checkpoint blockade,” Gajewski’s team noted in their paper. They found promising drugs known as checkpoint inhibitors — such as anti PD-1 or anti PD-L1, which can take the brakes off of an immune response — were not effective in STING-deficient mice. New agents that stimulate the STING pathway are being developed as potential cancer therapeutics.
A second University of Chicago team, led by cancer biologistYang-Xin Fu, MD, PhD, professor of pathology, and Ralph Weichselbaum, MD, chairman of radiation and cellular oncology and co-director of the Ludwig Center for Metastasis Research, found that high-dose radiation therapy not only kills targeted cancer cells but the resulting DNA damage drives a systemic immune response.
a great deal recently about what we call checkpoints, the stumbling blocks that prevent the immune system from ultimately destroying cancers,” said Thomas Gajewski, MD, PhD, professor of medicine and pathology at the University of Chicago and senior author of one of the studies. “Blockade of immune checkpoints, such as with anti-PD-1, is therapeutic in a subset of patients, but many individuals still don’t respond. Understanding the role of the STING pathway provides insights into how we can ‘wake up’ the immune response against tumors. This can be further boosted by checkpoint therapies.”
The two published studies, he said, help move this approach forward.
In a series of experiments in mice, both research teams found tumor cell-derived DNA could initiate an immune response against cancers. But when tested in mice that lacked a functional gene for STING, the immune system did not effectively respond.
“This result unifies traditional studies of DNA damage with newly identified DNA sensing of immune responses,” Fu said.
“This is a previously unknown mechanism,” Weichselbaum added.
In mice that lacked STING, however, there was no therapeutic immune response. The induction of interferons by radiation and consequent cancer cell killing, they conclude, depends on STING-pathway signaling.
They did find that combining cyclic guanosine monophosphate-adenosine monophosphate (cGAMP), an earlier step in the STING pathway, with radiation, could greatly enhance the antitumor efficacy of radiation.
“This opens a new avenue to develop STING-related agonists for patients with radiation-resistant cancers,” Fu said.
STING-Dependent Cytosolic DNA Sensing Mediates Innate Immune Recognition of Immunogenic Tumors
• Spontaneous T cell responses against tumors require the host STING pathway in vivo
• Tumor-derived DNA can induce type I interferon production via STING
• Tumor DNA can be identified in host APCs in the tumor microenvironment in vivo
Summary
Spontaneous T cell responses against tumors occur frequently and have prognostic value in patients. The mechanism of innate immune sensing of immunogenic tumors leading to adaptive T cell responses remains undefined, although type I interferons (IFNs) are implicated in this process. We found that spontaneous CD8+ T cell priming against tumors was defective in mice lacking stimulator of interferon genes complex (STING), but not other innate signaling pathways, suggesting involvement of a cytosolic DNA sensing pathway. In vitro, IFN-β production and dendritic cell activation were triggered by tumor-cell-derived DNA, via cyclic-GMP-AMP synthase (cGAS), STING, and interferon regulatory factor 3 (IRF3). In the tumor microenvironment in vivo, tumor cell DNA was detected within host antigen-presenting cells, which correlated with STING pathway activation and IFN-β production. Our results demonstrate that a major mechanism for innate immune sensing of cancer occurs via the host STING pathway, with major implications for cancer immunotherapy.
Immunity Erratum STING-Dependent Cytosolic DNA Sensing Mediates Innate Immune Recognition of Immunogenic Tumors
Seng-Ryong Woo, Mercedes B. Fuertes, Leticia Corrales, Stefani Spranger, Michael J. Furdyna, Michael Y.K. Leung, Ryan Duggan, Ying Wang, Glen N. Barber, Katherine A. Fitzgerald, Maria-Luisa Alegre, and Thomas F. Gajewski* *Correspondence: tgajewsk@medicine.bsd.uchicago.eduhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2014.12.015 (Immunity 41, 830–842; November 20, 2014)
The original Figure 3C accidentally contained a duplicated panel in the bright-field column, third row down, and this has now been replaced with the correct data. The change does not alter the conclusions of the paper. This mistake has now been corrected online, and the authors regret the error.
Cytosolic DNA Sensors (CDSs): a STING in the tail – Review
The innate immune system provides the first line of defense against infectious pathogens and serves to limit their early proliferation. It is also vital in priming and activating the adaptive immune system.
Innate immune detection of intracellular DNA derived from viruses and invasive bacteria is important to initiate an effective protective response. This crucial step depends on cytosolic DNA sensors (CDSs), which upon activation trigger the production of type I interferons (IFNs) and the induction of IFN-responsive genes and proinflammatory chemokines.
Although the identity of these CDSs is not fully uncovered, much progress has been made in understanding the signaling pathways triggered by these sensors.
Cytosolic DNA-mediated production of type I IFNs (mainly IFN-β) requires the transcription factor IFN regulatory factor 3 (IRF3), which is activated upon phosphorylation by TANK-binding-kinase-1 (TBK1) [1].
STING in DNA sensing
Recently, a new molecule, STING (stimulator of IFN genes), has been shown to be essential for the TBK1-IRF3- dependent induction of IFN-β by transfected DNA ligands and intracellular DNA produced by pathogens after infection [2, 3].
STING (also known as MITA, MPYS and ERIS) is a transmembrane protein that resides in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) [2-6]. In response to cytosolic DNA, STING forms dimers and translocates from the ER to the Golgi then to punctate cytosolic structures where it colocalizes with TBK-1, leading to the phosphorylation of IRF3.
How STING stimulates TBK1-dependent IRF3 activation was recently elucidated by Tanaka and Chen. They found that, upon cytosolic DNA sensing, the C-terminal tail of STING acts as a scaffold protein to promote the phosphorylation of IRF3 by TBK1 [7].
STING in the host response to intracellular pathogens. Linking type I IFN response and autophagy for better defense
Until very recently, STING in addition to its role as an adaptor protein was also thought to function as a sensor of cyclic dinucleotides.
Burdette et al. first demonstrated that STING binds directly to the bacterial molecule cyclic diguanylate monophosphate (c-di-GMP) [8]. This finding was confirmed by several teams who examined the structure of STING bound to c-di-GMP [9-11], including Cheng and colleagues, however their data suggest that STING is not the primary sensor of c-di-GMP [12]. Rather, they indicate that DDX41, an identified CDS, functions as a direct receptor for cyclic dinucleotides upstream of STING. The authors hypothesized that DDX41 binds to c-di-GMP then forms a complex with STING to activate the IFN response.
STING induces autophagy
Exciting new developments reveal that STING participates in another aspect of innate immunity, autophagy.
Autophagy plays a critical role in host defense responses to pathogens by promoting the elimination of microbes that enter into the cytosol by their sequestration into autophagosomes and their delivery to the lysosome.
Recent studies have reported that DNA viruses and intracellular bacteria induce autophagy and that this process is dependent on cytosolic genomic DNA and STING [13-15]. Robust induction of autophagy was also observed after transfection of various double stranded (ds) DNA species, such as poly(dA:dT), poly(dG:dC) or plasmid DNA, but not single stranded (ss) DNA, dsRNA or ssRNA [16].
Interestingly, activated STING was shown to relocate to unidentified membrame-bound compartments where it colocalizes with LC3, a hallmark of autophagy, and ATg9a. The latter protein was reported to regulate the interaction between STING and TBK1 after dsDNA stimulation [16]. The E3 ubiquitin ligases TRIM56 and TRIM32
were also found to regulate STING by mediating its dimerization through K63-linked ubiquitination [17, 18].
Several cytosolic DNA sensors upstream of STING have been proposed. DNA-dependent activator of IRFs (DAI) was the first CDS discovered based on the ability of transfected poly(dA:dT) to induce IFN-β [19]. However, the role of DAI has been shown to be very cell-type specific and cells derived from DAI-deficient mice responded normally to dsDNA ligands [20].
While analyzing immune responses to dsDNA regions derived from vaccinia virus (VACV-70) or Herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-60) genomes, Unterholzner et al. identified IFI16 as a DNA binding protein mediating IFN-β induction [21]. Interestingly, IFI16 belongs to a new family of pattern recognition receptors that contain the pyrin and HIN domain (PYHIN), termed AIM2-like receptors (ALRs).
AIM2 is a STING-independent cytosolic DNA sensor that forms an inflammasome with ASC to trigger caspase-1 activation and the secretion of the proinflammatory cytokines IL-1β and IL-18 [20].
Members of the DExD/H-box helicase superfamily have also been reported to function as cytosolic DNA sensors. While DHX36 and DHX9 were identified as STING-independent but MyD88-dependent sensors of CpG-containing DNA in plasmacytoid dendritic cells, DDX41 was found to bind various dsDNA ligands and localize with STING to promote IFN-β expression [22]. Other CDSs have been reported to function independently of STING: RNA Pol III, LRRFIP1 and Ku70 [20].
Unlike cytosolic RNA sensors (RIG-I, MDA-5), which detect structural moieties specific to pathogen RNA, such as 5’-triphosphates, it is not clear whether cytosolic DNA sensors can recognize any particular structural motif of DNA that would discriminate between self and non-self. This suggests that CDSs may have a role not only in anti-microbial innate immune responses but also in autoimmunity. A multitude of CDSs have been described but whether they are all true receptors remains an open question.
1. Stetson DB & Medzhitov R. 2006. Recognition of cytosolic DNA activates an IRF3-dependent innate immune response. Immunity. 24(1):93-103.
2. Ishikawa H. & Barber GN., 2008. STING is an endoplasmic reticulum adaptor that facilitates innate immune signalling. Nature. 455(7213):674-8.
3. Ishikawa H. et al., 2009. STING regulates intracellular DNA-mediated, type I interferon-dependent innate immunity. Nature. 461(7265):788-92.
4. Zhong B. et al., 2008. The adaptor protein MITA links virus-sensing receptors to IRF3 transcription factor activation. Immunity. 29(4):538-50.
5. Jin L. et al., 2008. MPYS, a novel membrane tetraspanner, is associated with major histocompatibility complex class II and mediates transduction of apoptotic signals. Mol Cell Biol. 28(16):5014-26.
UV Light Potentiates STING (Stimulator of Interferon Genes)-dependent Innate Immune Signaling through Deregulation of ULK1 (Unc51-like Kinase 1).
The mechanism by which ultraviolet (UV) wavelengths of sunlight trigger or exacerbate the symptoms of the autoimmune disorder lupus erythematosus is not known but may involve a role for the innate immune system. Here we show that UV radiation potentiates STING (stimulator of interferon genes)-dependent activation of the immune signaling transcription factor interferon regulatory factor 3 (IRF3) in response to cytosolic DNA and cyclic dinucleotides in keratinocytes and other human cells. Furthermore, we find that modulation of this innate immune response also occurs with UV-mimetic chemical carcinogens and in a manner that is independent of DNA repair and several DNA damage and cell stress response signaling pathways. Rather, we find that the stimulation of STING-dependent IRF3 activation by UV is due to apoptotic signaling-dependent disruption of ULK1 (Unc51-like kinase 1), a pro-autophagic protein that negatively regulates STING. Thus, deregulation of ULK1 signaling by UV-induced DNA damage may contribute to the negative effects of sunlight UV exposure in patients with autoimmune disorders.
STING and the innate immune response to nucleic acids in the cytosol
Cytosolic detection of pathogen-derived nucleic acids is critical for the initiation of innate immune defense against diverse bacterial, viral and eukaryotic pathogens. Conversely, inappropriate responses to cytosolic nucleic acids can produce severe autoimmune pathology. The host protein STING has been identified as a central signaling molecule in the innate immune response to cytosolic nucleic acids. STING seems to be especially critical for responses to cytosolic DNA and the unique bacterial nucleic acids called ‘cyclic dinucleotides’. Here we discuss advances in the understanding of STING and highlight the many unresolved issues in the field.
The detection of pathogen-derived nucleic acids is a central strategy by which the innate immune system senses microbes to then initiate protective responses1. Conversely, inappropriate recognition of self nucleic acids can result in debilitating autoimmune diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus2. It is therefore important to understand the molecular basis of the detection of nucleic acids by the innate immune system. Studies have established that nucleic acids derived from extracellular sources are sensed mainly by endosomal Toll-like receptors (TLRs), such as TLR3, TLR7 and TLR9, whereas cytosolic nucleic acids are detected independently of TLRs by a variety of less-well-characterized mechanisms1.
Studies have identified STING (‘stimulator of interferon genes’; also known as TMEM173, MPYS, MITA and ERIS) as a critical signaling molecule in the innate response to cytosolic nucleic-acid ligands. STING was first described as a protein that interacts with major histocompatibility complex class II molecules3, but the relevance of this interaction remains unclear. Subsequent studies have instead focused on the role of STING in the transcriptional induction of type I interferons and coregulated genes in response to nucleic acids in the cytosol. Several groups have independently isolated STING by screening for proteins able to induce interferon-B (IFN-B) when overexpressed4–6. Studies of STING-deficient mice have subsequently confirmed the essential role of STING in innate responses to cytosolic nucleic-acid ligands, particularly double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) and unique bacterial nucleic acids called ‘cyclic dinucleotides’7–9. Several studies have also linked STING to the interferon response to cytosolic RNA5–7, but this has not been found consistently7,8,10,11; thus, we focus here on the role of STING in response to DNA and cyclic dinucleotides.
Protein Stimulator of interferon genes protein
Gene TMEM173
Organism Homo sapiens (Human)
Facilitator of innate immune signaling that acts as a sensor of cytosolic DNA from bacteria and viruses and promotes the production of type I interferon (IFN-alpha and IFN-beta). Innate immune response is triggered in response to non-CpG double-stranded DNA from viruses and bacteria delivered to the cytoplasm. Acts by recognizing and binding cyclic di-GMP (c-di-GMP), a second messenger produced by bacteria, and cyclic GMP-AMP (cGAMP), a messenger produced in response to DNA virus in the cytosol: upon binding of c-di-GMP or cGAMP, autoinhibition is alleviated and TMEM173/STING is able to activate both NF-kappa-B and IRF3 transcription pathways to induce expression of type I interferon and exert a potent anti-viral state. May be involved in translocon function, the translocon possibly being able to influence the induction of type I interferons. May be involved in transduction of apoptotic signals via its association with the major histocompatibility complex class II (MHC-II). Mediates death signaling via activation of the extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) pathway. Essential for the induction of IFN-beta in response to human herpes simplex virus 1 (HHV-1) infection. Exhibits 2′,3′ phosphodiester linkage-specific ligand recognition. Can bind both 2′-3′ linked cGAMP and 3′-3′ linked cGAMP but is preferentially activated by 2′-3′ linked cGAMP (PubMed:26300263)
Stimulator of interferon genes protein (IPR029158)
Transmembrane protein 173, also known as stimulator of interferon genes protein (STING) or endoplasmic reticulum interferon stimulator (ERIS), is a transmembrane adaptor protein which is involved in innate immune signalling processes. It induces expression of type I interferons (IFN-alpha and IFN-beta) via the NF-kappa-B and IRF3, pathways in response to non-self cytosolic RNA and dsDNA [PMID: 18724357, PMID: 19776740,PMID: 18818105, PMID: 19433799].