Epigenetic and pharmacological control of pigmentation via Bromodomain Protein 9 (BRD9).

Lineage-specific differentiation programs are activated by epigenetic changes in chromatin structure. Melanin-producing melanocytes maintain a gene expression program ensuring appropriate enzymatic conversion of metabolites into the pigment, melanin, and transfer to surrounding cells. During neuroectodermal development, SMARCA4 (BRG1), the catalytic subunit of SWItch/Sucrose Non-Fermentable (SWI/SNF) chromatin remodeling complexes, is essential for lineage specification. SMARCA4 is also required for development of multipotent neural crest precursors into melanoblasts, which differentiate into pigment-producing melanocytes. In addition to the catalytic domain, SMARCA4 and several SWI/SNF subunits contain bromodomains which are amenable to pharmacological inhibition. We investigated the effects of pharmacological inhibitors of SWI/SNF bromodomains on melanocyte differentiation. Strikingly, treatment of murine melanoblasts and human neonatal epidermal melanocytes with selected bromodomain inhibitors abrogated melanin synthesis and visible pigmentation. Using functional genomics, iBRD9, a small molecule selective for the bromodomain of BRD9 was found to repress pigmentation-specific gene expression. Depletion of BRD9 confirmed a requirement for expression of pigmentation genes in the differentiation program from melanoblasts into pigmented melanocytes and in melanoma cells. Chromatin immunoprecipitation assays showed that iBRD9 disrupts the occupancy of BRD9 and the catalytic subunit SMARCA4 at melanocyte-specific loci. These data indicate that BRD9 promotes melanocyte pigmentation whereas pharmacological inhibition of BRD9 is repressive.

A Negative Regulatory Role for RKIP in Breast Cancer Immune Response.

Raf-1 kinase inhibitor protein was first identified as a negative regulator of the Raf signaling pathway. Subsequently, it was shown to have a causal role in containing cancer progression and metastasis. Early studies suggested that RKIP blocks cancer progression by inhibiting the Raf-1 pathway. However, it is not clear if the RKIP tumor and metastasis suppression function involve other targets. In addition to the Raf signaling pathway, RKIP has been found to modulate several other signaling pathways, affecting diverse biological functions including immune response. Recent advances in medicine have identified both positive and negative roles of immune response in cancer initiation, progression and metastasis. It is possible that one way that RKIP exerts its effect on cancer is by targeting an immune response mechanism. Here, we provide evidence supporting the causal role of tumor and metastasis suppressor RKIP in downregulating signaling pathways involved with immune response in breast cancer cells and discuss its potential ramification on cancer therapy.

Bromodomain and extra-terminal domain (BET) proteins regulate melanocyte differentiation.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacologic inhibition of bromodomain and extra-terminal (BET) proteins is currently being explored as a new therapeutic approach in cancer. Some studies have also implicated BET proteins as regulators of cell identity and differentiation through their interactions with lineage-specific factors. However, the role of BET proteins has not yet been investigated in melanocyte differentiation. Melanocyte inducing transcription factor (MITF) is the master regulator of melanocyte differentiation, essential for pigmentation and melanocyte survival. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that BET proteins regulate melanocyte differentiation through interactions with MITF. RESULTS: Here we show that chemical inhibition of BET proteins prevents differentiation of unpigmented melanoblasts into pigmented melanocytes and results in de-pigmentation of differentiated melanocytes. BET inhibition also slowed cell growth, without causing cell death, increasing the number of cells in G1. Transcriptional profiling revealed that BET inhibition resulted in decreased expression of pigment-specific genes, including many MITF targets. The expression of pigment-specific genes was also down-regulated in melanoma cells, but to a lesser extent. We found that RNAi depletion of the BET family members, bromodomain-containing protein 4 (BRD4) and bromodomain-containing protein 2 (BRD2) inhibited expression of two melanin synthesis enzymes, TYR and TYRP1. Both BRD4 and BRD2 were detected on melanocyte promoters surrounding MITF-binding sites, were associated with open chromatin structure, and promoted MITF binding to these sites. Furthermore, BRD4 and BRD2 physically interacted with MITF. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate a requirement for BET proteins in the regulation of pigmentation and melanocyte differentiation. We identified changes in pigmentation specific gene expression that occur upon BET inhibition in melanoblasts, melanocytes, and melanoma cells.

Critical role of miR-10b in B-RafV600E dependent anchorage independent growth and invasion of melanoma cells.

Recent high-throughput-sequencing of cancer genomes has identified oncogenic mutations in the B-Raf genetic locus as one of the critical events in melanomagenesis. B-Raf encodes a serine/threonine kinase that regulates the MAPK/ERK kinase (MEK) and extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) protein kinase cascade. In normal cells, the activity of B-Raf is tightly regulated and is required for cell growth and survival. B-Raf gain-of-function mutations in melanoma frequently lead to unrestrained growth, enhanced cell invasion and increased viability of cancer cells. Although it is clear that the invasive phenotypes of B-Raf mutated melanoma cells are stringently dependent on B-Raf-MEK-ERK activation, the downstream effector targets that are required for oncogenic B-Raf-mediated melanomagenesis are not well defined. miRNAs have regulatory functions towards the expression of genes that are important in carcinogenesis. We observed that miR-10b expression correlates with the presence of the oncogenic B-Raf (B-RafV600E) mutation in melanoma cells. While expression of miR-10b enhances anchorage-independent growth of B-Raf wild-type melanoma cells, miR-10b silencing decreases B-RafV600E cancer cell invasion in vitro. Importantly, the expression of miR-10b is required for B-RafV600E-mediated anchorage independent growth and invasion of melanoma cells in vitro. Taken together our results suggest that miR-10b is an important mediator of oncogenic B-RafV600E activity in melanoma.

Correction: RKIP regulates CCL5 expression to inhibit breast cancer invasion and metastasis by controlling macrophage infiltration.

Present: Due to an error made by the authors while submitting a revision, Dr. Tuan Zea Tan was omitted from the list of authors.Corrected: Correct author list can be found below. Authors sincerely apologize for this oversight. Ila Datar1, Xiaoliang Qiu1, Hong Zhi Ma1, Miranda Yeung1, Shweta Aras1, Ivana de la Serna1, Fahd Al-Mulla2, Tuan Zea Tan3, Jean Paul Thiery3, Robert Trumbly1, Xuan Fan4, Hongjuan Cui4 and Kam C. Yeung1 1 Department of Biochemistry and Cancer Biology, University of Toledo, College of Medicine, Health Science Campus, Toledo, OH, USA 2 Kuwait University, Faculty of Medicine. P.O. Box 24923, Safat, Kuwait 3 Department of Biochemistry, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 4 State Key Laboratory Of Silkworm Genome Biology, Chongqing, China Original article: Oncotarget. 2015; 6(36): 39050-61. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.5176.

RKIP regulates CCL5 expression to inhibit breast cancer invasion and metastasis by controlling macrophage infiltration.

Accumulating evidence suggests that presence of macrophages in the tumor microenvironment add to the invasive and tumor-promoting hallmarks of cancer cells by secreting angiogenic and growth factors. RKIP is a known metastasis suppressor and interferes with several steps of metastasis. However, the mechanistic underpinnings of its function as a broad metastasis suppressor remain poorly understood. Here, we establish a novel pathway for RKIP regulation of metastasis inhibition through the negative regulation of RANTES/CCL5 thereby limiting tumor macrophage infiltration and inhibition of angiogenesis. Using a combination of loss- and gain-of- function approaches, we show that RKIP hinders breast cancer cell invasion by inhibiting expression of the CC chemokine CCL5 in vitro. We also show that the expression levels of RKIP and CCL5 are inversely correlated among clinical human breast cancer samples. Using a mouse allograft breast cancer transplantation model, we highlight that ectopic expression of RKIP significantly decreases tumor vasculature, macrophage infiltration and lung metastases. Mechanistically, we demonstrate that the inhibition of the CCL5 expression is the cause of the observed effects resulting from RKIP expression. Taken together, our results underscore the significance of RKIP as important negative regulator of tumor microenvironment.

RKIP Inhibits Local Breast Cancer Invasion by Antagonizing the Transcriptional Activation of MMP13.

Raf Kinase Inhibitory Protein or RKIP was initially identified as a Raf-1 binding protein using the yeast 2-hybrid screen. RKIP inhibits the activation phosphorylation of MEK by Raf-1 by competitively inhibiting the binding of MEK to Raf-1 and thus exerting an inhibitory effect on the Raf-MEK-Erk pathway. RKIP has been identified as a metastasis suppressor gene. Expression of RKIP is low in cancer metastases. Although primary tumor growth remains unaffected, re- expression of RKIP inhibits cancer metastasis. Mechanistically, RKIP constrains metastasis by inhibiting angiogenesis, local invasion, intravasation, and colonization. The molecular mechanism of how RKIP inhibits these individual steps remains undefined. In our present study, using an unbiased PCR based screening and by analyzing DNA microarray expression datasets we observe that the expression of multiple metalloproteases (MMPs) including MMP1, MMP3, MMP10 and MMP13 are negatively correlated with RKIP expression in breast cancer cell lines and clinical samples. Since expression of MMPs by cancer cells is important for cancer metastasis, we hypothesize that RKIP may mediate suppression of breast cancer metastasis by inhibiting multiple MMPs. We show that the expression signature of RKIP and MMPs is better at predicting high metastatic risk than the individual gene. Using a combination of loss- and gain-of-function approaches, we find that MMP13 is the cause of RKIP-mediated inhibition of local cancer invasion. Interestingly expression of MMP13 alone is not sufficient to reverse the inhibition of breast cancer cell metastasis to the lung due to the expression of RKIP. We find that RKIP negatively regulates MMP13 through the Erk2 signaling pathway and the repression of MMP13 by RKIP is transcription factor AP-1 independent. Together, our findings indicate that RKIP inhibits cancer cell invasion, in part, via MMP13 inhibition. These data also implicate RKIP in the regulation of MMP transcription, suggesting a potential mechanism by which RKIP inhibits tumor progression and metastasis.

Differential effects of estrogen-dependent transactivation vs. transrepression by the estrogen receptor on invasiveness of HER2 overexpressing breast cancer cells.

Estrogen (E2) supports breast cancer cell growth but suppresses invasiveness and both actions are antagonized by anti-estrogens. As a consequence, anti-estrogen treatment may increase the invasive potential of estrogen receptor (ER)+ tumor cell sub-populations that are endocrine resistant due to HER2 amplification. Either transactivation or transrepression by E2/ER could lead to both up- and down-regulation of many genes. Inhibition of the transactivation function of ER is adequate to inhibit E2-dependent growth. However, the impact of inhibiting E2-dependent transactivation vs. transrepression by ER on regulation of invasiveness by E2 is less clear. Here we dissect the roles of ER-mediated transactivation and transrepression in the regulation of invasiveness of ER+/HER2+ breast cancer cells by E2. Knocking down the general ER co-activators CBP and p300 prevented activation by E2 of its classical target genes but did not interfere with the ability of E2 to repress its direct target genes known to support invasiveness and tumor progression; there was also no effect on invasiveness or the ability of E2 to regulate invasiveness. On the other hand, overexpression of a co-repressor binding site mutant of ER (L372R) prevented E2-dependent transrepression but not transactivation. The mutant ER abrogated the ability of E2 to suppress invasiveness. E2 can partially down-regulate HER2 but knocking down HER2 below E2-regulated levels did not affect invasiveness or the ability of E2 to regulate invasiveness, although it did inhibit growth. Therefore, in ER+/HER2+ cells, the E2-dependent transrepression by ER rather than its transactivation function is critical for regulation of invasiveness and this is independent of HER2 regulation by E2. The findings suggest that selective inhibitors of transactivation by ER may be more beneficial in reducing tumor progression than conventional anti-estrogens that also antagonize E2-dependent transrepression.

Genetic and epigenetic control of RKIP transcription.

Raf kinase inhibitory protein (RKIP) is known to modulate key signaling cascades and regulate normal physiological processes such as cellular proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis. The expression of RKIP is found to be downregulated in several cancer metastases and the repressed RKIP expression can be reactivated on treatment with chemotherapeutic agents. RKIP is a proven tumor metastasis suppressor gene and investigating the mechanisms of transcriptional regulation of RKIP is therefore of immense clinical importance. In this review, we discuss the basal expression of RKIP in various tissues and the genetic aspects of the RKIP chromosomal locus including the structure of the RKIP promoter as well as gene regulatory elements such as enhancers. We also review the genetic and epigenetic modulation of RKIP transcription through EZH2, a component of the polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) and sequence specific transcription factors (TFs) BACH1 and Snail. Emerging experimental evidence supports a unifying model in which both these TFs repress RKIP transcription in cancers by recruiting the EZH2 containing repressive complex to the proximal RKIP promoter. Finally, we review the known mechanisms employed by different types of chemotherapeutic agents to activate RKIP expression in cancer cells.

The ETS domain transcription factor ELK1 directs a critical component of growth signaling by the androgen receptor in prostate cancer cells.

The androgen receptor (AR) is essential for diverse aspects of prostate development and function. Molecular mechanisms by which prostate cancer (PC) cells redirect AR signaling to genes that primarily support growth are unclear. A systematic search for critical AR-tethering proteins led to ELK1, an ETS transcription factor of the ternary complex factor subfamily. Although genetically redundant, ELK1 was obligatory for AR-dependent growth and clonogenic survival in both hormone-dependent PC and castration-recurrent PC cells but not for AR-negative cell growth. AR required ELK1 to up-regulate a major subset of its target genes that was strongly and primarily enriched for cell growth functions. AR functioned as a coactivator of ELK1 by association through its A/B domain, bypassing the classical mechanism of ELK1 activation by phosphorylation and without inducing ternary complex target genes. The ELK1-AR synergy per se was ligand-independent, although it required ligand for nuclear localization of AR as targeting the AR A/B domain to the nucleus recapitulated the action of hormone; accordingly, Casodex was a poor antagonist of the synergy. ELK3, the closest substitute for ELK1 in structure/function and genome recognition, did not interact with AR. ELK1 thus directs selective and sustained gene induction that is a substantial and critical component of growth signaling by AR in PC cells. The ELK1-AR interaction offers a functionally tumor-selective drug target.

During hormone depletion or tamoxifen treatment of breast cancer cells the estrogen receptor apoprotein supports cell cycling through the retinoic acid receptor α1 apoprotein.

INTRODUCTION: Current hormonal adjuvant therapies for breast cancer including tamoxifen treatment and estrogen depletion are overall tumoristatic and are severely limited by the frequent recurrence of the tumors. Regardless of the resistance mechanism, development and progression of the resistant tumors requires the persistence of a basal level of cycling cells during the treatment for which the underlying causes are unclear. METHODS: In estrogen-sensitive breast cancer cells the effects of hormone depletion and treatment with estrogen, tamoxifen, all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA), fulvestrant, estrogen receptor α (ER) siRNA or retinoic acid receptor α (RARα) siRNA were studied by examining cell growth and cycling, apoptosis, various mRNA and protein expression levels, mRNA profiles and known chromatin associations of RAR. RARα subtype expression was also examined in breast cancer cell lines and tumors by competitive PCR. RESULTS: Basal proliferation persisted in estrogen-sensitive breast cancer cells grown in hormone depleted conditioned media without or with 4-hydroxytamoxifen (OH-Tam). Downregulating ER using either siRNA or fulvestrant inhibited basal proliferation by promoting cell cycle arrest, without enrichment for ErbB2/3+ overexpressing cells. The basal expression of RARα1, the only RARα isoform that was expressed in breast cancer cell lines and in most breast tumors, was supported by apo-ER but was unaffected by OH-Tam; RAR-ß and -γ were not regulated by apo-ER. Depleting basal RARα1 reproduced the antiproliferative effect of depleting ER whereas its restoration in the ER depleted cells partially rescued the basal cycling. The overlapping tamoxifen-insensitive gene regulation by apo-ER and apo-RARα1 comprised activation of mainly genes promoting cell cycle and mitosis and suppression of genes involved in growth inhibition; these target genes were generally insensitive to ATRA but were enriched in RAR binding sites in associated chromatin regions. CONCLUSIONS: In hormone-sensitive breast cancer, ER can support a basal fraction of S-phase cells (i) without obvious association with ErbB2/3 expression, (ii) by mechanisms unaffected by hormone depletion or OH-Tam and (iii) through maintenance of the basal expression of apo-RARα1 to regulate a set of ATRA-insensitive genes. Since isoform 1 of RARα is genetically redundant, its targeted inactivation or downregulation should be further investigated as a potential means of enhancing hormonal adjuvant therapy.

Hormone depletion-insensitivity of prostate cancer cells is supported by the AR without binding to classical response elements.

A need for androgen response elements (AREs) for androgen receptor (AR)-dependent growth of hormone depletion-insensitive prostate cancer is generally presumed. In such cells, androgen-independent activation by AR of certain genes has been attributed to selective increases in basal associations of AR with putative enhancers. We examined the importance of AR binding to DNA in prostate cancer cells in which proliferation in the absence of hormone was profoundly (∼ 90%) dependent on endogenous AR and where the receptor was not up-regulated or mutated but was predominantly nuclear. Here, ARE-mediated promoter activation and the binding of AR to a known ARE in the chromatin remained entirely androgen dependent, and the cells showed an androgen-responsive gene expression profile with an unaltered sensitivity to androgen dose. In the same cells, a different set of genes primarily enriched for cell division functions was activated by AR independently of hormone and significantly overlapped the signature gene overexpression profile of hormone ablation-insensitive clinical tumors. After knockdown of endogenous AR, hormone depletion-insensitive cell proliferation and AR apoprotein-dependent gene expression were rescued by an AR mutant that was unable to bind to ARE but that could transactivate through a well-established AR tethering protein. Hormone depletion-insensitive AR binding sites in the chromatin were functional, binding, and responding to both the wild-type and the mutant AR and lacked enrichment for canonical or noncanonical ARE half-sites. Therefore, a potentially diverse set of ARE-independent mechanisms of AR interactions with target genes must underlie truly hormone depletion-insensitive gene regulation and proliferation in prostate cancer.

RKIP inhibits NF-kappaB in cancer cells by regulating upstream signaling components of the IkappaB kinase complex.

RKIP was first identified as an inhibitor of the Raf-MEK-ERK signaling pathway. RKIP was also found to play an important role in the NF-kappaB pathway. Genetic and biochemical studies demonstrated that RKIP functioned as a scaffold protein facilitating the phosphorylation of IkappaB by upstream kinases. However, contrary to what one would expect of a scaffold protein, our results show that RKIP has an overall inhibitory effect on the NF-kappaB transcriptional activities. Since NF-kappaB target gene expression is subject to negative regulation involving the optimal induction of negative regulators, our data support a hypothesis that RKIP inhibits NF-kappaB activity via the auto-regulatory feedback loop by rapidly inducing the expression and synthesis of inhibitors of NF-kappaB activation.

In vitro characterization of the Mig1 repressor from Saccharomyces cerevisiae reveals evidence for monomeric and higher molecular weight forms.

The Mig1 DNA-binding protein of Saccharomyces cerevisiae was expressed and purified from yeast and the physical properties were characterized by several methods, including gel filtration, sucrose gradient sedimentation and native gel electrophoresis. Purified Mig1 exists as a monomer with a Stokes' radius of 48 A and a sedimentation coefficient of 3.55 S. Mig1 has an elongated shape with a frictional coefficient of 1.83. The K(d) of purified Mig1 for the SUC2 A site is 2.8 nM and for SUC2 B site 25.8 nM; these values were similar for Mig1 purified from repressed and derepressed cells. Full-length Mig1 expressed in yeast binds more tightly to SUC2 B than bacterially expressed GST-Mig1. Sucrose gradient sedimentation resolved a larger molecular weight form of Mig1 in whole-cell extracts that was not seen in purified samples and may represent a complex with another protein. This complex is found within the nucleus and is seen only in repressed cells. Mig1 exists in multiple phosphorylation states and only less phosphorylated forms of Mig1 are associated with this complex.

Mutations of the WD repeats that compromise Tup1 repression function maintain structural integrity of the WD domain trypsin-resistant core.

The yeast global transcriptional repressor Tup1 contains 7 WD repeats in its C-terminus that form a beta-propeller-like structure, in which the first and last WD repeats interact to make a closed circle. The WD domains of all proteins tested, including Tup1, form a compact structure resistant to trypsin digestion (Garcia-Higuera et al., Biochemistry 35 (1996) 13985-13994). We found that the in vitro formation of the trypsin-resistant core of Tup1 requires just five WD repeats (WD2-6). Deletion of the ST region between WD1 and WD2 destabilizes the trypsin-resistant core, but maintains Tup1 repression function in vivo. Linker insertion and point mutations in the WD repeats that compromise Tup1 repression function in vivo still maintain the trypsin-resistant core in vitro These results indicate that structural perturbation of the WD domain structure cannot explain the effects of these mutations on Tup1 repression function.

Functional dissection of the global repressor Tup1 in yeast: dominant role of the C-terminal repression domain.

In the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Tup1, in association with Cyc8 (Ssn6), functions as a general repressor of transcription. Tup1 and Cyc8 are required for repression of diverse families of genes coordinately controlled by glucose repression, mating type, and other mechanisms. This repression is mediated by recruitment of the Cyc8-Tup1 complex to target promoters by sequence-specific DNA-binding proteins. We created a library of XhoI linker insertions and internal in-frame deletion mutations within the TUP1 coding region. Insertion mutations outside of the WD domains were wild type, while insertions within the WD domains induced mutant phenotypes with differential effects on the target genes SUC2, MFA2, RNR2, and HEM13. Deletion mutations confirmed previous findings of two separate repression domains in the N and C termini. The cumulative data suggest that the C-terminal repression domain, located near the first WD repeat, plays the dominant role in repression. Although the N-terminal repression domain is sufficient for partial repression, deletion of this region does not compromise repression. Surprisingly, deletion of the majority of the histone-binding domain of Tup1 also does not significantly reduce repression. The N-terminal region containing potential alpha-helical coiled coils is required for Tup1 oligomerization and association with Cyc8. Association with Cyc8 is required for repression of SUC2, HEM13, and RNR2 but not MFA2 and STE2.

Histone-dependent association of Tup1-Ssn6 with repressed genes in vivo.

The Tup1-Ssn6 complex regulates diverse classes of genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and serves as a model for corepressor functions in many organisms. Tup1-Ssn6 does not directly bind DNA but is brought to target genes through interactions with sequence-specific DNA binding factors. Full repression by Tup1-Ssn6 appears to require interactions with both the histone tails and components of the general transcription machinery, although the relative contribution of these two pathways is not clear. Here, we map Tup1 locations on two classes of Tup1-Ssn6-regulated genes in vivo via chromatin immunoprecipitations. Distinct profiles of Tup1 are observed on a cell-specific genes and DNA damage-inducible genes, suggesting that alternate repressive architectures may be created on different classes of repressed genes. In both cases, decreases in acetylation of histone H3 colocalize with Tup1. Strikingly, although loss of the Srb10 mediator protein had no effect on Tup1 localization, both histone tail mutations and histone deacetylase mutations crippled the association of Tup1 with target loci. Together with previous findings that Tup1-Ssn6 physically associates with histone deacetylase activities, these results indicate that the repressor complex alters histone modification states to facilitate interactions with histones and that these interactions are required to maintain a stable repressive state.