Histone gene transcription factor binding in extracts of normal human cells

TCGA: Increased oncoprotein coding region mutations correlate with a greater expression of apoptosis-effector genes and a positive outcome for stomach adenocarcinoma

Oncogene mutations are primarily thought to facilitate uncontrolled cell growth. However, overexpression of oncoproteins likely leads to apoptosis in a feed forward mechanism, whereby a certain level of oncoprotein leads to the activation of pro-proliferation effector genes and higher levels lead to activation of pro-apoptotic effector genes. TCGA STAD barcodes having no oncoprotein coding region mutations represented reduced expression of the apoptosis-effector genes compared with barcodes with multiple oncoprotein coding region mutations. Furthermore, STAD barcodes in a "no-subsequent tumor" group, representing 224 samples, and in a "positive outcome" group, had more oncoprotein coding regions mutated, on average, than barcodes of the new tumor and negative outcome groups, respectively. BRAF, CTNNB1, KRAS and MTOR coding region mutations (as a group) had the strongest association with the no-subsequent tumor group. Tumor suppressor coding region mutations were also correlated with no-subsequent tumor. These results are consistent with an oncoprotein-mediated, feed-forward mechanism of apoptosis in patients. Importantly, the no-subsequent tumor group also had more overall mutations. This result leads to considerations of unhealthy cells or cells with more neo-antigens for immune rejection. However, a probabilistic aspect of mutagenesis is also consistent with more oncoprotein and tumor suppressor protein mutations, in cases of more overall mutations, and thus a higher likelihood of activation of feed forward apoptosis pathways.

Genome-wide analysis of regions similar to promoters of histone genes

Background

The purpose of this study is to: i) develop a computational model of promoters of human histone-encoding genes (shortly histone genes), an important class of genes that participate in various critical cellular processes, ii) use the model so developed to identify regions across the human genome that have similar structure as promoters of histone genes; such regions could represent potential genomic regulatory regions, e.g. promoters, of genes that may be coregulated with histone genes, and iii/ identify in this way genes that have high likelihood of being coregulated with the histone genes.

Results

We successfully developed a histone promoter model using a comprehensive collection of histone genes. Based on leave-one-out cross-validation test, the model produced good prediction accuracy (94.1% sensitivity, 92.6% specificity, and 92.8% positive predictive value). We used this model to predict across the genome a number of genes that shared similar promoter structures with the histone gene promoters. We thus hypothesize that these predicted genes could be coregulated with histone genes. This hypothesis matches well with the available gene expression, gene ontology, and pathways data. Jointly with promoters of the above-mentioned genes, we found a large number of intergenic regions with similar structure as histone promoters.

Conclusions

This study represents one of the most comprehensive computational analyses conducted thus far on a genome-wide scale of promoters of human histone genes. Our analysis suggests a number of other human genes that share a high similarity of promoter structure with the histone genes and thus are highly likely to be coregulated, and consequently coexpressed, with the histone genes. We also found that there are a large number of intergenic regions across the genome with their structures similar to promoters of histone genes. These regions may be promoters of yet unidentified genes, or may represent remote control regions that participate in regulation of histone and histone-coregulated gene transcription initiation. While these hypotheses still remain to be verified, we believe that these form a useful resource for researchers to further explore regulation of human histone genes and human genome. It is worthwhile to note that the regulatory regions of the human genome remain largely un-annotated even today and this study is an attempt to supplement our understanding of histone regulatory regions.

Bacillus anthracis lethal toxin represses MMTV promoter activity through transcription factors

We have recently shown that the anthrax lethal toxin (LeTx) selectively represses nuclear hormone receptors. In this study, we found that LeTx repressed the activation of the mouse mammary tumor virus promoter related to overexpression of the transcription factors hepatocyte nuclear factor 3, octamer-binding protein 1, and c-Jun. LeTx transcriptional repression was associated with a decrease in the protein levels of these transcription factors in a lethal factor protease activity-dependent manner. Early administration of LeTx antagonists partially or completely abolished the repressive effects of LeTx. In contrast to the rapid cleavage of mitogen-activated protein kinase kinases by LeTx, the degradation of these transcription factors occurred at a relatively late stage after LeTx treatment. In addition, LeTx repressed phorbol-12-myristate-13-acetate-induced mouse mammary tumor virus promoter activity and phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate induction of endogenous c-Jun protein. Collectively, these findings suggest that transcription factors are intracellular targets of LeTx and expand our understanding of the molecular action of LeTx at a later stage of low-dose exposure.

Sp1 as G1 cell cycle phase specific transcription factor in epithelial cells

Sp1 binding sites have been identified in enhancer/promoter regions of several growth and cell cycle regulated genes, and it has been shown that Sp1 is increasingly phosphorylated in G1 phase of the cell cycle. Interactions of Sp1 with proteins involved in control of cell cycle and tumor formation have been reported. Here we show that expression of Sp1 protein predominates in the G1 phase of the cell cycle in epithelial cells. This is achieved by proteasome-dependent degradation. Inhibition of endogeneous Sp1 activity by a dominant-negative Sp1 mutant was associated with a cell cycle arrest in G1 phase, a strongly reduced expression of cyclin D1, the EGF-receptor and increased levels of p27Kip1. We have thus identified Sp1 as an important regulator of the cell cycle in G1 phase.

Role for a YY1-binding element in replication-dependent mouse histone gene expression

Expression of the highly conserved replication-dependent histone gene family increases dramatically as a cell enters the S phase of the eukaryotic cell cycle. Requirements for normal histone gene expression in vivo include an element, designated alpha, located within the protein-encoding sequence of nucleosomal histone genes. Mutation of 5 of 7 nucleotides of the mouse H3.2 alpha element to yield the sequence found in an H3.3 replication-independent variant abolishes the DNA-protein interaction in vitro and reduces expression fourfold in vivo. A yeast one-hybrid screen of a HeLa cell cDNA library identified the protein responsible for recognition of the histone H3.2 alpha sequence as the transcription factor Yin Yang 1 (YY1). YY1 is a ubiquitous and highly conserved transcription factor reported to be involved in both activation and repression of gene expression. Here we report that the in vitro histone alpha DNA-protein interaction depends on YY1 and that mutation of the nucleotides required for the in vitro histone alpha DNA-YY1 interaction alters the cell cycle phase-specific up-regulation of the mouse H3.2 gene in vivo. Because all mutations or deletions of the histone alpha sequence both abolish interactions in vitro and cause an in vivo decrease in histone gene expression, the recognition of the histone alpha element by YY1 is implicated in the correct temporal regulation of replication-dependent histone gene expression in vivo.

Cell cycle-regulated binding of nuclear proteins to elements within a mouse H3.2 histone gene

The histone gene family in mammals consists of 15-20 genes for each class of nucleosomal histone protein. These genes are classified as either replication-dependent or -independent in regard to their expression in the cell cycle. The expression of the replication-dependent histone genes increases dramatically as the cell prepares to enter S phase. Using mouse histone genes, we previously identified a coding region activating sequence (CRAS) involved in the upregulation of at least two (H2a and H3) and possibly all nucleosomal replication-dependent histone genes. Mutation of two seven-nucleotide elements, alpha and omega, within the H3 CRAS causes a decrease in expression in stably transfected Chinese hamster ovary cells comparable with the effect seen upon deletion of the entire CRAS. Further, nuclear proteins interact in a highly specific manner with nucleotides within these sequences. Mutation of these elements abolishes DNA/protein interactions in vitro. Here we report that the interactions of nuclear factors with these elements are differentially regulated in the cell cycle and that protein interactions with these elements are dependent on the phosphorylation/dephosphorylation state of the nuclear factors.

Identification of a second conserved element within the coding sequence of a mouse H3 histone gene that interacts with nuclear factors and is necessary for normal expression

Replication-dependent histone genes of all four nucleosomal classes are coordinately up-regulated at the beginning of S phase of the eukaryotic cell cycle. The universality and importance of this process in eukaryotic cells suggest that common regulatory mechanisms are involved in controlling the high level of expression of these histone genes. We have previously identified the alpha element within mouse H2a.2 and H3.2 coding region activating sequences (CRAS), which is involved in regulation of these two replication-dependent genes. Here we report the identification of a second element within the mouse histone CRAS, the omega element. This element interacts with nuclear proteins and we present in vivo evidence that this sequence is required for normal expression. Omega nucleotides involved in interaction with nuclear proteins have been precisely mapped by menas of DNase I footprinting and methylation interference assays. A naturally occurring mutation in the omega sequence is found in a replication-independent H3.3 gene. Mutation of the H3.2 omega element to that of the H3.3 sequence (3 nt changes) caused a 4-fold drop in in vivo expression of the H3.2 gene in stably transfected CHO cells, equally the effect of mutation of all 7 nt of the element. By UV cross-linking we have determined the approximate molecular weight of the omega binding protein to be 45 kDa. Finally, we identify putative omega sequences in the coding region of mouse H2B and H4 histone genes.

Delineation of a human histone H4 cell cycle element in vivo: the master switch for H4 gene transcription

Histone gene expression is cell cycle regulated at the transcriptional and the post-transcriptional levels. Upon entry into S phase, histone gene transcription is stimulated 2- to 5-fold and peaks within 1-3 hr of the initiation of DNA synthesis. We have delineated the proximal promoter element responsible for cell cycle-dependent transcription of a human histone H4 gene in vivo. Our results indicate that H4 cell cycle-dependent transcriptional regulation is mediated by an 11-base-pair element, the cell cycle element (5'-CTTTCG-GTTTT-3'), that resides in the in vivo protein-DNA interaction site, site II (nucleotides -64 to -24). The H4 cell cycle element functions as a master switch for expression of the FO108 human histone H4 gene in vivo; mutations within the H4 cell cycle element drastically reduce the level of expression as well as abrogate cell cycle-regulated transcription. Furthermore, these mutations result in a loss of binding in vitro of the cognate nuclear factor HiNF-M. In vivo competition analysis indicates that the cell cycle element mediates specific competition for a DNA-binding factor, presumably HiNF-M, that is a rate-limiting step in transcription of this H4 gene.

Transcription of the histone H5 gene is regulated by three differentiation-specific enhancers

Histone H5, an early marker of the avian erythroid lineage, is expressed at low levels in early erythroid precursors and at higher levels in more mature cells. We show that the increase in H5 expression is due to transcriptional activation of the H5 gene following differentiation of precursor CFU(E). We have found and characterized two upstream enhancers, E1 (between -2233 and -1878 from the site of transcription initiation, +1) and E3 (between -1321 and -1163), and confirmed the presence of a downstream enhancer (C. D. Trainor, S. J. Stamler, and J. D. Engel, Nature [London] 328:827-830, 1987) E7 (between +846 and +1181) which are responsible for the increase in H5 gene transcription. The enhancers had a weak effect in nondifferentiated CFU(E) but a strong effect when the cells were induced to differentiate. Cooperation among the three enhancers, however, was not required for H5 gene activity in the differentiated cells. The enhancers contain binding sites for several ubiquitous and erythroid cell-specific nuclear proteins, including GATA-1, as demonstrated with GATA-1-specific antibodies. Although the GATA sites were required for enhancer function, the concentration of GATA-1, GATA-2, and GATA-3 decreased during cell differentiation, and overexpression of these factors had little effect on H5 transcription. Hence, the differentiation-specific effect of the enhancers is not mediated by changes in relative levels of the GATA factors. Functional analysis of the H5 promoter indicated that the requirement of several elements, including a GC box necessary for transcription enhancement, did not change during the early stages of CFU(E) differentiation. However, the UPE, a positive element in proliferating CFU(E) recognized by the transcription factor H4TF2, was dispensable in the differentiated cells. These results suggest that as the cells enter the final stages of differentiation, there is a reprogramming of the regulatory factors that control H5 transcription and that the enhancers rescue and increase the activity of the promoter.

Transcription of the histone H5 gene is regulated by three differentiation-specific enhancers

Histone H5, an early marker of the avian erythroid lineage, is expressed at low levels in early erythroid precursors and at higher levels in more mature cells. We show that the increase in H5 expression is due to transcriptional activation of the H5 gene following differentiation of precursor CFU(E). We have found and characterized two upstream enhancers, E1 (between -2233 and -1878 from the site of transcription initiation, +1) and E3 (between -1321 and -1163), and confirmed the presence of a downstream enhancer (C. D. Trainor, S. J. Stamler, and J. D. Engel, Nature [London] 328:827-830, 1987) E7 (between +846 and +1181) which are responsible for the increase in H5 gene transcription. The enhancers had a weak effect in nondifferentiated CFU(E) but a strong effect when the cells were induced to differentiate. Cooperation among the three enhancers, however, was not required for H5 gene activity in the differentiated cells. The enhancers contain binding sites for several ubiquitous and erythroid cell-specific nuclear proteins, including GATA-1, as demonstrated with GATA-1-specific antibodies. Although the GATA sites were required for enhancer function, the concentration of GATA-1, GATA-2, and GATA-3 decreased during cell differentiation, and overexpression of these factors had little effect on H5 transcription. Hence, the differentiation-specific effect of the enhancers is not mediated by changes in relative levels of the GATA factors. Functional analysis of the H5 promoter indicated that the requirement of several elements, including a GC box necessary for transcription enhancement, did not change during the early stages of CFU(E) differentiation. However, the UPE, a positive element in proliferating CFU(E) recognized by the transcription factor H4TF2, was dispensable in the differentiated cells. These results suggest that as the cells enter the final stages of differentiation, there is a reprogramming of the regulatory factors that control H5 transcription and that the enhancers rescue and increase the activity of the promoter.

Overlapping and CpG methylation-sensitive protein-DNA interactions at the histone H4 transcriptional cell cycle domain: distinctions between two human H4 gene promoters

Transcriptional regulation of vertebrate histone genes during the cell cycle is mediated by several factors interacting with a series of cis-acting elements located in the 5' regions of these genes. The arrangement of these promoter elements is different for each gene. However, most histone H4 gene promoters contain a highly conserved sequence immediately upstream of the TATA box (H4 subtype consensus sequence), and this region in the human H4 gene FO108 is involved in cell cycle control. The sequence-specific interaction of nuclear factor HiNF-D with this key proximal promoter element of the H4-FO108 gene is cell cycle regulated in normal diploid cells (J. Holthuis, T.A. Owen, A.J. van Wijnen, K.L. Wright, A. Ramsey-Ewing, M.B. Kennedy, R. Carter, S.C. Cosenza, K.J. Soprano, J.B. Lian, J.L. Stein, and G.S. Stein, Science, 247:1454-1457, 1990). Here, we show that this region of the H4-FO108 gene represents a composite protein-DNA interaction domain for several distinct sequence-specific DNA-binding activities, including HiNF-D, HiNF-M, and HiNF-P. Factor HiNF-P is similar to H4TF-2, a DNA-binding activity that is not cell cycle regulated and that interacts with the analogous region of the H4 gene H4.A (F. LaBella and N. Heintz, Mol. Cell. Biol. 11:5825-5831, 1991). The H4.A gene fails to interact with factors HiNF-M and HiNF-D owing to two independent sets of specific nucleotide variants, indicating differences in protein-DNA interactions between these H4 genes. Cytosine methylation of a highly conserved CpG dinucleotide interferes with binding of HiNF-P/H4TF-2 to both the H4-FO108 and H4.A promoters, but no effect is observed for either HiNF-M or HiNF-D binding to the H4-FO108 gene. Thus, strong evolutionary conservation of the H4 consensus sequence may be related to combinatorial interactions involving overlapping and interdigitated recognition nucleotides for several proteins, whose activities are regulated independently. Our results also suggest molecular complexity in the transcriptional regulation of distinct human H4 genes.

Overlapping and CpG methylation-sensitive protein-DNA interactions at the histone H4 transcriptional cell cycle domain: distinctions between two human H4 gene promoters

Transcriptional regulation of vertebrate histone genes during the cell cycle is mediated by several factors interacting with a series of cis-acting elements located in the 5' regions of these genes. The arrangement of these promoter elements is different for each gene. However, most histone H4 gene promoters contain a highly conserved sequence immediately upstream of the TATA box (H4 subtype consensus sequence), and this region in the human H4 gene FO108 is involved in cell cycle control. The sequence-specific interaction of nuclear factor HiNF-D with this key proximal promoter element of the H4-FO108 gene is cell cycle regulated in normal diploid cells (J. Holthuis, T.A. Owen, A.J. van Wijnen, K.L. Wright, A. Ramsey-Ewing, M.B. Kennedy, R. Carter, S.C. Cosenza, K.J. Soprano, J.B. Lian, J.L. Stein, and G.S. Stein, Science, 247:1454-1457, 1990). Here, we show that this region of the H4-FO108 gene represents a composite protein-DNA interaction domain for several distinct sequence-specific DNA-binding activities, including HiNF-D, HiNF-M, and HiNF-P. Factor HiNF-P is similar to H4TF-2, a DNA-binding activity that is not cell cycle regulated and that interacts with the analogous region of the H4 gene H4.A (F. LaBella and N. Heintz, Mol. Cell. Biol. 11:5825-5831, 1991). The H4.A gene fails to interact with factors HiNF-M and HiNF-D owing to two independent sets of specific nucleotide variants, indicating differences in protein-DNA interactions between these H4 genes. Cytosine methylation of a highly conserved CpG dinucleotide interferes with binding of HiNF-P/H4TF-2 to both the H4-FO108 and H4.A promoters, but no effect is observed for either HiNF-M or HiNF-D binding to the H4-FO108 gene. Thus, strong evolutionary conservation of the H4 consensus sequence may be related to combinatorial interactions involving overlapping and interdigitated recognition nucleotides for several proteins, whose activities are regulated independently. Our results also suggest molecular complexity in the transcriptional regulation of distinct human H4 genes.