Search

Our study focuses on a family of ubiquitously expressed human C2H2 zinc finger proteins comprised of ZFX, ZFY and ZNF711. Although their protein structure suggests that ZFX, ZFY and ZNF711 are transcriptional regulators, the mechanisms by which they influence transcription have not yet been elucidated. We used CRISPR-mediated deletion to create bi-allelic knockouts of ZFX and/or ZNF711 in female HEK293T cells (which naturally lack ZFY). We found that loss of either ZFX or ZNF711 reduced cell growth and that the double knockout cells have major defects in proliferation. RNA-seq analysis revealed that thousands of genes showed altered expression in the double knockout clones, suggesting that these TFs are critical regulators of the transcriptome. To gain insight into how these TFs regulate transcription, we created mutant ZFX proteins and analyzed them for DNA binding and transactivation capability. We found that zinc fingers 11–13 are necessary and sufficient for DNA binding and, in combination with the N terminal region, constitute a functional transactivator. Our functional analyses of the ZFX family provides important new insights into transcriptional regulation in human cells by members of the large, but under-studied family of C2H2 zinc finger proteins.

Aberrant expression of HOXC6 and HOXC4 is commonly detected in prostate cancer. The high expression of these transcription factors is associated with aggressive prostate cancer and can predict cancer recurrence after treatment. Thus, HOXC4 and HOXC6 are clinically relevant biomarkers of aggressive prostate cancer. However, the molecular mechanisms by which these HOXC genes contribute to prostate cancer is not yet understood. To begin to address the role of HOXC4 and HOXC6 in prostate cancer, we performed RNA-seq analyses before and after siRNA-mediated knockdown of HOXC4 and/or HOXC6 and also performed ChIP-seq to identify genomic binding sites for both of these transcription factors. Our studies demonstrate that HOXC4 and HOXC6 co-localize with HOXB13, FOXA1 and AR, three transcription factors previously shown to contribute to the development of prostate cancer. We suggest that the aberrantly upregulated HOXC4 and HOXC6 proteins may compete with HOXB13 for binding sites, thus altering the prostate transcriptome. This competition model may be applicable to many different human cancers that display increased expression of a HOX transcription factor.

High expression of the transcription factor ZFX is correlated with proliferation, tumorigenesis, and patient survival in multiple types of human cancers. However, the mechanism by which ZFX influences transcriptional regulation has not been determined. We performed ChIP-seq in four cancer cell lines (representing kidney, colon, prostate, and breast cancers) to identify ZFX binding sites throughout the human genome. We identified roughly 9000 ZFX binding sites and found that most of the sites are in CpG island promoters. Moreover, genes with promoters bound by ZFX are expressed at higher levels than genes with promoters not bound by ZFX. To determine if ZFX contributes to regulation of the promoters to which it is bound, we performed RNA-seq analysis after knockdown of ZFX by siRNA in prostate and breast cancer cells. Many genes with promoters bound by ZFX were down-regulated upon ZFX knockdown, supporting the hypothesis that ZFX acts as a transcriptional activator. Surprisingly, ZFX binds at +240 bp downstream from the TSS of the responsive promoters. Using Nucleosome Occupancy and Methylome Sequencing (NOMe-seq), we show that ZFX binds between the open chromatin region at the TSS and the first downstream nucleosome, suggesting that ZFX may play a critical role in promoter architecture. We have also shown that a closely related zinc finger protein ZNF711 has a similar binding pattern at CpG island promoters, but ZNF711 may play a subordinate role to ZFX. This functional characterization of ZFX provides important new insights into transcription, chromatin structure, and the regulation of the cancer transcriptome.

Background Rewriting of the epigenome has risen as a promising alternative to gene editing for precision medicine. In nature, epigenetic silencing can result in complete attenuation of target gene expression over multiple mitotic divisions. However, persistent repression has been difficult to achieve in a predictable manner using targeted systems. Results Here, we report that persistent epigenetic memory required both a DNA methyltransferase (DNMT3A-dCas9) and a histone methyltransferase (Ezh2-dCas9 or KRAB-dCas9). We demonstrate that the histone methyltransferase requirement can be locus specific. Co-targeting Ezh2-dCas9, but not KRAB-dCas9, with DNMT3A-dCas9 and DNMT3L induced long-term HER2 repression over at least 50 days (approximately 57 cell divisions) and triggered an epigenetic switch to a heterochromatic environment. An increase in H3K27 trimethylation and DNA methylation was stably maintained and accompanied by a sustained loss of H3K27 acetylation. Interestingly, substitution of Ezh2-dCas9 with KRAB-dCas9 enabled long-term repression at some target genes (e.g., SNURF) but not at HER2, at which H3K9me3 and DNA methylation were transiently acquired and subsequently lost. Off-target DNA hypermethylation occurred at many individual CpG sites but rarely at multiple CpGs in a single promoter, consistent with no detectable effect on transcription at the off-target loci tested. Conversely, robust hypermethylation was observed at HER2. We further demonstrated that Ezh2-dCas9 required full-length DNMT3L for maximal activity and that co-targeting DNMT3L was sufficient for persistent repression by Ezh2-dCas9 or KRAB-dCas9. Conclusions These data demonstrate that targeting different combinations of histone and DNA methyltransferases is required to achieve maximal repression at different loci. Fine-tuning of targeting tools is a necessity to engineer epigenetic memory at any given locus in any given cell type. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13072-019-0275-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death and lung adenocarcinoma is its most common subtype. Although genetic alterations have been identified as drivers in subsets of lung adenocarcinoma, they do not fully explain tumor development. Epigenetic alterations have been implicated in the pathogenesis of tumors. To identify epigenetic alterations driving lung adenocarcinoma, we used an improved version of the Tracing Enhancer Networks using Epigenetic Traits method (TENET 2.0) in primary normal lung and lung adenocarcinoma cells. We found over 32,000 enhancers that appear differentially activated between normal lung and lung adenocarcinoma. Among the identified transcriptional regulators inactivated in lung adenocarcinoma vs. normal lung, NKX2-1 was linked to a large number of silenced enhancers. Among the activated transcriptional regulators identified, CENPA, FOXM1, and MYBL2 were linked to numerous cancer-specific enhancers. High expression of CENPA, FOXM1, and MYBL2 is particularly observed in a subgroup of lung adenocarcinomas and is associated with poor patient survival. Notably, CENPA, FOXM1, and MYBL2 are also key regulators of cancer-specific enhancers in breast adenocarcinoma of the basal subtype, but they are associated with distinct sets of activated enhancers. We identified individual lung adenocarcinoma enhancers linked to CENPA, FOXM1, or MYBL2 that were associated with poor patient survival. Knockdown experiments of FOXM1 and MYBL2 suggest that these factors regulate genes involved in controlling cell cycle progression and cell division. For example, we found that expression of TK1, a potential target gene of a MYBL2-linked enhancer, is associated with poor patient survival. Identification and characterization of key transcriptional regulators and associated enhancers in lung adenocarcinoma provides important insights into the deregulation of lung adenocarcinoma epigenomes, highlighting novel potential targets for clinical intervention., Author summary Although genetic alterations have been identified as drivers in subsets of lung adenocarcinoma, they do not fully explain tumor development. Here we investigated epigenetic alterations that might contribute to lung adenocarcinoma progression. We used a bioinformatics approach called TENET 2.0 to identify key regulators and enhancers altered in lung adenocarcinoma compared to normal lung. We identified NKX2-1 as a transcriptional regulator inactivated in lung adenocarcinoma, linked to a large number of enhancers silenced in cancer. Among the activated transcriptional regulators, CENPA, MYBL2, and FOXM1 were linked to numerous cancer-specific enhancers and high expression of these regulators was observed in a subgroup of lung adenocarcinomas showing poor patient survival. Investigating downstream effects of these key regulators, we also determined individual enhancers associated with survival and their potential target genes, including TK1. Our findings suggest that abnormal expression of key regulators drives epigenetic deregulation in lung adenocarcinoma, promoting future development of novel biomarkers and therapeutic targets.

The holistic role of DNA methylation in the organization of the cancer epigenome is not well understood. Here we perform a comprehensive, high-resolution analysis of chromatin structure to compare the landscapes of HCT116 colon cancer cells and a DNA methylation-deficient derivative. The NOMe-seq accessibility assay unexpectedly revealed symmetrical and transcription-independent nucleosomal phasing across active, poised, and inactive genomic elements. DNA methylation abolished this phasing primarily at enhancers and CpG island (CGI) promoters, with little effect on insulators and non-CGI promoters. Abolishment of DNA methylation led to the context-specific reestablishment of the poised and active states of normal colon cells, which were marked in methylation-deficient cells by distinct H3K27 modifications and the presence of either well-phased nucleosomes or nucleosome-depleted regions, respectively. At higher-order genomic scales, we found that long, H3K9me3-marked domains had lower accessibility, consistent with a more compact chromatin structure. Taken together, our results demonstrate the nuanced and context-dependent role of DNA methylation in the functional, multiscale organization of cancer epigenomes., Charles Heidelberger Memorial Fellowship

DNA methylation, which occurs predominantly at CpG dinucleotides, is a potent epigenetic repressor of transcription. Because DNA methylation is reversible, there is much interest in understanding the mechanisms by which it can be regulated by DNA-binding transcription factors. We discuss several models that, by incorporating sequence motifs, CpG density, and methylation levels, attempt to link the binding of a transcription factor with the acquisition or loss of DNA methylation at promoters and distal regulatory elements. Additional in vivo genome-wide characterization of transcription factor binding patterns and high-resolution DNA methylation analyses are clearly required for stronger support of each model.

Variability in the quality of antibodies to histone post-translational modifications (PTMs) presents widely recognized hindrance in epigenetics research. Here, by using antibody engineering technologies we produced recombinant antibodies directed to the trimethylated lysine residues of histone H3 with high specificity and affinity and no lot-to-lot variation. These recombinant antibodies performed well in common epigenetics applications, and their high specificity enabled us to identify positive and negative correlations among histone PTMs.

The self-renewal capacity ascribed to embryonic stem cells (ESC) is reminiscent of cancer cell proliferation, raising speculation that a common network of genes may regulate these traits. A search for general regulators of these traits yielded a set of microRNAs for which expression is highly enriched in human ESCs and liver cancer cells (HCC) but attenuated in differentiated quiescent hepatocytes. Here, we show that these microRNAs promote hESC self-renewal, as well as HCC proliferation, and when overexpressed in normally quiescent hepatocytes, induce proliferation and activate cancer signaling pathways. Proliferation in hepatocytes is mediated through translational repression of Pten, Tgfbr2, Klf11, and Cdkn1a, which collectively dysregulates the PI3K/AKT/mTOR and TGFβ tumor suppressor signaling pathways. Furthermore, aberrant expression of these miRNAs is observed in human liver tumor tissues and induces epithelial–mesenchymal transition in hepatocytes. These findings suggest that microRNAs that are essential in normal development as promoters of ESC self-renewal are frequently upregulated in human liver tumors and harbor neoplastic transformation potential when they escape silencing in quiescent human hepatocytes. Mol Cancer Res; 10(7); 979–91. ©2012 AACR.

Developmental and homeostatic remodeling of cellular organelles is mediated by a complex process termed autophagy. The cohort of proteins that constitute the autophagy machinery functions in a multistep biochemical pathway. Though components of the autophagy machinery are broadly expressed, autophagy can occur in specialized cellular contexts, and mechanisms underlying cell-type-specific autophagy are poorly understood. We demonstrate that the master regulator of hematopoiesis, GATA-1, directly activates transcription of genes encoding the essential autophagy component microtubule-associated protein 1 light chain 3B (LC3B) and its homologs (MAP1LC3A, GABARAP, GABARAPL1, and GATE-16). In addition, GATA-1 directly activates genes involved in the biogenesis/function of lysosomes, which mediate autophagic protein turnover. We demonstrate that GATA-1 utilizes the forkhead protein FoxO3 to activate select autophagy genes. GATA-1-dependent LC3B induction is tightly coupled to accumulation of the active form of LC3B and autophagosomes, which mediate mitochondrial clearance as a critical step in erythropoiesis. These results illustrate a novel mechanism by which a master regulator of development establishes a genetic network to instigate cell-type-specific autophagy.

In mammalian cells, multiple cellular processes, including gene silencing, cell growth and differentiation, pluripotency, neoplastic transformation, apoptosis, DNA repair, and maintenance of genomic integrity, converge on the evolutionarily conserved protein KAP1, which is thought to regulate the dynamic organization of chromatin structure via its ability to influence epigenetic patterns and chromatin compaction. In this minireview, we discuss how KAP1 might execute such pleiotropic effects, focusing on genomic targeting mechanisms, protein-protein interactions, specific post-translational modifications of both KAP1 and associated histones, and transcriptome analyses of cells deficient in KAP1.

Previous studies of E2F family members have suggested that protein-protein interactions may be the mechanism by which E2F proteins are recruited to specific genomic regions. We have addressed this hypothesis on a genome-wide scale using ChIP-seq analysis of MCF7 cell lines that express tagged wild type and mutant E2F1 proteins. First, we performed ChIP-seq for tagged WT E2F1. Then, we analyzed E2F1 proteins that lacked the N-terminal SP1 and cyclin A binding domains, the C-terminal transactivation and pocket protein binding domains, and the internal marked box domain. Surprisingly, we found that the ChIP-seq patterns of the mutant proteins were identical to that of WT E2F1. However, mutation of the DNA binding domain abrogated all E2F1 binding to the genome. These results suggested that the interaction between the E2F1 DNA binding domain and a consensus motif may be the primary determinant of E2F1 recruitment. To address this possibility, we analyzed the in vivo binding sites for the in vitro-derived consensus E2F1 motif (TTTSSCGC) and also performed de novo motif analysis. We found that only 12% of the ChIP-seq peaks contained the TTTSSCGC motif. De novo motif analysis indicated that most of the in vivo sites lacked the 5' half of the in vitro-derived consensus, having instead the in vivo consensus of CGCGC. In summary, our findings do not provide support for the model that protein-protein interactions are involved in recruiting E2F1 to the genome, but rather suggest that recognition of a motif found at most human promoters is the critical determinant.

GATA factors interact with simple DNA motifs (WGATAR) to regulate critical processes, including hematopoiesis, but very few WGATAR motifs are occupied in genomes. Given the rudimentary knowledge of mechanisms underlying this restriction, and how GATA factors establish genetic networks, we used ChIP-seq to define GATA-1 and GATA-2 occupancy genome-wide in erythroid cells. Coupled with genetic complementation analysis and transcriptional profiling, these studies revealed a rich collection of targets containing a characteristic binding motif of greater complexity than WGATAR. GATA factors occupied loci encoding multiple components of the Scl/TAL1 complex, a master regulator of hematopoiesis and leukemogenic target. Mechanistic analyses provided evidence for cross-regulatory and autoregulatory interactions among components of this complex, including GATA-2 induction of the hematopoietic corepressor ETO-2 and an ETO-2 negative autoregulatory loop. These results establish fundamental principles underlying GATA factor mechanisms in chromatin and illustrate a complex network of considerable importance for the control of hematopoiesis.

It has been proposed that ZNF217, which is amplified at 20q13 in various tumors, plays a key role during neoplastic transformation. ZNF217 has been purified in complexes that contain repressor proteins such as CtBP2, suggesting that it acts as a transcriptional repressor. However, the function of ZNF217 has not been well characterized due to a lack of known target genes. Using a global chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP)-chip approach, we identified thousands of ZNF217 binding sites in three tumor cell lines (MCF7, SW480, and Ntera2). Further analysis of ZNF217 in Ntera2 cells showed that many promoters are bound by ZNF217 and CtBP2 and that a subset of these promoters are activated upon removal of ZNF217. Thus, our in vivo studies corroborate the in vitro biochemical analyses of ZNF217-containing complexes and support the hypothesis that ZNF217 functions as a transcriptional repressor. Gene ontology analysis showed that ZNF217 targets in Ntera2 cells are involved in organ development, suggesting that one function of ZNF217 may be to repress differentiation. Accordingly we show that differentiation of Ntera2 cells with retinoic acid led to down-regulation of ZNF217. Our identification of thousands of ZNF217 target genes will enable further studies of the consequences of aberrant expression of ZNF217 during neoplastic transformation.

While significant effort has been dedicated to the characterization of epigenetic changes associated with prenatal differentiation, relatively little is known about the epigenetic changes that accompany post-natal differentiation where fully functional differentiated cell types with limited lifespans arise. Here we sought to address this gap by generating epigenomic and transcriptional profiles from primary human breast cell types isolated from disease-free human subjects. From these data we define a comprehensive human breast transcriptional network, including a set of myoepithelial- and luminal epithelial-specific intronic retention events. Intersection of epigenetic states with RNA expression from distinct breast epithelium lineages demonstrates that mCpG provides a stable record of exonic and intronic usage, whereas H3K36me3 is dynamic. We find a striking asymmetry in epigenomic reprogramming between luminal and myoepithelial cell types, with the genomes of luminal cells harbouring more than twice the number of hypomethylated enhancer elements compared with myoepithelial cells., Epigenetic changes associated with post-natal differentiation have been characterized. Here the authors generate epigenomic and transcriptional profiles from primary human breast cells, providing insights into the transcriptional and epigenetic events that define post-natal cell differentiation in vivo.

Natural killer (NK) and CD1d-restricted Valpha14i natural killer T (NKT) cells play a critical early role in host defense. Here we show that mice with a targeted deletion of T-bet, a T-box transcription factor required for Th1 cell differentiation, have a profound, stem cell-intrinsic defect in their ability to generate mature NK and Valpha14i NKT cells. Both cell types fail to complete normal terminal maturation and are present in decreased numbers in peripheral lymphoid organs of T-bet(-/-) mice. T-bet expression is regulated during NK cell differentiation by NK-activating receptors and cytokines known to control NK development and effector function. Our results identify T-bet as a key factor in the terminal maturation and peripheral homeostasis of NK and Valpha14i NKT cells.

Previously, identification of promoters regulated by mammalian transcription factors has relied upon overexpression studies. Here we present the identification of a large set of promoters that are bound by E2F in physiological conditions. Probing a human CpG microarray with chromatin immunoprecipitated using an antibody to E2F4, we have identified 68 unique target loci; 15% are bidirectional promoters and 25% recruit E2F via a mechanism distinct from the defined consensus site. Interestingly, although E2F has been shown previously to regulate genes involved in cell cycle progression, many of the new E2F target genes encode proteins involved in DNA repair or recombination. We suggest that human CpG microarrays, in combination with chromatin immunoprecipitation, will allow rapid identification of target promoters for many mammalian transcription factors.

In their article, A.S. Weinmann and P.J. Farnham (2002, Methods 26) described new techniques for isolating in vivo binding sites for any DNA-binding protein. In this article, we describe complementary methods for detailed in vivo characterizations of such identified protein-DNA interactions. First, we describe how formaldehyde crosslinking and chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP), in conjunction with transient transfections or the use of cell lines containing stably integrated constructs or episomes, can be employed to identify which specific nucleotides of a region of DNA are required for recruitment of a particular transcription factor. In contrast to in vivo footprinting, this method not only specifies which nucleotides are bound, but also identifies the protein(s) involved in binding. Next, we discuss the use of the ChIP assay to study how binding of a transcription factor is altered by passage through the cell cycle, by overexpression or deletion of another factor, or during tumorigenesis. Finally, a look toward the future suggests that the ChIP assay may be combined with Western blot analysis or mass spectrometry to identify additional proteins that interact with a transcription factor of interest.

We have taken a new approach to the identification of E2F-regulated promoters. After modification of a chromatin immunoprecipitation assay, we cloned nine chromatin fragments which represent both strong and weak in vivo E2F binding sites. Further characterization of three of the cloned fragments revealed that they are bound in vivo not only by E2Fs but also by members of the retinoblastoma tumor suppressor protein family and by RNA polymerase II, suggesting that these fragments represent promoters regulated by E2F transcription complexes. In fact, database analysis indicates that all three fragments correspond to genomic DNA located just upstream of start sites for previously identified mRNAs. One clone, ChET 4, corresponds to the promoter region for beclin 1, a candidate tumor suppressor protein. We demonstrate that another of the clones, ChET 8, is strongly bound by E2F family members in vivo but does not contain a consensus E2F binding site. However, this fragment functions as a promoter whose activity can be repressed by E2F1. Finally, we demonstrate that the ChET 9 promoter contains a consensus E2F binding site, can be activated by E2F1, and drives expression of an mRNA that is upregulated in colon and liver tumors. Interestingly, the characterized ChET promoters do not display regulation patterns typical of known E2F target genes in a U937 cell differentiation system. In summary, we have provided evidence that chromatin immunoprecipitation can be used to identify E2F-regulated promoters which contain both consensus and nonconsensus binding sites and have shown that not all E2F-regulated promoters show identical expression profiles.

We show that the Mre11 complex associates with E2F family members via the Nbs1 N terminus. This association and Nbs1 phosphorylation are correlated with S-phase checkpoint proficiency, whereas neither is sufficient individually for checkpoint activation. The Nbs1 E2F interaction occurred near the Epstein-Barr virus origin of replication as well as near a chromosomal replication origin in the c-myc promoter region and was restricted to S-phase cells. The Mre11 complex colocalized with PCNA at replication forks throughout S phase, both prior to and coincident with the appearance of nascent DNA. These data suggest that the Mre11 complex suppresses genomic instability through its influence on both the regulation and progression of DNA replication.

The proto-oncogene c-myc is transcribed from a dual promoter P1/P2, with transcription initiation sites 160 base pairs apart. Here we have studied the transcriptional activation of both promoters on chromatin templates. c-myc chromatin was reconstituted on stably transfected, episomal, Epstein-Barr virus-derived vectors in a B cell line. Episomal P1 and P2 promoters showed only basal activity but were strongly inducible by histone deacetylase inhibitors. The effect of promoter mutations on c-myc activity, chromatin structure, and E2F binding was studied. The ME1a1 binding site between P1 and P2 was required for the maintenance of an open chromatin configuration of the dual c-myc promoters. Mutation of this site strongly reduced the sensitivity of the core promoter region of P1/P2 to micrococcal nuclease and prevented binding of polymerase II (pol II) at the P2 promoter. In contrast, mutation of the P2 TATA box also abolished binding of pol II at the P2 promoter but did not affect the chromatin structure of the P1/P2 core promoter region. The E2F binding site adjacent to ME1a1 is required for repression of the P2 promoter but not the P1 promoter, likely by recruitment of histone deacetylase activity. Chromatin precipitation experiments with E2F-specific antibodies revealed binding of E2F-1, E2F-2, and E2F-4 to the E2F site of the c-myc promoter in vivo if the E2F site was intact. Taken together, the analyses support a model with a functional hierarchy for regulatory elements in the c-myc promoter region; binding of proteins to the ME1a1 site provides a nucleosome-free region of chromatin near the P2 start site, binding of E2F results in transcriptional repression without affecting polymerase recruitment, and the TATA box is required for polymerase recruitment.

Overexpression of c-Myc can lead to altered transcriptional regulation of cellular genes and to neoplastic transformation. Although DNA binding is clearly required, the mechanism by which recruitment of c-Myc to target promoters results in transcriptional activation is highly debated. Much of this controversy comes from the difficulty in clearly defining a true Myc target gene. We have previously determined that cad is a bona fide Myc target gene and thus now use the cad promoter as a model to study Myc function. Others have shown that Myc can interact indirectly with histone acetylases and have suggested that Myc mediates transcriptional activation by causing an increase in the levels of acetylated histones on target promoters. To directly test this model, we employed a chromatin immunoprecipitation assay to examine the levels of acetylated histones on the cad promoter. Although Myc was bound to the cad promoter in S phase but not in G(0) phase, we found high levels of acetylated histones on the promoter in both stages. We also examined acetylated histones on the cad promoter before and after differentiation of U937 cells. Although the levels of c-Myc bound to the cad promoter were greatly reduced after differentiation, we saw high levels of acetylated histones on the cad promoter both before and after differentiation. Finally, we found that a 30-fold change in binding of N-Myc to the telomerase promoter did not result in a concomitant change in histone acetylation. Thus, recruitment of a Myc family member to a target promoter does not necessarily influence the amount of acetylated histones at that promoter. Further investigations are in progress to define the role of Myc in transcriptional activation.

The E2F family of transcription factors plays an important role in the regulation of gene expression at the G1/S-phase transition of the mammalian cell cycle (see reference 16 for an extensive review of the E2F regulatory pathway). E2F binding sites are found in the promoters of genes whose products are required for nucleotide synthesis (e.g., dihydrofolate reductase [DHFR] and thymidine kinase [TK]), for DNA replication (e.g., DNA polymerase α and cdc6), and for cell cycle progression (e.g., cyclin E, cyclin D1, c-myc, b-myb, and cdc2). Transcription from each of these promoters increases during late G1 or early S phase, and this regulation is mediated by protein binding to one or more E2F binding sites (3, 11, 22, 30, 34, 43, 44). To date, eight members of the E2F family have been identified: six E2F proteins (E2F1 to -6) and two DP proteins (DP1 and DP2). The E2F and DP proteins bind to DNA as a heterodimer and can function as activators of transcription. Alternatively, E2F-DP heterodimers can also repress transcription when complexed with members of the Rb family of pocket proteins (pRb, p107, and p130) due to the ability of the pocket proteins to bind to and mask the E2F transactivation domain and to recruit histone deacetylases (6, 17, 25). Individual E2Fs preferentially bind to different pocket proteins. E2F1, E2F2, and E2F3, for example, bind to pRb, while E2F4 predominantly binds to p130 and p107 and E2F5 binds to p130. A popular model for how E2F family members regulate G1/S-phase-specific gene expression invokes a complex pattern of protein-protein and protein-DNA interactions that change as cells progress through the cell cycle (Fig. ​(Fig.1A).1A). As depicted, transcription from E2F site-containing promoters is thought to be repressed in G0 phase due to the binding of a trimolecular E2F-DP-pocket protein complex and recruitment of histone deacetylase activity by the pocket protein component (6, 17, 25). As cells progress through the cell cycle, various cyclin–cyclin-dependent kinase (cdk) complexes phosphorylate the pocket proteins, causing release of the hyperphosphorylated pocket protein and associated proteins from the DNA-bound E2F-DP heterodimer (1, 2, 7). Finally, traversal through S phase is thought to be accompanied by cyclin-cdk-mediated phosphorylation of the DP subunit of E2F1-3–DP complexes, resulting in release of the heterodimers from the promoter DNA (15, 21, 42). In some cells, E2F4-containing complexes are thought to be inactivated by relocation to the cytoplasm (28, 38). FIG. 1 E2F-mediated transcriptional regulation. (A) The current model of E2F-mediated transcriptional regulation is thought to involve binding of an E2F-pocket protein complex to promoters in G0 phase of the cell cycle and release of the pocket protein in late ... Although this model is attractive, it is largely based upon circumstantial data, and several important questions remain unanswered. For example, the transcriptional activity of complexes containing E2F4 and E2F5 may be shut off during mid- to late S phase by association with unphosphorylated p107 or p130, rather than by relocation to the cytoplasm (10). Additionally, it is not known if E2F target gene specificity exists or if all six E2Fs bind to and regulate every target gene or if Rb family members display target gene specificity. Determination of target gene specificity has been difficult due to the fact that most cells studied to date contain all of the E2Fs and pocket proteins. Thus, most analyses of E2F and pocket protein binding specificity have been performed using in vitro systems or by overexpression of an individual E2F or pocket protein in cells. In vitro systems, however, cannot recapitulate the complex environment of living cells, and altering the relative amounts of individual proteins through overexpression may abolish important protein-protein interactions. Therefore, we wished to determine which E2Fs and pocket proteins bind to and regulate expression of specific target genes in intact cells under physiological conditions. We felt that the use of an unperturbed in vivo system was of particular importance in the analysis of E2F target gene specificity since regulation occurs in the context of cell cycle progression which cannot be mimicked in vitro and which is often altered when individual E2F proteins are overexpressed. Toward this goal, we have used a formaldehyde cross-linking and immunoprecipitation system to monitor protein-DNA and protein-protein interactions on E2F target genes in living cells. Importantly, this procedure has allowed us to determine the in vivo patterns of E2F and pocket protein binding to specific E2F target genes as cells progress through a cell cycle. Our results indicate that, while some promoters fit the proposed model for E2F-mediated transcriptional regulation, others do not, necessitating individualization of the current model. Furthermore, our data suggest that cell cycle-regulated activity is a stochastic event, as cells have the ability to form several different E2F-pocket protein complexes on a given promoter at each stage of the cell cycle.

Previously, we have used a chromatin cross-linking and immunoprecipitation protocol for the analysis of Myc and USF binding to the cad promoter. The adaptation of this technique for the study of mammalian transcription factors was a big step forward in the analysis of transcription factor family member specificity, allowing for the first time a definitive knowledge of which factor binds to a promoter region under normal physiological conditions. However, due to limitations of the assay, our previous studies could not definitively prove that both Myc and USF bound to the exact same site on the cad promoter, nor could we directly correlate loss of in vivo binding of a particular factor with loss of transcriptional activity. Therefore, we have further modified the chromatin immunoprecipitation protocol to alleviate these problems. We have now shown that it is possible to coexamine growth-regulated transcriptional activity and promoter occupancy by using stably integrated promoter constructs. We show that both Myc and USF bind to the exact same E box on the cad promoter, suggesting that competition between these two factors for a single site occurs in living cells. We also find that cad promoter constructs that retain USF binding but lose Myc binding in vivo no longer display an increase in transcriptional activity in mid- to late G(1) phase of the cell cycle. Finally, we propose that cell cycle-regulated transcriptional activation of the cad promoter may be a stochastic, rather than a predetermined, process.

The E2F family of heterodimeric transcription factors plays an important role in the regulation of gene expression at the G1/S phase transition of the mammalian cell cycle. Previously, we have demonstrated that cell cycle regulation of murine dihydrofolate reductase (dhfr) expression requires E2F-mediated activation of the dhfr promoter in S phase. To investigate the mechanism by which E2F activates an authentic E2F-regulated promoter, we precisely replaced the E2F binding site in the dhfr promoter with a Gal4 binding site. Using Gal4-E2F1 derivatives, we found that E2F1 amino acids 409-437 contain a potent core transactivation domain. Functional analysis of the E2F1 core domain demonstrated that replacement of phenylalanine residues 413, 425, and 429 with alanine reduces both transcriptional activation of the dhfr promoter and protein-protein interactions with CBP, transcription factor (TF) IIH, and TATA-binding protein (TBP). However, additional amino acid substitutions for phenylalanine 429 demonstrated a strong correlation between activation of the dhfr promoter and binding of CBP, but not TFIIH or TBP. Finally, transactivator bypass experiments indicated that direct recruitment of CBP is sufficient for activation of the dhfr promoter. Therefore, we suggest that recruitment of CBP is one mechanism by which E2F activates the dhfr promoter.

Activity of the dihydrofolate reductase (dhfr) promoter increases at the G1-S-phase boundary of the cell cycle. Mutations that abolish protein binding to an E2F element in the dhfr promoter also abolish the G1-S-phase increase in dhfr transcription, indicating that transcriptional regulation is mediated by the E2F family of proteins. To investigate the mechanism by which E2F regulates dhfr transcription, we moved the E2F element upstream and downstream of its natural position in the promoter. We found that the E2F element confers growth regulation to the dhfr promoter only when it is proximal to the transcription start site. Using a heterologous E2F element, we showed that position-dependent regulation is a property that is promoter specific, not E2F element specific. We demonstrated that E2F-mediated growth regulation of dhfr transcription requires activation of the dhfr promoter in S phase and that the C-terminal activation domains of E2F1, E2F4, and E2F5, when fused to the Gal4 DNA binding domain, are sufficient to specify position-dependent activation. To further investigate the role of activation in dhfr regulation, we tested other transactivation domains for their ability to activate the dhfr promoter. We found that the N-terminal transactivation domain of VP16 cannot activate the dhfr promoter. We propose that, unlike other E2F-regulated promoters, robust transcription from the dhfr promoter requires an E2F transactivation domain close to the transcription start site.

We have used an in vitro RNA polymerase II (RNAP II) inhibition-restimulation assay to investigate the inability of a form of RNAP II (RNAP IIB) that lacks the conserved, C-terminal heptapeptide repeat domain (CTD) to transcribe the dihydrofolate reductase (dhfr) promoter. Our previous studies demonstrated promoter-specific responses to RNAP IIB in the inhibition-restimulation assay and suggested the existence of cis-acting elements that alleviate the requirement for the CTD. We have now identified elements from two different classes of promoters that can convert dhfr to a CTD-independent promoter. First, addition of a consensus TATA box to the dhfr promoter resulted in a promoter capable of CTD-independent transcription and increased the promoter's affinity for the general transcription factor TFIID. These results suggest that high affinity for TFIID correlates with an ability to be transcribed by RNAP IIB, supporting a proposed interaction between the CTD and TFIID. Second, transfer of a combination of two elements (located at -25 and +1) from the rep-3b promoter, which does not contain a consensus TATA box but can nonetheless be transcribed by RNAP IIB, into the dhfr promoter also allowed CTD-independent transcription. These elements do not constitute a high affinity binding site for TFIID, indicating that an additional mechanism exists to allow CTD-independent transcription. Thus, elements from two classes of CTD-independent promoters that can obviate a requirement for the CTD appear to function via distinct mechanisms. Our finding that a change in a basal element can affect a requirement for the CTD is consistent with a role for the CTD during the formation of the transcriptional preinitiation complex.

Transcriptional regulation is a critical mediator of many normal cellular processes, as well as disease progression. Transcription factors (TFs) often co-localize at cis-regulatory elements on the DNA, form protein complexes, and collaboratively regulate gene expression. Machine learning and Bayesian approaches have been used to identify TF modules in a one-dimensional context. However, recent studies using high throughput technologies have shown that TF interactions should also be considered in three-dimensional nuclear space. Here, we describe methods for identifying TF modules and discuss how moving from a one-dimensional to a three-dimensional paradigm, along with integrated experimental and computational approaches, can lead to a better understanding of TF association networks.

Vascular endothelial dysfunction underlies the genesis and progression of numerous diseases. Although the GATA transcription factor GATA-2 is expressed in endothelial cells and is implicated in coronary heart disease, it has been studied predominantly as a master regulator of hematopoiesis. Because many questions regarding GATA-2 function in the vascular biology realm remain unanswered, we used ChIP sequencing and loss-of-function strategies to define the GATA-2–instigated genetic network in human endothelial cells. In contrast to erythroid cells, GATA-2 occupied a unique target gene ensemble consisting of genes encoding key determinants of endothelial cell identity and inflammation. GATA-2–occupied sites characteristically contained motifs that bind activator protein-1 (AP-1), a pivotal regulator of inflammatory genes. GATA-2 frequently occupied the same chromatin sites as c-JUN and c-FOS, heterodimeric components of AP-1. Although all three components were required for maximal AP-1 target gene expression, GATA-2 was not required for AP-1 chromatin occupancy. GATA-2 conferred maximal phosphorylation of chromatin-bound c-JUN at Ser-73, which stimulates AP-1–dependent transactivation, in a chromosomal context-dependent manner. This work establishes a link between a GATA factor and inflammatory genes, mechanistic insights underlying GATA-2–AP-1 cooperativity and a rigorous genetic framework for understanding GATA-2 function in normal and pathophysiological vascular states.

We have identified human MBT domain-containing protein L3MBTL2 as an integral component of a protein complex that we termed Polycomb Repressive Complex 1 (PRC1)-like 4 (PRC1L4) given the co-presence of PcG proteins RING1, RING2 and PCGF6/MBLR. PRC1L4 also contained E2F6 and CBX3/ HPlγ known to function in transcriptional repression. PRCIL4-mediated repression necessitated L3MBTL2 that compacted chromatin in a histone modification-independent manner. Genome-wide location analyses identified several hundred genes simultaneously bound by L3MBTL2 and E2F6, preferentially around transcriptional start sites that exhibited little overlap with those targeted by other E2Fs or by L3MBTL1, another MBT-domain containing protein that interacts with RB1. L3MBTL2-specific RNAi resulted in increased expression of target genes that exhibited a significant reduction in H2A lysine 119 monoubiquitination. These findings highlight a PcG/MBT collaboration that attains repressive chromatin without entailing histone lysine methylation marks.

TRIM28 (KAP1) is upregulated in many cancers and has been implicated in both transcriptional activation and repression. Using chromatin immunoprecipitation and sequencing, we show that KAP1 binding sites fall into several categories, specifically, the 3' coding exons of zinc finger (ZNF) genes and promoter regions of ZNFs and other genes. The currently accepted model is that KAP1 is recruited to the genome via interaction of its N-terminal RBCC domain with KRAB ZNFs (KRAB domain containing ZNFs). To determine whether the interaction of KAP1 with KRAB ZNFs is the mechanism by which KAP1 is recruited to genomic binding sites, we analyzed stable cell lines that express tagged wild-type and mutant KAP1. Surprisingly, deletion of the RBCC domain abolished KAP1 binding to the 3' exons of ZNF genes but KAP1 binding to promoter regions was unaffected. Using KAP1 knockdown cells, we showed that the genes most responsive to KAP1 were not ZNF genes but instead were either indirect targets or had KAP1 bound 10 to 100 kb from the transcription start site. Therefore, our studies suggest that KAP1 plays a role distinct from transcriptional regulation at the majority of its strongest binding sites.

The last decade has seen an incredible breakthrough in technologies that allow histones, transcription factors (TFs), and RNA polymerases to be precisely mapped throughout the genome. From this research, it is clear that there is a complex interaction between the chromatin landscape and the general transcriptional machinery and that the dynamic control of this interface is central to gene regulation. However, the chromatin remodeling enzymes and general TFs cannot, on their own, recognize and stably bind to promoter or enhancer regions. Rather, they are recruited to cis regulatory regions through interaction with site-specific DNA binding TFs and/or proteins that recognize epigenetic marks such as methylated cytosines or specifically modified amino acids in histones. These “recruitment” factors are modular in structure, reflecting their ability to interact with the genome via one region of the protein and to simultaneously bind to other regulatory proteins via “effector” domains. In this chapter, we provide examples of common effector domains that can function in transcriptional regulation via their ability to (a) interact with the basal transcriptional machinery and general co-activators, (b) interact with other TFs to allow cooperative binding, and (c) directly or indirectly recruit histone and chromatin modifying enzymes.

The proto-oncogene Raf-1 is a cytoplasmic serine/threonine kinase implicated in the signaling process in cell proliferation. To determine if Raf-1 is sufficient and necessary to transmit mitogenic signals to growth-responsive genes, we examined the effect of constitutively activated (v-raf) or inhibitory (Raf-C4) Raf-1 proteins on reporter gene activation in transient expression assays of NIH 3T3 cells. In serum-starved cells, v-raf strongly activated transcription from the promoters of the immediate-early genes c-fos and egr-2, as well as the proximal or B promoter of the late growth response gene rep-3 (rep-3b). Two other late response gene promoters, cad and dhfr, were only modestly activated by v-raf, however. An individual serum response element from the c-fos or egr-2 promoter conferred both serum-inducibility and v-raf-responsiveness to a heterologous promoter. Consistent with the degree to which antisense c-raf-1 RNA and dominant-negative Raf-1 proteins interfere with NIH 3T3 cell proliferation, Raf-C4 reduced serum-induced transcription from the egr-2 and rep-3b promoters in a dose-dependent manner by 50%. In contrast, Raf-C4 did not significantly reduce transcription from the c-fos or cad promoters or the serum response element-driven heterologous promoters. We conclude that Raf-1 is both sufficient and necessary to activate a subset of early and late growth response genes.

krox 20 is an inducible immediate early response gene. To determine if krox 20 has a physiological role in the adult central nervous system (CNS), this study sought to demonstrate the presence of krox 20 in adult rat brain. RNA analysis showed the presence of krox 20 transcripts in the CNS, including the cortex. Polyclonal antibodies to a Krox 20 fusion protein demonstrated 79 and 55 kDa antigens in nuclear CNS homogenates. Neither RNA nor protein analysis was able to demonstrate an induction of krox 20 by a seizure at times when other immediate early response genes are known to be induced. Immunohistochemical analysis revealed staining at several levels throughout the nervous system. This staining was predominantly nuclear, consistent with the role of krox 20 as a transcription factor. These data show that krox 20 is present in the adult CNS, yet differs in response to stimuli as compared to other related transcription factors with a zinc finger motif, such as NGFI-A and NGFI-C.

We examined the ability of purified RNA polymerase (RNAP) II lacking the carboxy-terminal heptapeptide repeat domain (CTD), called RNAP IIB, to transcribe a variety of promoters in HeLa extracts in which endogenous RNAP II activity was inhibited with anti-CTD monoclonal antibodies. Not all promoters were efficiently transcribed by RNAP IIB, and transcription did not correlate with the in vitro strength of the promoter or with the presence of a consensus TATA box. This was best illustrated by the GC-rich, non-TATA box promoters of the bidirectional dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR)-REP-encoding locus. Whereas the REP promoter was transcribed by RNAP IIB, the DHFR promoter remained inactive after addition of RNAP IIB to the antibody-inhibited reactions. However, both promoters were efficiently transcribed when purified RNAP with an intact CTD was added. We analyzed a series of promoter deletions to identify which cis elements determine the requirement for the CTD of RNAP II. All of the promoter deletions of both DHFR and REP retained the characteristics of their respective full-length promoters, suggesting that the information necessary to specify the requirement for the CTD is contained within approximately 65 bp near the initiation site. Furthermore, a synthetic minimal promoter of DHFR, consisting of a single binding site for Sp1 and a binding site for the HIP1 initiator cloned into a bacterial vector sequence, required RNAP II with an intact CTD for activity in vitro. Since the synthetic minimal promoter of DHFR and the smallest REP promoter deletion are both activated by Sp1, the differential response in this assay does not result from upstream activators. However, the sequences around the start sites of DHFR and REP are not similar and our data suggest that they bind different proteins. Therefore, we propose that specific initiator elements are important for determination of the requirement of some promoters for the CTD.

The transcription rate of the dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) gene increases at the G1/S boundary of the proliferative cell cycle. Through analysis of transiently and stably transfected NIH 3T3 cells, we have now demonstrated that DHFR promoter sequences extending from -270 to +20 are sufficient to confer similar regulation on a reporter gene. Mutation of a protein binding site that spans sequences from -16 to +11 in the DHFR promoter resulted in loss of the transcriptional increase at the G1/S boundary. Purification of an activity from HeLa nuclear extract that binds to this region enriched for a 180-kDa polypeptide (HIP1). Using this HIP1 preparation, we have identified specific positions within the binding site that are critical for efficient protein-DNA interactions. An analysis of association and dissociation rates suggests that bound HIP1 protein can exchange rapidly with free protein. This rapid exchange may facilitate the burst of transcriptional activity from the DHFR promoter at the G1/S boundary.

To study the regulation of transcription of the carbamoyl-phosphate synthase (glutamine-hydrolyzing)/aspartate carbamoyltransferase/dihydroorotase (CAD) gene from the Syrian hamster, Mesocricetus auratus, we developed a homologous in vitro transcription system on the basis of nuclear extract from Syrian hamster kidney cells. We optimized the reaction temperature and the concentrations of DNA template, KCl, and MgCl2 simultaneously with the response surface method and found an unusually low temperature optimum of 20 degrees C. We therefore investigated whether CAD transcription in vitro depended on a heat-labile component of nuclear extract. Preincubating extract alone at 30 degrees C reduced transcription from the CAD promoter but not from the major late promoter of adenovirus 2. The formation of stable initiation complexes at the CAD promoter was diminished in heat-treated extract; run-off transcripts, however, accumulated at the same rate as in untreated extract. The heat sensitivity of complex formation correlated with the heat sensitivity of DNA binding by transcription factor Sp1, which binds to two sites in the CAD promoter; moreover, both preformed initiation complexes and DNA-bound Sp1 were heat-resistant. Adding purified Sp1 to heat-treated extract restored complex formation. We propose that Sp1 activates CAD transcription by stabilizing initiation complexes at the CAD promoter.

Half of all human transcription factors use C2H2 zinc finger domains to specify site-specific DNA binding and yet very little is known about their role in gene regulation. Based on in vitro studies, a zinc finger code has been developed that predicts a binding motif for a particular zinc finger factor (ZNF). However, very few studies have performed genome-wide analyses of ZNF binding patterns, and thus, it is not clear if the binding code developed in vitro will be useful for identifying target genes of a particular ZNF. We performed genome-wide ChIP-seq for ZNF263, a C2H2 ZNF that contains 9 finger domains, a KRAB repression domain, and a SCAN domain and identified more than 5000 binding sites in K562 cells. Our results suggest that ZNF263 binds to a 24-nt site that differs from the motif predicted by the zinc finger code in several positions. Interestingly, many of the ZNF263 binding sites are located within the transcribed region of the target gene. Although ZNFs containing a KRAB domain are thought to function mainly as transcriptional repressors, many of the ZNF263 target genes are expressed at high levels. To address the biological role of ZNF263, we identified genes whose expression was altered by treatment of cells with ZNF263-specific small interfering RNAs. Our results suggest that ZNF263 can have both positive and negative effects on transcriptional regulation of its target genes.

The Krox-20 gene is rapidly and transiently induced when quiescent 3T3 cells are stimulated to reenter the proliferative cycle. We identified the major serum-responsive transcription initiation site and found that it differs from the initiation sites previously identified for the Krox-20 gene. Transcripts from the major serum-responsive initiation site increased at least 40-fold in serum-stimulated cells compared with logarithmically growing cells.

The murine dihydrofolate reductase gene is regulated by a bidirectional promoter that lacks a TATA box. To identify the DNA sequences required for dihydrofolate reductase transcription, the activities of various templates were determined by in vitro transcription analysis. Our data indicate that sequences both upstream and downstream of the transcription initiation site modulate the activity of the dihydrofolate reductase promoter. We have focused on two regions downstream of the transcription initiation site that are important in determining the overall efficiency of the promoter. Region 1, which included exon 1 and part of intron 1, could stimulate transcription when placed in either orientation in the normal downstream position and when inserted upstream of the transcription start site. This region could also stimulate transcription in trans when the enhancer was physically separate from the promoter. Deletion of region 2, spanning 46 nucleotides of the 5' untranslated region, reduced transcriptional activity by fivefold. DNase I footprinting reactions identified protein-binding sites in both downstream stimulatory regions. Protein bound to two sites in region 1, both of which contain an inverted CCAAT box. The protein-binding site in the 5' untranslated region has extensive homology to binding sites in promoters that both lack (simian virus 40 late) and contain (adenovirus type 2 major late promoter and c-myc) TATA boxes.

We have identified a sequence element that specifies the position of transcription initiation for the dihydrofolate reductase gene. Unlike the functionally analogous TATA box that directs RNA polymerase II to initiate transcription 30 nucleotides downstream, the positioning element of the dihydrofolate reductase promoter is located directly at the site of transcription initiation. By using DNase I footprint analysis, we have shown that a protein binds to this initiator element. Transcription initiated at the dihydrofolate reductase initiator element when 28 nucleotides were inserted between it and all other upstream sequences, or when it was placed on either side of the DNA helix, suggesting that there is no strict spatial requirement between the initiator and an upstream element. Although neither a single Sp1-binding site nor a single initiator element was sufficient for transcriptional activity, the combination of one Sp1-binding site and the dihydrofolate reductase initiator element cloned into a plasmid vector resulted in transcription starting at the initiator element. We have also shown that the simian virus 40 late major initiation site has striking sequence homology to the dihydrofolate reductase initiation site and that the same, or a similar, protein binds to both sites. Examination of the sequences at other RNA polymerase II initiation sites suggests that we have identified an element that is important in the transcription of other housekeeping genes. We have thus named the protein that binds to the initiator element HIP1 (Housekeeping Initiator Protein 1).

The retinoblastoma (Rb) protein is a key regulator of cell proliferation, differentiation, and tumorigenesis. Initial studies of Rb revealed that it binds to, and decreases the activity of, the E2F family of transcription factors. Over the last decade, the mechanisms by which Rb regulates E2F activity have been well-studied. These investigations have lead to a commonly held belief that Rb functions solely as a transcriptional repressor. However, although not as commonly discussed, there are many examples of Rb synergizing with site-specific transcription factors to activate transcription. This Rb-mediated activation appears to be cell type-specific, transcription factor-specific, and even promoter-specific. This chapter details some of the examples of Rb-mediated transcriptional activation and suggests future studies that could provide insight into the mechanisms by which Rb can function to positively regulate transcription.

The E2F family of transcription factors regulates the expression of genes involved in cell cycle progression, DNA synthesis, repair, and recombination, and a variety of other cellular processes. Although E2F proteins are often redundant in function, specificity of binding and activity can occur. For example, E2F1, but not other E2F family members, was shown previously to bind the murine carboxylesterase promoter in chromatin immunoprecipitation studies. This promoter region lacks a consensus E2F binding site, suggesting that E2F1 may be recruited to the DNA in a unique fashion. To further investigate this E2F1-specific binding, we have employed a "transient chromatin immunoprecipitation" approach. Using various deletions and mutations of the promoter region, we localized the E2F1-specific binding site and demonstrated that it was required for E2F1-mediated transcription of the carboxylesterase promoter. The identified site was similar to the 8-bp consensus E2F site but differed from the consensus at a crucial position. To address whether E2F1 directly bound to this non-consensus site, we demonstrated that the DNA binding domain of E2F1 is necessary for E2F1-mediated activation of the carboxylesterase promoter. Interestingly, a "UP" mutation of the site, making it more similar to the consensus element, did not improve the ability of E2F1 to bind the promoter. Rather, E2F1 could no longer bind to the carboxylesterase promoter that contained the consensus E2F site. We propose a model in which E2F1-specific regulation of the carboxylesterase promoter requires both E2F1/DNA interactions and protein-protein interaction between E2F1 and a factor that binds adjacent to the non-consensus site.

E2F6 contains a DNA binding domain that is very similar to that of the other members of the E2F family of transcriptional regulators. However, E2F6 cannot bind to all promoters that contain consensus E2F-binding sites. Therefore, we used a combination of chromatin immunoprecipitation and genomic microarrays to identify promoters bound by E2F6 in human cells. Although most of the identified promoters were bound by multiple E2F family members, one promoter was bound only by E2F6. To determine which of the newly identified promoters were regulated by E2F6, we reduced the level of E2F6 by using RNA interference technology. We found that mRNA transcribed from promoters bound by E2F6 was increased after reduction of the amount of E2F6 protein in the cell. Interestingly, many of the E2F6-regulated genes encoded functions involved in tumor suppression and the maintenance of chromatin structure. Specifically, our results suggest that E2F6 represses transcription of the brca1, ctip, art27, hp1alpha, and the rbap48 genes. E2F6 has been postulated to mediate transcriptional repression by recruiting a histone H3 methyltransferase to the DNA. However, we found that the E2F6-regulated promoters did not contain histone H3 methylated at lysine 9. To determine the mechanism by which E2F6 regulates transcription, we performed chromatin immunoprecipitation before and after the introduction of small inhibitory ribonucleic acids specific to E2F6. We found that depletion of E2F6 resulted in the recruitment of E2F1 to the target promoters. In summary, we have identified 48 endogenous target genes of E2F6 and have shown that E2F6 can repress target promoters in a manner that does not require histone H3 methylation at lysine 9.

The c-Myc protein is up-regulated in many different types of cancer, suggesting that a detailed understanding of Myc function is an important goal. Our previous studies have focused on determining the mechanism by which Myc activates transcription using the target gene cad as an experimental model. Previously, we found that Myc activates cad transcription at a post-RNA polymerase II recruitment step and that the Myc transactivation domain interacts with a number of cdk-cyclin complexes. We now extend these studies to determine the role of these cyclin-cdk complexes in Myc-mediated transactivation. We have found that cyclin T1 binding to Myc localizes to the highly conserved Myc Box I, whereas cdk8 binding localizes to the amino-terminal 41 amino acids of the Myc transactivation domain. We showed that recruitment of cdk8 is sufficient for activation of a synthetic promoter construct. In contrast, the ability of Myc to activate transcription of the cad promoter correlates with binding of cyclin T1. Furthermore, recruitment of cyclin T1 to the cad promoter via a Gal4 fusion protein or through protein-protein interaction with the HIV-1 Tat protein can also activate cad transcription. These results suggest that Myc activates transcription by stimulating elongation and that P-TEFb is a key mediator of this process.

The c-Myc protein is a site-specific DNA-binding transcription factor that is up-regulated in a number of different cancers. We have previously shown that binding of Myc correlates with increased transcription of the cad promoter. We have now further investigated the mechanism by which Myc mediates transcriptional activation of the cad gene. Using a chromatin immunoprecipitation assay, we found high levels of RNA polymerase II bound to the cad promoter in quiescent NIH 3T3 cells and in differentiated U937 cells, even though the promoter is inactive. However, chromatin immunoprecipitation with an antibody that recognizes the hyperphosphorylated form of the RNA polymerase II carboxyl-terminal domain (CTD) revealed that phosphorylation of the CTD does correlate with c-Myc binding and cad transcription. We have also found that the c-Myc transactivation domain interacts with cdk9 and cyclin T1, components of the CTD kinase P-TEFb. Furthermore, activator bypass experiments have shown that direct recruitment of cyclin T1 to the cad promoter can substitute for c-Myc to activate the promoter. In summary, our results suggest that c-Myc activates transcription of cad by stimulating promoter clearance and elongation, perhaps via recruitment of P-TEFb.