Search

Polycomb repressive epigenetic complexes are recurrently dysregulated in cancer. Unlike polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2), the role of PRC1 in oncogenesis and therapy resistance is not well-defined. Here, we demonstrate that highly recurrent mutations of the PRC1 subunits BCOR and BCORL1 in leukemia disrupt assembly of a noncanonical PRC1.1 complex, thereby selectively unlinking the RING-PCGF enzymatic core from the chromatin-targeting auxiliary subcomplex. As a result, BCOR-mutated PRC1.1 is localized to chromatin but lacks repressive activity, leading to epigenetic reprogramming and transcriptional activation at target loci. We define a set of functional targets that drive aberrant oncogenic signaling programs in PRC1.1-mutated cells and primary patient samples. Activation of these PRC1.1 targets in BCOR-mutated cells confers acquired resistance to treatment while sensitizing to targeted kinase inhibition. Our study thus reveals a novel epigenetic mechanism that explains PRC1.1 tumor-suppressive activity and identifies a therapeutic strategy in PRC1.1-mutated cancer. Significance: We demonstrate that BCOR and BCORL1 mutations in leukemia unlink PRC1.1 repressive function from target genes, resulting in epigenetic reprogramming and activation of aberrant cell signaling programs that mediate treatment resistance. Our study provides mechanistic insights into the pathogenesis of PRC1.1-mutated leukemia that inform novel therapeutic approaches. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 85

Polycomb repressive epigenetic complexes are recurrently dysregulated in cancer. Unlike polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2), the role of PRC1 in oncogenesis and therapy resistance is not well-defined. Here, we demonstrate that highly recurrent mutations of the PRC1 subunits BCOR and BCORL1 in leukemia disrupt assembly of a noncanonical PRC1.1 complex, thereby selectively unlinking the RING-PCGF enzymatic core from the chromatin-targeting auxiliary subcomplex. As a result, BCOR-mutated PRC1.1 is localized to chromatin but lacks repressive activity, leading to epigenetic reprogramming and transcriptional activation at target loci. We define a set of functional targets that drive aberrant oncogenic signaling programs in PRC1.1-mutated cells and primary patient samples. Activation of these PRC1.1 targets in BCOR-mutated cells confers acquired resistance to treatment while sensitizing to targeted kinase inhibition. Our study thus reveals a novel epigenetic mechanism that explains PRC1.1 tumor-suppressive activity and identifies a therapeutic strategy in PRC1.1-mutated cancer.Significance:We demonstrate that BCOR and BCORL1 mutations in leukemia unlink PRC1.1 repressive function from target genes, resulting in epigenetic reprogramming and activation of aberrant cell signaling programs that mediate treatment resistance. Our study provides mechanistic insights into the pathogenesis of PRC1.1-mutated leukemia that inform novel therapeutic approaches.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 85

Supplementary Figure from BCOR and BCORL1 Mutations Drive Epigenetic Reprogramming and Oncogenic Signaling by Unlinking PRC1.1 from Target Genes

Supplementary Data from BCOR and BCORL1 Mutations Drive Epigenetic Reprogramming and Oncogenic Signaling by Unlinking PRC1.1 from Target Genes

Key Points Adding venetoclax to FluBu2 reduced-intensity conditioning transplant did not impair engraftment or induce excessive graft-versus-host disease.Monitoring measurable residual disease by ultra-sensitive duplex sequencing revealed complex clonal dynamics before and after transplant., Visual Abstract, Adding the selective BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax to reduced-intensity conditioning chemotherapy (fludarabine and busulfan [FluBu2]) may enhance antileukemic cytotoxicity and thereby reduce the risk of posttransplant relapse. This phase 1 study investigated the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of venetoclax, a BCL-2 selective inhibitor, when added to FluBu2 in adult patients with high-risk acute myeloid leukemia (AML), myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), and MDS/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) undergoing transplant. Patients received dose-escalated venetoclax (200-400 mg daily starting day −8 for 6-7 doses) in combination with fludarabine 30 mg/m2 per day for 4 doses and busulfan 0.8 mg/kg twice daily for 8 doses on day −5 to day −2 (FluBu2). Transplant related–toxicity was evaluated from the first venetoclax dose on day −8 to day 28. Twenty-two patients were treated. At study entry, 5 patients with MDS and MDS/MPN had 5% to 10% marrow blasts, and 18 (82%) of 22 had a persistent detectable mutation. Grade 3 adverse events included mucositis, diarrhea, and liver transaminitis (n = 3 each). Neutrophil/platelet recovery and acute/chronic graft-versus-host-disease rates were similar to those of standard FluBu2. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The RP2D of venetoclax was 400 mg daily for 7 doses. With a median follow-up of 14.7 months (range, 8.6-24.8 months), median overall survival was not reached, and progression-free survival was 12.2 months (95% confidence interval, 6.0-not estimable). In patients with high-risk AML, MDS, and MDS/MPN, adding venetoclax to FluBu2 was feasible and safe. To further address relapse risk, assessment of maintenance therapy after venetoclax plus FluBu2 transplant is ongoing. This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03613532.